[OT]Why do you trust computers?

On 27/03/2020 13:31, Mayayana wrote:
"Chris" wrote

| I don't see it as offering something. I had an appt for a
| yearly physical. Lots of tests. They didn't even suggest
| I go to the hospital to have the blood tests.
|
| Be a little reasonable. Health services all over the world are at crisis
| point. A zoom appointment is better than a cancellation, right?
|

You seem to only pipe up to say that no one
should be critical due to the crisis. We should stay home,
shut up, and behave. I propose that such an unthinking
herd mentality is part of the problem. Incompetent
bureaucracies, panic, selfishness and stupidity don't
stop in a crisis.

Selfishness is the biggest problem. People don't think the rules apply
to them because they "know better" or they consider themselves special
somehow. Your Zoom appt polemic is a case in point. You think it is so
important for you to have your physical exam right now, that any
compromise is a huge inconvenience. Are you actually sick? Do you *need*
to see a doctor face-to-face? Would it kill you to not physically see
your doctor for 2-3 months (maybe more)? I'd guess that "No" is probably
the answer to all the above.


People need to actually think. Don't
avoid masks just because the authorities say we don't
need them, for example. They're only trying to keep people
calm and deal with a shortage of masks.

No. "They" are trying to stop people from getting sick and dying.

Earlier you were
saying that we should all obey the authorities and stay
home. What about the store clerks,
kitchen workers, manicurists, housecleaners, laborers,
who don't have a month's rent in the bank? Trump is
offering them $1,200, which may take up to 4 months to
arrive. What are you going to tell them when they break
down your door for food?

This pandemic is finding all the societal holes that countries have
ignored for decades. So it turns out we're quite dependent on the
workers governments have shat upon for so long. Lack of adequate social
or job security, living on the bread-line, poverty even are real things
even in the largest economies. These birds are coming home to roost.

So, yes, we should do everything we can to comply with the lockdowns.
However, for many, particularly in the US, complying could mean losing
everything. I cheque in the post is simplistic and woeful. The last few
days in the US have been frightening in terms of number growth and I
don't think that's going to change anytime soon without some genuine
leadership. I mean anyone who says 100,000 dead is a "good job" is
literally detached from reality and devoid of all humanity.

The Zoom appt is certainly a less critical issue, but there's
still no reason to just unthinkingly go along with ninny-brained
fads. A Zoom appt is not better than a cancellation.

Then cancel it.

| I see it as a way to bill for an appt without having the
| appt. Yes, I could show her a rash. But I don't have a
| rash. So Zoom would be no better than a phone call,
| except that she probably bills for the former as a full appt
| and for the latter as a phone consultation.
|
| In a world without medical insurance the question of money is immaterial.
| Maybe the doc is doing it for yours and hers safety. Did you think about
| that?
|

You're making several, let's say "rash", assumptions
there. I have insurance. Money is not immaterial. What
are you on about? You've chosen to defend a dubious
position and now you're holding onto it like a yapping dog
with an article of clothing in its mouth.

If the doctor has a Zoom appt she can charge my insurance.

My point is that because you pay you feel you have a right to your
physical despite the fact the healthcare system is at its limits trying
to deal with COVID. Nevermind the tens of thousands needing actual
medical care, where's my paid for 30min appt?!

Obviously the idea of not meeting physically is for everyone's
safety. That's a given. The idea of meeting not physically
is the problem. She's trying to keep the business
going without change, even though it's not possible to
do that. I'm a carpenter. What if I called you to say I
can't go fix your deck right now, but I'd be happy to do
a Zoom consultation about it? And what if I then sent
you a bill for "deck repair"?

Completely different skillset. Your expertise and "product" is
inherently manual. A Doctor's isn't.

| It doesn't sound like you've used Zoom or the like recently. They are
much,
| much better then you suggest. High res and low latency. I regularly have
| zoom and Teams meetings (more so it the last couple of weeks) and the
| personal interaction is very similar to being there in person. When the
| alternative is to not have the meeting/appointment then video chat is
| infinite % better.
|
That makes sense for a business meeting. You don't really
need to see each other. In most cases it could be done just as
well on a conference call. The video aspect is just high tech
pizzazz.

Yep. Just as I thought, you don't know what you're talking about.

(In fact, people I know who regularly have business
meetings often complain that they're mostly a waste of time;
a chance for top dogs to hold forth with posing while the pack
is forced to listen.)

