Poll of the Day > Are people starting to give up social distancing/isolating themselves?

(+) Yeah! (+)

WhiskeyDisk posted...

Nobody is saying don't go outdoors.

That said, going to beaches and major parks/trails and the like isn't a good idea because they attract a higher density of people and maintaining appropriate distancing becomes harder. To that end, many governments have closed such places (my home province issues a $1000 fine and tows the car of anyone found violating those closures), and that's quite reasonable. But going for a walk around your neighbourhood where you make sure you keep the necessary breathing room? That's fair game.

DPsx7 posted...

Do realize that by now you've probably gone for groceries and didn't keel over yet.

And that doesn't mean excursions like going for groceries are risk-free. Increasing that risk by making more such excursions than you actually have to really isn't a good idea, whether in terms of personal or public safety.

DPsx7 posted...

They had all winter to amuse themselves inside. Can you blame them for wanting to get out? It's called cabin fever.

It's called a goddamn pandemic. "I'm booooored I wanna go outsiiiiide" is not a good reason to disregard infection control measures during the greatest public health crisis in a century. Yeah, it'd be really nice to get out and do more things, but responsible adults recognize that they can't always do whatever they want for entertainment. Suck it up and do something else until it is actually safe.

---

DPsx7 posted...

I don't have a choice. If I used big words you'd all hate me for it.

adjl uses big words all the time and the worst we do to him is call him a robot boy.

---

adjl posted...

That said, going to beaches and major parks/trails and the like isn't a good idea because they attract a higher density of people and maintaining appropriate distancing becomes harder. To that end, many governments have closed such places (my home province issues a $1000 fine and tows the car of anyone found violating those closures), and that's quite reasonable. But going for a walk around your neighbourhood where you make sure you keep the necessary breathing room? That's fair game.

And that doesn't mean excursions like going for groceries are risk-free. Increasing that risk by making more such excursions than you actually have to really isn't a good idea, whether in terms of personal or public safety.

It's called a goddamn pandemic. "I'm booooored I wanna go outsiiiiide" is not a good reason to disregard infection control measures during the greatest public health crisis in a century. Yeah, it'd be really nice to get out and do more things, but responsible adults recognize that they can't always do whatever they want for entertainment. Suck it up and do something else until it is actually safe.

Hmm, yes and no. People do congregate at those places but they are quite large. Plus I doubt there would be lots of tourists at your park/beach depending on location. I also feel like the gov't was put into a tough spot. There wasn't an immediate need to close these outdoor places except you get the trolls hosting virus parties and such so the gov't had to choose all or nothing rather than devote time or resources to it.

But you go out with the intent to be careful and that's all there is to it. Avoid anyone sketchy, wash your hands, no big deal.

Again, too much hype. The US is exceptionally sedentary the way it is. It's probably not a good thing to tell people to stay on the couch for months. There are other things to consider against one virus. Lighten the restrictions and let those who are willing to start returning to normal.

---

dancer62 posted...

Just some people. Was at the grocery store at 6am for Senior Hour, to shop for myself and an elderly neighbor, pretty much all seniors there, mostly wearing masks. Was checking out (cashier now surrounded by plexiglas shields), and crowded by two women, masks dangling from their hands, shoving to load the checkout counter behind me, can't wait for me to finish, can't maintain social (or even ordinary polite) distance, obviously not seniors, obviously more than 1 person per cart.

To be fair, the media has been lying like cheap rag rugs. A month ago, painter's dust masks were no good, had to have surgical masks, now, dust masks are better. Two weeks ago, sunlight doesn't have enough UV to kill the virus, now, 3 minutes of sunlight kills the virus. Previously, social distancing was working to slow the spread of the virus, now, random testing of blood of people in low risk/low exposure communities, 30% already have coronavirus antibodies. Then, we have the aircraft carrier Roosevelt, 4800 crew working in close proximity, only 600 test positive, most are asymptomatic, and only 8 hospitalized.

Is there any truth to what we are being told, or is it all meaningless babble and panicmongering? Is the coronavirus actually that much worse than ordinary seasonal flu? Does social distancing slow the spread of the virus, or just delay people developing immunity?

You realize this is a relatively new thing and we don't know everything about it, this hasn't been studied like the common cold for over 100 years dude. Covid-19 was first discovered just last year, scientists are trying to understand it more but we don't know everything yet. You act like the news agencies are going out of their way to lie about this, let me guess your a Trump fanboy.

Not to mention really analyzing any virus takes a lot of time even if you have the best god damn scientists in the wold working on it.

Monopoman posted...

