Protecting oneself

[redsturgeon]

OTOH, we have to live as well and it is a bit like asking a scientist what we should do about all those deaths from motoring. The answer of course would be to restrict cars to 15 mph max.

If we all followed all the advice, society would just seize up. There needs to be a balance. It is finding where that should be that is the tricky bit.

Dod

I think the analogy to be more accurate would be something like:

The weather has turn cold, the roads have become icy, please travel slowly until the gritter trucks arrives. When the weather warms up then you can get back to your normal speed. Thank you for your patience.

John

[dealtn]

OTOH, we have to live as well and it is a bit like asking a scientist what we should do about all those deaths from motoring. The answer of course would be to restrict cars to 15 mph max.

If we all followed all the advice, society would just seize up. There needs to be a balance. It is finding where that should be that is the tricky bit.

Dod

I think the analogy to be more accurate would be something like:

The weather has turn cold, the roads have become icy, please travel slowly until the gritter trucks arrives. When the weather warms up then you can get back to your normal speed. Thank you for your patience.

John

I don't think so.

If you ask a (medical) scientist about the number of deaths, the cause of those deaths, and what can be done to reduce those deaths, he will answer broadly as Dod suggests. If you then ask him about whether it is preferable for society to do so, or whether he recommends that, he will (like Sage should operate) say that isn't his remit, he is there only for his expertise in the science (or medical role), it is for others, such as politicians to interpret, devise a strategy, or set of laws for society.

It is at that stage your analogy comes closer.

[redsturgeon]

OTOH, we have to live as well and it is a bit like asking a scientist what we should do about all those deaths from motoring. The answer of course would be to restrict cars to 15 mph max.

If we all followed all the advice, society would just seize up. There needs to be a balance. It is finding where that should be that is the tricky bit.

Dod

I think the analogy to be more accurate would be something like:

The weather has turn cold, the roads have become icy, please travel slowly until the gritter trucks arrives. When the weather warms up then you can get back to your normal speed. Thank you for your patience.

John

I don't think so.

If you ask a (medical) scientist about the number of deaths, the cause of those deaths, and what can be done to reduce those deaths, he will answer broadly as Dod suggests. If you then ask him about whether it is preferable for society to do so, or whether he recommends that, he will (like Sage should operate) say that isn't his remit, he is there only for his expertise in the science (or medical role), it is for others, such as politicians to interpret, devise a strategy, or set of laws for society.

It is at that stage your analogy comes closer.

Fair enough.

John

[Dod101]

Yes I was looking at what the science adviser would say. redsturgeon's comment is fair enough but that sounds more like a political response, and of course that is where the whole thing gets so very difficult. There is no black (am I allowed to say that?) or white answer. There is the scientific answer which is fine in academic circles but then there is the answer for the real world and that is of course a political choice. We can see that on every news bulletin. For instance on this evening's BBC news, we had Boris from the Andrew Marr Show this morning talking about the possibility of further restrictions in the next few weeks and Starmer asking for these in the next 24 hours. Starmer is not of course PM and has the benefit of not having to try to satisfy as many different interests as the PM needs to.

I think therefore that it comes back to the original point, 'Protecting oneself'.

Dod

[vagrantbrain]

The hotel took the point. On arrival the front door was wide open. And our table in the dining room was right by a window, we opened the window for every meal. Plus there was a wood stove in the room and at breakfast when that was not alight, en extractor fan.
We sat, safely, in a steady breeze.

At home, our draughty cottage and two wood burners keep us safe.

So I commend this to you - hands face space ventilate.

Your thoughts?

V8

The wood burners will probably do you more harm than the virus judging by the particulates they spread around.

Dod

Yes and totally self-inflicted. The OP did not need to go the hotel in Devon in the first place.

And swerving off at a tangent, does anyone else feel like grabbing business proprietors, school heads etc warmly by the throat and shaking them when they claim they have made their premises "COVID SECURE"?

Honestly, they all must have degrees in kidding themselves. There is no such thing (except perhaps in a few carefully designed research and testing laboratories).

My workplace of about 800 people has been fastidious about masks, desk moves, social distancing, on-site testing etc and to date not one single case of on-site transmission, and that includes 2 major maintenance shutdowns. I'd say that qualifies!

[Mike4]

OTOH, we have to live as well and it is a bit like asking a scientist what we should do about all those deaths from motoring. The answer of course would be to restrict cars to 15 mph max.

If we all followed all the advice, society would just seize up. There needs to be a balance. It is finding where that should be that is the tricky bit.

Dod

This analogy doesn't follow at all. The number of car accidents left broadly uncontrolled does not increase exponentially until it runs out of victims like COVID does, or like any pandemic will.

[Dod101]

No, in one sense it doesn't, but at the same time, ask a scientist what we ought to do given a particular set of circumstances and he will probably give you a totally unrealistic, if effective, answer. That is the point I was making not a direct comparison with the Covid situation. I thought that was obvious.

