Some say it’s physically impossible for covid to spread outdoors. If so then why do 90% of MDs tell us wear mask outdoors?

mr38 wrote:

90% of MDs are not experts on the transmission of a novel virus.

Ding Ding Ding

We have a winner!

Blowing Rock Master wrote:

mr38 wrote:

90% of MDs are not experts on the transmission of a novel virus.

Ding Ding Ding

We have a winner!

Which means nearly 100% of people online aren’t experts of transmission either. Yet we still hear everyone’s opinions.

Everyone that jabs MDs for not ‘having the right credentials’ should have to state their credentials first.

As an epidemiologist that went back to med school, what more can I do to convince you I am qualified?? We try our best to protect people. We don’t make money off it (I’m about 300k in debt from med school rn).

Outdoor activity transmission is low. Not teasing out different things makes things simpler. Good public health is simple. You lose people on details. I think at the end of the day we are just trying to do what we took an oath for: do no harm. Alone outside or almost alone? No mask. “Outside” in a stadium? Mask.

But 90% of physicians would know enough about airborne transmission to know it's BS.

There are lots of people in the ID world who are against blanket restrictions/masking for outdoor activities. The problem from a public health standpoint is that it is very difficult to parse out all the higher risk situations out doors from the very low risk situations. There are just too many variables. Sitting close to other people in an outdoor sports stadium can be higher risk if there is little wind, it is cool and dry and people are yelling and cheering. But the risk changes significantly if it is breezy, warm, etc. So, if you are serious about stopping the virus, you have to overreact sometimes to get the best outcomes. But you have to balance that with compliance problems. CA had pretty good restrictions but a lot of people did not comply and the results were as bad as places where restrictions were light or non-existent. Focusing on the truly high risk activities (indoor dining, bars, large gatherings) while allowing low risk activities (beaches, parks, etc. without masks) can in the end result in better compliance and better outcomes.

Dr Faucii wrote:

Nobody said that is impossible to get the virus outdoors. It's just not that likely unless you sit in a Texas Stadium for 3 hours and squeeze through the hallways to get in and out.

You are assuming here.

So what about these instances:

1. a major marathon with crowding at the start. buses at boston marathon to get people to the start maskless obviously not so good

2. pack running in very close proximity during pacing of the half marathon or marathon race. e.g. Amateurs staying on a sub3:30hr marathon pace to qualify for Boston Marathon prob OK ?

3. an outdoor track race with 20 other participants maskless during a waterfall start from lanes 1 through 6 prob OK ?

We don't "need" to parse out anything, that is the problem. The control freaks still think they have a right to control and micro manage. Most people just don't care what you or they think or are worried about. We have the vaccines for the people who need them, so now this virus is less of a threat to the public than the flu. Time to carry on and ignore the

Precious Roy's of the world.

Precious Roy wrote:

So, if you are serious about stopping the virus, you have to overreact sometimes to get the best outcomes. But you have to balance that with compliance problems. CA had pretty good restrictions but a lot of people did not comply and the results were as bad as places where restrictions were light or non-existent. Focusing on the truly high risk activities (indoor dining, bars, large gatherings) while allowing low risk activities (beaches, parks, etc. without masks) can in the end result in better compliance and better outcomes.

Yes, I think I agree with you here. The problem is if everyone 'overreacts' to stop the virus, we would be wearing a mask 24/7. Also, most people know this is total BS so they don't abide by the rules when they know it would be useful, e.g. in a hospital toilet when they'e gone for an appointment and have had to wait. A hospital toilet is a small, non-ventilated (or poorly ventilated by air conditioning). Lots of people go through it every hour. they shuffle about, blow their noses, flush the toilet, cough, sneeze, faff about in the mirror, fart and so on. It is a high risk area. But someone who has total fatigue about wearing a mask has probably thought F it! And they are not wearing a mask any of the time...

I think overreacting has led to harm.