Depends on the business, but completely misses the point.


Not all communication scenarios are business meetings. I don't
know when you last went outside, but there's a very big difference
between physical proximity and phone calls. Adding video doesn't
do much to change that.

The research is quite clear that a video call is *much* closer to
face-to-face interaction than a phone call. It is quite obvious really.
I'm not quite sure I understand why you dismiss it so much?

I also worry that the temporary measures
might bleed over into the future. So psychotherapy via Zoom
becomes the norm while in-person becomes a special case. Or
doctors visits become a visit with a computer followed by a
Zoom hi/bye with a doctor. (My doctor is already spending most
of her time staring at a laptop, checking off the latest fads:
blood pressure? check. cholesterol? check. colonoscopy?
check. Did you ever wonder why colonoscopies are the best
thing since sliced bread, while checks for artery clogging are
rare? It's because treating colon cancer costs insurance
companies a massive amount of money, on average. So it's
worth it to them to blow $2,500 on a test you probably don't
need. Clogged arteries, on the other hand, are more expensive
to inspect and if you get them there's a good chance you'll
just drop dead. So you're tested for the problem you probably
don't have instead of the one that you may very well have,
because it's less costly. Did you think doctors and insurance
companies are all laboring for free?)

You're just highlighting intrinsic problems with a medical
insurance-lead healthcare system. Doctors only do what they can bill.
Socialised care doesn't make those types of choices.

I think a lot lessons will be learned from the pandemic unrelated to
COVID. Like how much travel do we *really* need to do to be able to work
efficiently. For many people work is what you do not where you are.
Obviously, a carpenter is quite different as you need a workshop.


I would suggest trying a simple practice: Take note of your
opinions and conclusions. Look at them. Analyze their genesis.
"Why do I believe x? Did I hear it? Who told me? Are they
believable? Did I come to that conclusion myself? Based on
what?" What emotional motive is causing you to feel so
irritated by my statements that you feel you must counter
them, even if it means resorting to irrational arguments? What
inernal; doubt are you sweeping under the rug with your
arguments? In other words, methinks the Zoomist sheltering
in place doth protest too much.

It is arguable that it's the person who names people by the technology
they use is not necessarily the most self-reflective of the two of us.

On 27/03/2020 20:03, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 08:23:51, Chris wrote:
[]
Be a little reasonable. Health services all over the world are at crisis
point. A zoom appointment is better than a cancellation, right?

I don't think Mayayana has "got" the crisis, judging by his reply rant.
[]
It doesn't sound like you've used Zoom or the like recently. They are
much,
much better then you suggest. High res and low latency. I regularly have
zoom and Teams meetings (more so it the last couple of weeks) and the
personal interaction is very similar to being there in person. When the
alternative is to not have the meeting/appointment then video chat is
infinite % better.

I've been surprised recently to see some choirs/groups/orchestras doing
virtual performances; whether Zoom or something else, the latency
problem must have been mostly cracked for that sort of thing to be even
possible.

Indeed. It seems to have become quite a thing. Very impressive musically
and technologically.

"Chris" wrote

| You seem to only pipe up to say that no one
| should be critical due to the crisis. We should stay home,
| shut up, and behave. I propose that such an unthinking
| herd mentality is part of the problem. Incompetent
| bureaucracies, panic, selfishness and stupidity don't
| stop in a crisis.
|
| Selfishness is the biggest problem. People don't think the rules apply
| to them because they "know better" or they consider themselves special
| somehow. Your Zoom appt polemic is a case in point. You think it is so
| important for you to have your physical exam right now

No. I didn't say that. I said it would make sense to
postpone it. *That's exactly what I said in the post
you just answered!* I'd rather not even have it. It's not
necessary. What I was criticizing was the idea that
to talk on the phone is a substitute for physical
inspection and blood tests.

You remind me of a cartoon I heard about. I expect
it was probably in the New Yorker. A person is looking out
the window, holding a phone to their face. The caption:
"Hi, 911? I just saw a man drive by and I don't think
he was going to the supermarket."

It doesn't take much for people to descend into the
tattletaling and peer pressure fascism of 8 year olds.
Meanwhile, what we need is consideration and common
sense.