You realize this is a relatively new thing and we don't know everything about it, this hasn't been studied like the common cold for over 100 years dude. Covid-19 was first discovered just last year, scientists are trying to understand it more but we don't know everything yet. You act like the news agencies are going out of their way to lie about this, let me guess your a Trump fanboy.

Not to mention really analyzing any virus takes a lot of time even if you have the best god damn scientists in the world working on it using the most advanced scientific equipment money can buy.

Neither a "boy" nor a "fan". My point is, the current generation of "journalists" doesn't have the intelligence or training to check the credibility of a source, much less evaluate the simple logic of a pronouncement. Yes, we have real scientists, and we have your "god damned scientists". Guess which make more exciting "news"?

The statistics have never justified panic. Worse than the death rate of seasonal flu, maybe. Worse than the death rate of traffic accidents, even in downtown Wuhan, no.

Surgical masks are better than painter's masks because they're both paper? And surgical masks are more "medical"? Wait, suddenly painter's masks fit better over the nose and chin, and can be bought in hardware stores. Bandanas don't seal at all, but are symbolic and look cool. Huh. Rocket science.

Ultraviolet radiation kills germs and viruses. But, sunlight is outdoors and people should stay home. Oops, suddenly sunlight does kill the virus. How about that? More rocket science.

Hey, the CDC is suddenly important, for more than pushing adult flu shots, wow, lets have daily statistics based on faulty information! Guess what? Suddenly, regardless of social distancing, the SARS-2 virus has spread much farther and is much less dangerous than anyone guessed! Even more rocket science.

The same media that, whatever Trump's actual merits, has been ridiculing the office of POTUS since his election mostly because he's not a real estate scammer from Arkansas. No, I didn't vote for him, nor much care for him.

Yes, I stay at home. I only go out for essentials, usually during Senior Hours. I care for an elderly blind neighbor with multiple medical issues, and try to protect her as much as possible. I mask. I wash my hands. I distance. I don't uncritically believe everything I hear. I think I'm going to do essential lawn care, in the sunshine, and believe the actual research over the "god damned scientists". And get Chinese take-out.

---

You do realize that this is a new strain of a virus that they are still learning about, right? Because if so, then it should make sense that they wouldnt know literally everything about it. Also, what do you mean be believing actual research over god damned scientists? Because arent the scientist the ones doing research?
---

DPsx7 posted...

Hmm, yes and no. People do congregate at those places but they are quite large.

Wide open parks, sure. Parks consisting of trails that see two-way traffic constantly and are barely wide enough to allow 6 feet of clearance, not so much. You're going to be passing people very often in those, most likely closer than is safe.

DPsx7 posted...

Plus I doubt there would be lots of tourists at your park/beach depending on location.

You don't need a lot of tourists. You've got most of the locals out of work and bored while the weather's getting nicer and going to a park/beach is very attractive. Those parking lots are going to be packed, and they're going to be packed with people who drove for less than an hour to get there. Packed parking lots mean hundreds of people walking the trails or looking for a place to sit on the beach (where, by the way, there's evidence that the high winds and moist air can carry droplets up to 30 feet, so the usual 6-foot spacing is inadequate), and that means high transmission risk.

DPsx7 posted...

But you go out with the intent to be careful and that's all there is to it. Avoid anyone sketchy,

You keep saying this, but you've yet to provide an answer for how one can be expected to "avoid anyone sketchy." Most transmission is asymptomatic, and even the people who do have coughs aren't exactly going to look sick. Just looking for "sketchy" people won't help you avoid anything, as I keep telling you. If you do have some great idea of what to look for, by all means, share it, because that could be extremely helpful.

DPsx7 posted...

The US is exceptionally sedentary the way it is. It's probably not a good thing to tell people to stay on the couch for months.

A couple months aren't going to change much of anything one way or the other in that regard.

dancer62 posted...

The statistics have never justified panic.

Nothing ever justifies panic. The statistics have, however, justified limiting people's ability to gather to try and keep the growth rate of cases under control. That's not panic, that's a well-reasoned preventative decision.

dancer62 posted...

Surgical masks are better than painter's masks because they're both paper? And surgical masks are more "medical"? Wait, suddenly painter's masks fit better over the nose and chin, and can be bought in hardware stores. Bandanas don't seal at all, but are symbolic and look cool. Huh. Rocket science.

As others have said, that's a matter of evolving understanding of the virus. Starting out, nobody was really sure how effective masks for the general population would be. We've since come to the understanding - thanks to data from other countries trying different things - that they do help and that even a bandana is better than nothing.

dancer62 posted...

Ultraviolet radiation kills germs and viruses. But, sunlight is outdoors and people should stay home. Oops, suddenly sunlight does kill the virus. How about that? More rocket science.

