41–50 of 146 posts
Sigh...
> They are hiding, scared, waiting for the government to officially announce that it is once again safe to return to the world.
If it were a leveled discussion of facts, without the obvious agenda and judgment attached, people would not react so negatively.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
like, theoretically someone could have read the full Van Halen rider and thought, damn we're not doing all this stuff but lets do the brown M&M's thing because you know how these touchy, irrational artist types are, if they see one brown M&M they probably lose it!
I think you're missing the point...
"Data from surface survival studies indicate that a 99% reduction in infectious SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses can be expected under typical indoor environmental conditions within 3 days (72 hours) on common non-porous surfaces like stainless steel, plastic, and glass." These are typical surfaces found on public transport, shopping malls, food courts. Three days allows for a lot of traffic to pass through and pot…
Nobody is perfect but certainly our previous leadership did a great job of proving just how critical it is that world leaders understand or at least believe in science and facts.
I've seen some Australian news outlet coverage via YouTube and can draw some pretty close parallels to a well known news outlet ironically named after a clever animal in the US. In my mind, this means the seeds of misinformation and a rise in the same kind of political environment are quite possible there too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, the brown M&M’s actually served an important purpose as a signal!
like, theoretically someone could have read the full Van Halen rider and thought, damn we're not doing all this stuff but lets do the brown M&M's thing because you know how these touchy, irrational artist types are, if they see one brown M&M they probably lose it!
Sigh...
The reason why people react negatively to those who have been bringing up this sort of thing is that it always comes with this nonsense at the end: > They are hiding, scared, waiting for the government to officially announce that it is once again safe to return to the world. If it were a leveled discussion of facts, without the obvious agenda and judgment attached, people would not react so negatively.
Watch as HN takes its signature air of superiority and says "I called it last year it was so obvious smh". 1. Basic safety principles mean that as long as we're not sure, keep doing it 2. You may have been enjoying a year surprisingly free of common colds, of flus, and many more other illnesses. These are absolutely transmitted through surfaces, and increasing hygiene standards is the best way to get rid of them. Kee…
> as long as we're not sure, keep doing it There are diminishing returns in this caution principle, while the harm caused by the deluge of disinfection products on the environment and ourselves certainly adds-up. You can never be 100% sure you won't get infected through surface. By this logic you should spray sanitizers everywhere all the time .
Disinfecting and cleaning your hands (even with soap. Noone's told you to douse your hands in alcohol every hour of the day) is as much for your protection as it is for others. Additionally, you can expect an average person to wash their hands maybe three to four times a day. Considering we have doctors and nurses that do this on the order of tens of times a day (and they all do it with hydroalcoholic solutions, which is the one thing that will damage your hands), the pretend harm caused to ourselves is bullshit.
> Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get the sense that's happening more for show: businesses want people to feel safe coming in; bragging about thorough cleaning procedures is a way of conveying that, whether it works or not
you nailed it. It is virtue signaling. A theater to display to everyone that you are on the right side of the debate and that you are taking covid seriously. I would even bet that most people issuing the cleaning guidance know that it is almost useless, but we live in a world in which it is more important for your actions to make you perceived the way you want rather than being effective.
Did anyone call this early on? Would’ve been nice to hear a free and open debate from the start—I don’t recall seeing one. There are costs to doing things everywhere on the planet “just in case.”
One in 10k per contact is still non-neglible imo. Everyone can do the math. With 100 contacts to contaminated surfaces the chance of infection grows to 0.01. If the chance to become infected per contact are just 1/2000 with 100 contacts the chances of getting infected are now 40%. It makes perfect sense to maintain surface hygiene since those contacts accumulate statistically.