QuestionerPerson wrote:

nope. not. no wrote:

I've been a nurse for 25 years. I don't know ANY physicians who advocate wearing a mask outside. Period

Are you a licensed nurse?

RN

So my point is that mandating masks all of the time has probably led to more harm than it prevented, which is ridiculous.

Roy,

Who are these people in the ID world that are against blanket restrictions? I understand your point that many would like amore nuanced approach but nearly all ID physicians I know (and yes I know a LOT of them) agree that good public health policy needs to be simple and actionable. Maybe what you are trying to get across is that most people in the ID world understand how nuanced these restrictions could be to balance safety and disruption to everyday activities but nearly all acknowledge it is simply not possible to implement such a system at scale and see it adhered to.

Lead Foil Hat wrote:We don't "need" to parse out anything, that is the problem. The control freaks still think they have a right to control and micro manage. Most people just don't care what you or they think or are worried about. We have the vaccines for the people who need them, so now this virus is less of a threat to the public than the flu. Time to carry on and ignore the

Precious Roy's of the world.

So you wouldn't wear a mask in ANY situation?

Your assessment is pretty good. The biggest issue with running is the heavy breathing and in distance running: closeness for an extended period.

I would have considered option 2 and 3 not safe in November. Now, probably ok because of vaccination.

In fact, I’d advocate for pre-race Covid tests to be gotten rid of if someone shows proof of vaccination. IMO those tests were pretty pointless anyways. Just enough false negatives + people are normally allowed to take them like 24 hr -72 hr prior (a lot changes in this time period). A vaccinated individual is way safer than an individual that tested negative 2 days ago.

Mass events should be a no go until we get more vaccinated (~70%) At least we have solution now. Hope this helps!

I am over the pandemic too but alas wrote:

Your assessment is pretty good. The biggest issue with running is the heavy breathing and in distance running: closeness for an extended period.

I would have considered option 2 and 3 not safe in November. Now, probably ok because of vaccination.

In fact, I’d advocate for pre-race Covid tests to be gotten rid of if someone shows proof of vaccination. IMO those tests were pretty pointless anyways. Just enough false negatives + people are normally allowed to take them like 24 hr -72 hr prior (a lot changes in this time period). A vaccinated individual is way safer than an individual that tested negative 2 days ago.

Mass events should be a no go until we get more vaccinated (~70%) At least we have solution now. Hope this helps!

Thank you!

Its 100% possible to spread fear if a fearful person sees you without one.

Joking aside it seems sensible that you could get just about any disease outside but probably a much lower chance then inside.

It's dangerous to go alone take this 😷

Yea another joke.

I'v never worn a mask outside and i never plan on it.

JObrien wrote:

Some say it’s physically impossible for covid to spread outdoors. If so then why do 90% of MDs tell us wear mask outdoors? Is it contagious enough of a disease for the vapor to sit in the air a number of seconds?

Who says this or are you just making it up as you go along.

I see very few people wearing masks outdoors nor do I read/hear about MDs recommending masks outdoors.

Blowing Rock Master wrote:

mr38 wrote:

90% of MDs are not experts on the transmission of a novel virus.

Ding Ding Ding

We have a winner!

I don't think Covid-19 is still considered a novel virus. Its been around for a year +. My gut feeling tells me its likely the most heavily tracked/studied virus ever.

No one informed says it's impossible. It's much, much harder to spread outdoors than in small spaces for obvious reasons like air exchange. 90% of MDs don't say that and plenty in fact don't even themselves mask up outside.

/thread

hamsters wrote:

Lead Foil Hat wrote:We don't "need" to parse out anything, that is the problem. The control freaks still think they have a right to control and micro manage. Most people just don't care what you or they think or are worried about. We have the vaccines for the people who need them, so now this virus is less of a threat to the public than the flu. Time to carry on and ignore the

Precious Roy's of the world.

So you wouldn't wear a mask in ANY situation?

Please don't set him off