On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 16:48:26, Chris wrote:
[]
leadership. I mean anyone who says 100,000 dead is a "good job" is
literally detached from reality and devoid of all humanity.
[]
I'm getting a bit tired of whoever it is saying that sort of thing
getting stick for saying it. What they say, or would if given half a
chance, is that "100,000 dead is terrible, a tragedy, but a good job if
we can keep the total down to that, rather than 500,000, or a million,
or two million". But the attention span of many - and that of the media
who feed them (which came first isn't too relevant to this point) has
shrunk to so few seconds that they don't get the chance to say the full.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

At the age of 7, Julia Elizabeth Wells could sing notes only dogs could hear.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 16:48:26, Chris wrote:
[]
leadership. I mean anyone who says 100,000 dead is a "good job" is
literally detached from reality and devoid of all humanity.
[]
I'm getting a bit tired of whoever it is saying that sort of thing
getting stick for saying it. What they say, or would if given half a
chance, is that "100,000 dead is terrible, a tragedy, but a good job if
we can keep the total down to that, rather than 500,000, or a million,
or two million". But the attention span of many - and that of the media
who feed them (which came first isn't too relevant to this point) has
shrunk to so few seconds that they don't get the chance to say the full.

The US is rapidly heading towards becoming the worst affected country in
the world despite not being the first and having had time to put the right
systems in place to control the situation. The death toll could easily be
below 50k but the response has been slow and ineffectual. yet the man at
the top is most interested in saying how a good a job he's doing and
doesn't care about the lives he's ruining. Every other leader gets the
gravity of the situation and isn't using it to score points or self
congratulate themselves except for the Orange one.

He is rightly being criticised.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Chris wrote:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 16:48:26, Chris wrote:
[]
leadership. I mean anyone who says 100,000 dead is a "good job" is
literally detached from reality and devoid of all humanity.
[]
I'm getting a bit tired of whoever it is saying that sort of thing
getting stick for saying it. What they say, or would if given half a
chance, is that "100,000 dead is terrible, a tragedy, but a good job if
we can keep the total down to that, rather than 500,000, or a million,
or two million". But the attention span of many - and that of the media
who feed them (which came first isn't too relevant to this point) has
shrunk to so few seconds that they don't get the chance to say the full.

The US is rapidly heading towards becoming the worst affected country in
the world despite not being the first and having had time to put the right

Italy is generally touted as "the worst affected" country in terms of
how fast / hard / etc. they got hit. They had 100k infections according
to a quick google.

Assuming the infection rate plays out the same in the US, it's looking
like 550k people will get infected. (italy = ~60M // US = ~330M)

500k is "only" like 0.2% of the population base ...

systems in place to control the situation. The death toll could easily be
below 50k but the response has been slow and ineffectual. yet the man at

One of us has to be looking at wrong info - google's only showing that
the US has had about 3k deaths with 164k confirmed cases.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl6DTg UACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooEx/Qf+LzIZiEaN1smkksRzjkzh+39WNinRK1jPgBOBYbFnnh5iQOt wZutT+OXO
s+SScVJTBAGRS1+RwXvfi92zinX3PupUIx5OXqqNBbYP42nO+O tNPfR0J2iIf4rQ
4VJndAraFH0Y8jG24dsGc0GTscJ7MbEDLv3D819Ibs00AzqS3Y g7Djo1lL9bcMrQ
AUf4goncLxSiAvme6JJgy0TpwdbNL6307EZPcuWk/1ydd97k6Y0yHRnUxHGPCK7x
2WTGdTqvND8tm5juUw3X0678wJJlaxv9ybHQRyB+7j1w7mV9mA mr6TflcOLmb0dx
VNTJE9vCUTOEhmccN/Ic0NatjQUYvw==
=NtkL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

In article , Dan Purgert
wrote:

The US is rapidly heading towards becoming the worst affected country in
the world despite not being the first and having had time to put the right

Italy is generally touted as "the worst affected" country in terms of
how fast / hard / etc. they got hit. They had 100k infections according
to a quick google.

Assuming the infection rate plays out the same in the US, it's looking
like 550k people will get infected. (italy = ~60M // US = ~330M)

500k is "only" like 0.2% of the population base ...

not even close to realistic.

systems in place to control the situation. The death toll could easily be
below 50k but the response has been slow and ineffectual. yet the man at

One of us has to be looking at wrong info - google's only showing that
the US has had about 3k deaths with 164k confirmed cases.

that's as of now, not what it will be.

the worst is ahead.

nospam wrote:
In article , Dan Purgert
wrote:

The US is rapidly heading towards becoming the worst affected country in
the world despite not being the first and having had time to put the right

Italy is generally touted as "the worst affected" country in terms of
how fast / hard / etc. they got hit. They had 100k infections according
to a quick google.