Sunlight killing the virus doesn't really change much unless you can figure out a way to shine sunlight inside people's lungs (which would almost certainly cause more harm than good even if you could figure out a way to do it without a circular saw, since the delicate tissues of the lung aren't designed to withstand UV radiation either). It just means public surfaces that see enough sunlight (which is an increasing number as the days grow longer) don't need to be sanitized and shaded surfaces can be prioritized.

---

Monopoman posted...

You realize this is a relatively new thing and we don't know everything about it, this hasn't been studied like the common cold for over 100 years dude. Covid-19 was first discovered just last year, scientists are trying to understand it more but we don't know everything yet. You act like the news agencies are going out of their way to lie about this, let me guess your a Trump fanboy.

I mentioned that, it's not so much lie as they just spread whatever they can to get ratings. As we learn about it the things the media wrote yesterday are probably wrong or outdated. Just stop, there's nothing wrong with Trump.

---

adjl posted...

Wide open parks, sure. Parks consisting of trails that see two-way traffic constantly and are barely wide enough to allow 6 feet of clearance, not so much. You're going to be passing people very often in those, most likely closer than is safe.

You don't need a lot of tourists. You've got most of the locals out of work and bored while the weather's getting nicer and going to a park/beach is very attractive. Those parking lots are going to be packed, and they're going to be packed with people who drove for less than an hour to get there. Packed parking lots mean hundreds of people walking the trails or looking for a place to sit on the beach (where, by the way, there's evidence that the high winds and moist air can carry droplets up to 30 feet, so the usual 6-foot spacing is inadequate), and that means high transmission risk.

You keep saying this, but you've yet to provide an answer for how one can be expected to "avoid anyone sketchy." Most transmission is asymptomatic, and even the people who do have coughs aren't exactly going to look sick. Just looking for "sketchy" people won't help you avoid anything, as I keep telling you. If you do have some great idea of what to look for, by all means, share it, because that could be extremely helpful.

A couple months aren't going to change much of anything one way or the other in that regard.

Nothing ever justifies panic. The statistics have, however, justified limiting people's ability to gather to try and keep the growth rate of cases under control. That's not panic, that's a well-reasoned preventative decision.

As others have said, that's a matter of evolving understanding of the virus. Starting out, nobody was really sure how effective masks for the general population would be. We've since come to the understanding - thanks to data from other countries trying different things - that they do help and that even a bandana is better than nothing.

Sunlight killing the virus doesn't really change much unless you can figure out a way to shine sunlight inside people's lungs (which would almost certainly cause more harm than good even if you could figure out a way to do it without a circular saw, since the delicate tissues of the lung aren't designed to withstand UV radiation either). It just means public surfaces that see enough sunlight (which is an increasing number as the days grow longer) don't need to be sanitized and shaded surfaces can be prioritized.

Being that parks allow bike traffic I doubt the trails are that small. Haven't been to all parks obviously. Either way it's unrealistic to believe as soon as you break that magical 6 foot circle with a stranger that you're infected. It has never worked like that.

Just saying without tourism that your local spots aren't going to be as busy. What are the chances your community will choose the same location at the same time to overcrowd it? Evidence my ass, they also say it doesn't live long outside.

Easy, it's the same stuff you'd use to avoid getting any other common illness. In fact most are not asymptomatic, there are signs. Sneezing, coughing, lethargy, sure this stuff could be something totally different but regardless of what someone may have you aren't interested in sharing.

A couple months may be all it takes to inadvertently encourage more people to be less active.

What statistics? The misrepresented numbers? The compromised tests? Indeed it's a non-zero number, however I'm always suspicious the media exaggerates to attract viewers. I keep saying use caution but understand this is not the doom and gloom situation people want it to be.

Everyone is learning. New findings are why we can slowly start to relax or reopen.

Exactly. Surfaces become self sanitizing so you can worry a little less about surprises. Doorknobs, shopping carts, playground equipment, whatever.

---

DPsx7 posted...

Being that parks allow bike traffic I doubt the trails are that small.

I havent been to all parks, either. But most of the parks Ive been to that allow bikes doubt need huge trails or anything...
---

DPsx7 posted...

Sneezing

I heard this is not a symptom. Unless its one of the new ones. I remember checking a little while ago. Especially with allergy season happening...
---

DPsx7 posted...

Being that parks allow bike traffic I doubt the trails are that small.

https://www.railstotrails.org/build-trails/trail-building-toolbox/design/designing-for-user-type/

Those guidelines suggest 12-14 feet for 2-way motorized traffic (ATV's and whatnot), which is plenty for bikes. 6 feet between people plus a 3-foot bubble for each of them to comfortably not be falling off of the trail (tick season is starting, after all, so it's not a good idea to end up in the bush) is 12 feet, so you don't exactly have a whole lot of breathing room there, especially where 6 feet is the minimum recommended distancing. And that's just a guideline. Many trails narrow further than that, especially when you bring bridges into the mix.

