I had thought wearing a mask kept me protected, and now I see it isn't really for that at all.
As I understand it, the mask type that offers the maximum amount of protection from agents such as Covid-19 is one that belongs to the FFP3 class, although Wikipedia states that for Covid a mask meeting FFP2 standards would be sufficient. See FFP standards on Wikipedia.
What I heard at the time was that a FFP2/3-type mask will protect you but won't protect others from you, which is why some people who suspect they might be infected would wear a FFP2/3 mask on top of a surgical mask to protect both the wearer and others.
The YouTube issue on this site is that we ask people to stick to reliable sources, so we don't end out passing along disinformation
This is a huge problem today. I have seen people posting links to very questionable sites (on other forums) that purport to offer scientific evidence that masks are not necessary, whereas these are just snippets of data taken out of context.
The problem is that some groups are weaponizing several social platforms to spread misinformation and create chaos, which is why you're absolutely right that people should only refer to trusted sources.
Individuals who test positive for Covid 19 are twice as likely to have dined at a restaurant in the 14 days before becoming ill than those who tested negative, according to a new study from the CDC.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/10/health/restaurant-dining-covid-19-cdc-study-wellness/index.html
Pfizer proposes expanding Covid-19 vaccine trial to include more diversity as race for a vaccine continues. The phase 3 trials will now expand from 30, 000 participants to 44,000.
So... my first thought is: Why does this need to be news? Why isn't diversity in testing vaccines commonplace? M/F, a rainbow of colorful backgrounds and all sorts of ages and health conditions?? AKA testing a real world population of subjects??
Why do we need to be having this discussion????
I guess that drug companies have come to this realization (finally) is a positive result of all that 2020 has become.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/13/health/us-coronavirus-sunday/index.html
@lovendures I'm guessing that what is going on is this: In early clinical trials, they use fewer subjects. Once the vaccine does well with early trials, they expand to larger trials with more participants. When they conduct empirical tests, they have to have a certain minimum number people from various demographics -- a certain number of subjects in each age group, race, gender, pre-existing conditions, and lord knows what other factors will effect how people respond to the vaccine. So in early tests, which are smaller, the subject pool is less diverse.
I can’t for the life of me figure out WHY they didn’t distinguish between outdoor and inside dining. Seems like that was a crucial question to askIndividuals who test positive for Covid 19 are twice as likely to have dined at a restaurant in the 14 days before becoming ill than those who tested negative, according to a new study from the CDC.
"In addition to dining at a restaurant, case-patients were more likely to report going to a bar/coffee shop, but only when the analysis was restricted to participants without close contact with persons with known COVID-19 before illness onset," the researchers wrote.https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/10/health/restaurant-dining-covid-19-cdc-study-wellness/index.html
@tybin. I agree with you about indoor-outdoor restaurant distinction, but this kind of study was throwing a lot of feelers out to covid-positive people trying to find patterns of transmission. It wasn't specifically a covid restaurant study. You can only ask people so many questions when you are trying to get data. It is important that they even got the restaurant correlation at all. Also even when you are eating outdoors with people, you have to remove your masks to eat, so it's a largely massless operation even when outdoors. Sounds like they have a case for a covid restaurant study.
To add to what Jeanne said - Depending on where you are, outside dining regs are different. Where I live, the majority of outdoor tables for restaurants are measured incorrectly - from the center of the table to the center of the next one, rather than the proper way, which would be to measure from the back of a pulled out chair to the back of a pulled our chair at the next table. So the 6 foot rule we have results in diners actually only being about 2 feet apart, at best.
It would be impossible to collect the necessary data to determine if outdoor dining causes as much COVID as indoor.
Twelve children who became infected with the coronavirus at three child-care facilities in Utah passed it to others despite having mild or no symptoms, according to a study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
As a result, the researchers recommended testing people who have been in contact with coronavirus cases in child-care settings, including those who are asymptomatic. That advice comes weeks after a controversial shift in the CDC’s testing recommendations saying that people without symptoms “do not necessarily need a test.”
The children transmitted the virus to 12 of the 46 people they were in contact with, including a parent who required hospitalization. Two of the children who spread the coronavirus had asymptomatic cases, showing that even those who are not displaying symptoms can transmit the virus.
Oh no no no! Poor dear little ones! May the angels of love and goodness surround each and ever single one and all their contacts with great healing love, light and gentle mercies.
I fear these stories will become as common as the day is long and our prayers and care be unceasing!
God bless and keep them all !