Assuming the infection rate plays out the same in the US, it's looking
like 550k people will get infected. (italy = ~60M // US = ~330M)

500k is "only" like 0.2% of the population base ...

not even close to realistic.

And why it is not close to realistic is the 0.2% fatality rate is *while
each critically ill patient has a ICU bed, ventilator, and medical staff
to attend to them*.

The real problem is the *RATE* of infection to a disease that no one on
the planet has immunity too.

We only have a finite number of ICU beds, ventilators, and uninfected
medical staff, so *WHEN* the rate of infection creates more
simultaneously ill patients then there are the aforementioned healthcare
capacity it will *NOT* be a 0.2% fatality rate. And the RATE predicts
the delta of ill vs healthcare is going to be dramatic. Hence the
recommendation to "flatten the curve". Think of 'I Love Lucy' and the
chocolate factory and not just a fast convenor belt but a tsunami of
chocolates.


systems in place to control the situation. The death toll could easily be
below 50k but the response has been slow and ineffectual. yet the man at

One of us has to be looking at wrong info - google's only showing that
the US has had about 3k deaths with 164k confirmed cases.

that's as of now, not what it will be.

the worst is ahead.


That is a certainly. How bad will be determined if we can get the
numb-nuts currently not in heavenly infected areas to "socially
distanced" themselves. Seriously. With a infectious pandemic with no
current cure it is breaking the transmission from person to person the
only way starve it and defeat it.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 00:56:16 +0800, "Mr. Man-wai Chang"
wrote:

Why do you trust computers? Because they are used to kill?

I trust the tools that we are given. Computers are just a tool. I
worked on both computer hardware and software. I designed a lot of
software applications running on the largest multiprocessors to todays
desktops and laptops.

Many computers are used in the design and production in almost all the
worlds countries. It would be possible to create a computer that is
designed or can learn to kill but it would not last long!

Steve

--
http://www.npsnn.com

Dan Purgert wrote:
Uh, that was a 0.2% rate of "confirmed cases", based on Italy's numbers
at the time of writing the post:

Infected - approx 100k
Population - approx 60 million

then extrapolating based on population of approx 330 million; resulting
in an expectation of approximately 5x the number of cases as seen in
Italy -- with, of course, the assumption that both countries have
basically identical patterns of the virus spreading.

That may or may not be the case though.

On Tuesday afternoon USA had 177,000 confirmed cases and more than 3,400
dead. That is 1.9% fatality rate already worst than Italy and this is
before healthcare capacity saturation point. It's gonna get worse, even
without contrarians doing stupid stuff like Corona-Parties or large
gatherings because their imaginary invisible whatever has deemed them
"special" and will somehow shield them. No more effective than the
ancients that finger-painted in goat entrails or played craps with
bird-bones for cures... I sure hope the naysayers will start taking this
more seriously. Not panic, but be serious.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Dan Purgert wrote:
Uh, that was a 0.2% rate of "confirmed cases", based on Italy's numbers
at the time of writing the post:

Infected - approx 100k
Population - approx 60 million

then extrapolating based on population of approx 330 million; resulting
in an expectation of approximately 5x the number of cases as seen in
Italy -- with, of course, the assumption that both countries have
basically identical patterns of the virus spreading.

That may or may not be the case though.

On Tuesday afternoon USA had 177,000 confirmed cases and more than 3,400
dead. That is 1.9% fatality rate already worst than Italy and this is

Yeah, right now, rounded to the nearest 100 (assuming my info is
accurate)

USA - 187.7k infections / 3.9k deaths
Italy - 105.8k infections / 12.4k deaths

US is still "under the mark" if you're comparing infections (and deaths)
to total population. Again, I'm not trying to brush off the cases or
anything (or do that "there's no problem" nonsense) ...