Dod

[dealtn]

OTOH, we have to live as well and it is a bit like asking a scientist what we should do about all those deaths from motoring. The answer of course would be to restrict cars to 15 mph max.

If we all followed all the advice, society would just seize up. There needs to be a balance. It is finding where that should be that is the tricky bit.

Dod

This analogy doesn't follow at all. The number of car accidents left broadly uncontrolled does not increase exponentially until it runs out of victims like COVID does, or like any pandemic will.

Actually I think it broadly does work the same, it just takes a massively longer time to do so.

Originally you would have a society with lots of people and no cars.

Cars arrive, only a very few are aware of them, let alone own them. Then their uusefullness and popularity increases and their increase is, if not exponential, a likely growth function.

Accidents and deaths occur alongside this growth, which if left unchecked continues to grow. Society becomes more aware and changes behaviours accordingly, sometimes at the instruction of the authorities. So cars have to follow speed restrictions, seatbelts must be worn, car manufacturers are pressured to improve safety etc.

Whether "left broadly left uncontrolled" or influenced by behavioural changes there are certainly parallels.

It is far from perfect as an analogy, but not hugely different in how it operates.

[servodude]

It is far from perfect as an analogy, but not hugely different in how it operates.

The devil is in the details though isn't it?

If being in contact with a car could kill you by surprise a few weeks later, during which time you could also pass on the problem unwittingly to anyone you met it would be a lot closer as an analogy

- as it is you normally know when you've been in an accident and it's not generally contagious (pile ups notwithstanding)


- sd

[CryptoPlankton]

- as it is you normally know when you've been in an accident...


- sd

I've had the odd phone call suggesting otherwise!

[servodude]

- as it is you normally know when you've been in an accident...


- sd

I've had the odd phone call suggesting otherwise!

I've met folk like that too
- hence normally

-sd

[AsleepInYorkshire]

For what little it's worth I completely understood Dod's analogy.

AiY

[DiviLuvva]

Until April take 50 micrograms (2000 IU) of Vitamin D a day and get on with your life.

A virus does what a virus does; and the majority of positive RT-PCR test results are not "cases".

[funduffer]

Coming back to the OP's point about covid and ventilation of indoor spaces.

It reminded me of when I worked in Germany at a site where they had recently built a new office block. Before the building was constructed, the employees were asked if they wanted an extra floor, or an air conditioning system. They voted for an extra floor, and natural ventilation was designed into the building instead. Apparently, many Germans are anti-air conditioning and are very keen on the benefits of fresh air.

Germany has seen much lower covid case numbers over the spring and summer compared to the UK, and have had a much higher proportion of workers working from the office than in the UK.

One wonders if this is due to more effective ventilation of buildings.

In the winter time the heating is on and natural ventilation reduced, perhaps a factor in Germany's recent covid wave?

FD

[stevensfo]

Yes I was looking at what the science adviser would say. redsturgeon's comment is fair enough but that sounds more like a political response, and of course that is where the whole thing gets so very difficult. There is no black (am I allowed to say that?) or white answer. There is the scientific answer which is fine in academic circles but then there is the answer for the real world and that is of course a political choice. We can see that on every news bulletin. For instance on this evening's BBC news, we had Boris from the Andrew Marr Show this morning talking about the possibility of further restrictions in the next few weeks and Starmer asking for these in the next 24 hours. Starmer is not of course PM and has the benefit of not having to try to satisfy as many different interests as the PM needs to.

I think therefore that it comes back to the original point, 'Protecting oneself'.

Dod

I have to admit that Keith Starmer is a curious individual. On reading about him especially in his judgements in the law courts,I'm curious as to why he supports Labour at all, unless it's in some weird way of trying to follow in Tony Blair's footsteps. Maybe he will introduce the New 'Improved' Labour' - with extra cleanliness and improved fragrance?
Personally, I'd prefer to stick with the clowns. Much as I despise them, at least with Boris, Cummings, Rees-Mogg et al, you know what you're getting. With the juggler, you never know when he may miss a few plates.


Steve

[88V8]

https://www.seattletimes.....“‘A’ had to get a large dose in just five minutes, provided by larger aerosols probably about 50 microns,” she said. “Large aerosols or small droplets overlapping in that gray area can transmit disease further than one or two meters if you have strong airflow.”

That Korean study was imopressively thorough. .... 27 people were infected by a woman sitting under a second-floor ceiling air conditioning unit.

A SAGE member with whom I corresponded about ventilation commented that it depended whether one was sitting up or downstream.
In the hotel, we were upstream.
So that's another takeaway, be upstream.

Most of the other guests were in another dining room where there is part air conditioning. No way of knowing whether any of them caught anything. But I do know that I won't share a space with anyone in still air, and I've always thought that aircon is a good way of spreading diseases.

Another absent risk factor in that hotel over Christmas, no children allowed. How mad, discouraging people from going out, but keeping the schools open. It's been known for months that secondary pupils are spreaders.

Yes, after that one outing of 2020, we're back indoors. Just the occasional foray to the blessed Waitrose.

Now, time to light the first wood burner.

V8