DPsx7 posted...

Either way it's unrealistic to believe as soon as you break that magical 6 foot circle with a stranger that you're infected. It has never worked like that.

Breaking that magical 6-foot circle does introduce a much greater risk than not doing so, though. That's why it's recommended to keep that minimum distance.

DPsx7 posted...

Just saying without tourism that your local spots aren't going to be as busy. What are the chances your community will choose the same location at the same time to overcrowd it?

There was a period of a week or two between my home province announcing that parks and trails were being closed and actually enforcing those closures (tickets, towing vehicles). During that period, there were a good many trails and parks whose parking lots were packed. Even without the quarantine giving everyone a bad case of cabin fever and leaving people with tons of free time because they aren't working, I've seen some of the more popular municipal parks in my city be too crowded to maintain appropriate distancing just because it was a nice day. I can only imagine the density you'd see under these circumstances.

So... the chances are pretty good. Lesser-known trails and parks will probably be fine, but the popular ones are going to be even more so now.

DPsx7 posted...

Evidence my ass, they also say it doesn't live long outside.

It doesn't have to live long to be transmitted between people. Moister air keeps it from drying out as quickly, high winds carry it further, and it's certainly not hanging around for the 3 minutes or so it takes sunlight to kill it... It's completely plausible that 6 feet won't be enough under those conditions, such that I'm quite happy to err on the side of caution.

DPsx7 posted...

In fact most are not asymptomatic, there are signs.

I cited this source the last time you made this claim:

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/13/831883560/can-a-coronavirus-patient-who-isnt-showing-symptoms-infect-others

Asymptomatic transmission is absolutely a thing, no matter how much you'd like to believe it's just people not looking closely enough.

DPsx7 posted...

Sneezing, coughing, lethargy, sure this stuff could be something totally different but regardless of what someone may have you aren't interested in sharing.

And as I've told you multiple times, by the time you notice somebody around you coughing and realize that you should be avoiding them, it's too late because you've already had them cough around you. Lethargy is also pretty much impossible to identify in a stranger because you don't have their baseline energy levels to compare their current ones to.

DPsx7 posted...

A couple months may be all it takes to inadvertently encourage more people to be less active.

And on the other hand, a couple months of not being able to get the small amount of physical activity their daily life normally gives them may be enough to encourage somebody to start exercising at home. Either way, it's a pretty fringe chance that I doubt will have enough of a net effect to be worth bringing up.

DPsx7 posted...
What statistics?

The tens of thousands of people that have died in a very short period of time, tens of thousands more that are alive only because they're hooked up to a dwindling number of ventilators, hundreds of thousands more that are infected and can transmit the disease, and the ample data indicating just how quickly that transmission can happen without intervening. Sure, the exact numbers are constantly evolving, but the basic gist of "this is a problem and we need to do something about it" has never changed.

---

dancer62 posted...

To be fair, the media has been lying like cheap rag rugs. A month ago, painter's dust masks were no good, had to have surgical masks, now, dust masks are better. Two weeks ago, sunlight doesn't have enough UV to kill the virus, now, 3 minutes of sunlight kills the virus. Previously, social distancing was working to slow the spread of the virus, now, random testing of blood of people in low risk/low exposure communities, 30% already have coronavirus antibodies. Then, we have the aircraft carrier Roosevelt, 4800 crew working in close proximity, only 600 test positive, most are asymptomatic, and only 8 hospitalized.

Is there any truth to what we are being told, or is it all meaningless babble and panicmongering? Is the coronavirus actually that much worse than ordinary seasonal flu? Does social distancing slow the spread of the virus, or just delay people developing immunity?

theyre figuring this out as they go, just like everyone else. New information coming out isnt lying...


---

adjl posted...

high winds carry it further

That reminds me of something. My mom recently sent an article to me. It talked about how an air conditioning unit might have helped spread the virus in a restaurant. Now, the thing is the restaurant was windowless, it was in China, they were sitting to close, and they were actually dining in at the restaurant, but still. I guess it could still happen to people in a carry-out place. Either way, it still didn't travel too far. The other 73 customers and 8 employees didn't get sick. But it was just something I found interesting...

https://www.businessinsider.com/air-conditioning-spread-coronavirus-restaurant-can-service-industry-open-again-2020-4

A few other sources have it if you don't like that source or something. And I think they say may have. I don't know if they can conclusively say that's what happened... Also, she apparently wasn't showing symptoms until later in the day...
---