It seems that right now, the US is approx double the average death rate
(12 deaths per million people vs. world rate of 5.6 deaths per million).
The US could _certainly_ be (have been) better at containing it /
getting lockdowns in place, but there's a bit of a way to go before the
US catches up to the UK (26 deaths / million pop), or other European
nations with 50 or more deaths per million (up to Italy's peak of 200
dead / million pop... and ignoring San Marino, which is apparently a
sovereign "microstate" inside the borders of Italy.)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl6D6R 8ACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooEOrwf+JsHD6FUMSGF+PLKK/bx2gUm0l9Q5FwGvnnKGSn5mMIXjXSbN4a6bhAzK
pt27Q/NRwPoKS1FsZ9R6GFDOnkgocHBomZ7Lb7Dg30htWe0rQv1bfBJW yde4Oxh6
Uy5zRamhyeiMA+r2018FqETaOX/Nh/RsWCSmZNHhjBuNjv+M/gRIXPo2tZb1lH69
WB+l+daQwLa7BrU0lsHbkCNcg6a9OwO1DuWccxQTp/v4p+rHPSb0osoqttrUrq5C
BkagbtkrioqjwWVgGlJshd6upmq+HWJreZQw7UPhKzgyPlRyW2 E0+0cyIiPNueU2
l0M/IdJNOhLQYQXo2foMEVqf05YBQA==
=YAu7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Dan Purgert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Chris wrote:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 16:48:26, Chris wrote:
[]
leadership. I mean anyone who says 100,000 dead is a "good job" is
literally detached from reality and devoid of all humanity.
[]
I'm getting a bit tired of whoever it is saying that sort of thing
getting stick for saying it. What they say, or would if given half a
chance, is that "100,000 dead is terrible, a tragedy, but a good job if
we can keep the total down to that, rather than 500,000, or a million,
or two million". But the attention span of many - and that of the media
who feed them (which came first isn't too relevant to this point) has
shrunk to so few seconds that they don't get the chance to say the full.

The US is rapidly heading towards becoming the worst affected country in
the world despite not being the first and having had time to put the right

Italy is generally touted as "the worst affected" country in terms of
how fast / hard / etc. they got hit. They had 100k infections according
to a quick google.

So far. You need to look at the curves and the direction of travel. The US
about 12 days behind Italy and it has already blown past all the worst
affected countries.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/c...OR+ESP+GBR+USA

The death rate is also on a scary trajectory.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/c...OR+ESP+USA+GBR

Assuming the infection rate plays out the same in the US, it's looking
like 550k people will get infected. (italy = ~60M // US = ~330M)

500k is "only" like 0.2% of the population base ...

Looking at per population data during an outbreak is not sensible as not
all the population has had the opportunity to get it. Once it's over yes,
but not yet. So all we have is deaths per case, but we know case numbers
are unreliable due to inconsistent testing in many countries.

systems in place to control the situation. The death toll could easily be
below 50k but the response has been slow and ineffectual. yet the man at

One of us has to be looking at wrong info - google's only showing that
the US has had about 3k deaths with 164k confirmed cases.

The data are 10-14 days behind the curve - people have yet to die or show
symptoms - and with the US having a doubling rate of 3-4 days there's a
long way to go yet. Even the trump is admitting it, finally.

"Chris" wrote

|
| The data are 10-14 days behind the curve - people have yet to die or show
| symptoms - and with the US having a doubling rate of 3-4 days there's a
| long way to go yet.
|

As you said, the data are not accurate at this point.
The rate is mainly due to increased testing. What's the
infection rate? Who knows?! I know a couple with a baby.
One had it bad. Probably they've all had it. She couldn't
get tested and didn't go to the hospital. Most people are
told they don't qualify for a test. So that's 3 cases not
on the books. There are probably a lot of those. Just as
with flu. They count the people who go to the doctor
and have a confirmed case. But I don't know anyone who
ever went to the doctor when they got the flu.

And today there was an article saying 1 in 4 may show
no symptoms. So it's really all grasping at straws. The
people in ICUs seem to be the only dependable indicator.
The published numbers are indicating testing, not cases.

Finally, at long last, the idiocy of telling people not
to wear masks is being reversed, after the Chinese
CDC and various researchers kept stating the obvious.
So now in the US we're in day 3 of the official bureaucracy
preparing the public to fervently believe the exact
opposite of what they fervently and dutifully believed as
of last weekend, that people actually *should not*
wear masks. Yesterday Dr. Fauci presented the transitional
belief model that "it might be good if it doesn't mean masks
being taken away from doctors and nurses".

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/h...ronavirus.html

I expect by the end of the week people will be telling
each other to wear a mask. People are already passing
around do-it-yourself instructions.

Last week people were laughing or fleeing when they
saw me with a mask. This week, many have them in
the supermarket and people look scared. But the clerks
are still not wearing them. Not one single clerk have I
seen with a mask!

Mayayana wrote:
"Chris" wrote

|
| The data are 10-14 days behind the curve - people have yet to die or show
| symptoms - and with the US having a doubling rate of 3-4 days there's a
| long way to go yet.
|

As you said, the data are not accurate at this point.
The rate is mainly due to increased testing. What's the
infection rate? Who knows?! I know a couple with a baby.
One had it bad. Probably they've all had it. She couldn't
get tested and didn't go to the hospital. Most people are
told they don't qualify for a test. So that's 3 cases not
on the books. There are probably a lot of those. Just as
with flu. They count the people who go to the doctor
and have a confirmed case. But I don't know anyone who
ever went to the doctor when they got the flu.

And today there was an article saying 1 in 4 may show
no symptoms. So it's really all grasping at straws. The
people in ICUs seem to be the only dependable indicator.
The published numbers are indicating testing, not cases.

Finally, at long last, the idiocy of telling people not
to wear masks is being reversed, after the Chinese
CDC and various researchers kept stating the obvious.
So now in the US we're in day 3 of the official bureaucracy
preparing the public to fervently believe the exact
opposite of what they fervently and dutifully believed as
of last weekend, that people actually *should not*
wear masks. Yesterday Dr. Fauci presented the transitional
belief model that "it might be good if it doesn't mean masks
being taken away from doctors and nurses".

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/h...ronavirus.html

I expect by the end of the week people will be telling
each other to wear a mask. People are already passing
around do-it-yourself instructions.

Last week people were laughing or fleeing when they
saw me with a mask. This week, many have them in
the supermarket and people look scared. But the clerks
are still not wearing them. Not one single clerk have I
seen with a mask!

There are not stock of masks to do any such thing.

Neither will people know proper handling procedures for
masks. How often to change them. When to throw them out.
And so on.

Even health professionals are not following proper procedures.
We have reports of nurses using the same mask for their
entire shift.

Such an effort does have an effect. It helps the people who would
cough straight out in front of them, it keeps their "cloud"
closer to them. Makes it closer to coughing in the sleeve.
That's good. Of some tiny benefit. But from a protection
from infection perspective (prophylaxis) point of view,
there just aren't enough masks for throwing them away
when you're supposed to. If you had a "virus shedder",
you'd be getting some benefit if that person had
a mask slapped on them.

Masks would also result in undesired behavioral changes.
Maybe my public transit buses would fill up cheek to
jowl with workers in the morning. A typical bus I
see when I go out for a walk in the morning, has *one*
passenger riding in it. They've cut back to Sunday schedule
here, to try to avoid bankrupting the transit system.

Imagine if, for example, someone decided kids should go back
to school, and fitted each one with a poorly fitting mask.
Now, where is Mike, our microbiologist at work, to do one of
his famous "eye rolls"... :-/

This goes solidly in the category of "some day we'll
live on Mars". When we have a Warp Drive maybe. And
the Delorean has a fusion reactor that works on
banana peels and beer.

And because we all need entertainment, I found this
article on the sidebar of another page I was looking
at. What if someone wrote a prescient article a
year ago, not knowing what was to come ? The only
thing they got wrong, was instead of the bog roll
aisle being devoid of product, it was the aisle with
bottles of Coke :-)

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...roke-out-today

"We don't do much better with cytokine storms today
than we did back in 1918 – Michael Osterholm"

That's what fills your lungs with fluid. Unlike the
articles we see today, enumerating possible treatments
(interleukin), since there was no pressure when that
article was written, the guy can be honest.

Paul

"Paul" wrote

| Last week people were laughing or fleeing when they
| saw me with a mask. This week, many have them in
| the supermarket and people look scared. But the clerks
| are still not wearing them. Not one single clerk have I
| seen with a mask!
|
| There are not stock of masks to do any such thing.
|

There are doctors using bandanas. People can use
common sense to cover their nose and mouth in all sorts
of ways. The NYT published an article on how to make
your own mask. The naysaying is deeply irrational. I
predict that within a week your neighbors will be
scolding you for going out without a mask.

| Masks would also result in undesired behavioral changes.
| Maybe my public transit buses would fill up cheek to
| jowl with workers in the morning.

Maybe. And condoms might encourage more
unsafe sex. But that's not a reason to avoid
condoms. We can handle two rules: Keep your
distance and wear a mask. Not so hard.