6 feet apart was far enough apart that it prevented schools from having the means to open much sooner. Kudos to all of the professionals who spoke up - despite the threats made against them.
Follow the science.
Link: https://nypost.com/2024/01/10/news/fauci-admits-to-congress-that-certain-covid-social-distancing-guidelines-lacked-scientific-basis-sort-of-just-appeared/
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
saved many lives. One of the few things Trump did right.
Your Dem party wanted Non ID mail-in ballots in states that it never could have dreamed of getting before - as you know. It allowed for amazing ballot harvesting. Conor even posting about it being ok because it would help get Trump out of office.
Trump called for opening up but was shut down by CDC while he was in office. We now know from testimony under oath and emails, that Fauci was involved with helping to fund the very lab that created virus and leaked it - Wuhan . He became the sweetheart of the Left because he played ball with Dems to keep election during Shut Down for mail-in voting. And for Fauci...Trump had begun an investigation into the origins of COVID...which Biden shut down immediately upon taking office which helped Fauci keep his secret. D governors in particular prolonged their state shut downs far, far longer for their citizens - your fucked up state of California the longest. Ron DeSantis opened up early on .....months after the initial shut down, and he eventually showed the way for all and made the other govs ultimately have to follow suit since their citizens were chaffing for their freedom while Florida rates of COVID deaths were no different than Cali's or other comparable states rate of COVID deaths. DeSantis called BS on the CDC because he listened to medical advisors not threatened by their government or political governing bodies who in turn were under the thumb of the government.
The sins of prolonged shut down were egregious under Biden. Dems was able to achieve many goals using the medical emergency excuse previously unattainable.
You lived through this and we said this stuff daily. You kept your ears closed like a good little dog and amazingly can't recall this now. The rest of us aren't dogs, and unlike you, we don't like being brought to heel..
(no message)
Say this but that puts you squarely with Funny Farm Frank (thanks MAS), Chris, Conor and Tyrone. So at this point, yes, your Dem party. Sorry.
Unfortunately, those that support him are sheep. And you have no idea who I’m voting for. One thing for certain is that I have enough common decency to not vote for Trump.
camp. As far as your vote, you have Joe, RFK or Trump. But you could always write in someone. May I recommend Heywood Jablome or Mike Hunt. They are good ones.
You’re all the same…simple minded, weak, little sheep. You and the other idiots act as if the guy is running to better the country. Comical.
If your governor had a set of balls and campaigned better, I might have voted for him. Unfortunately, he lacks the mental fortitude to beat a buffoon like Trump. Pathetic like you.
Me voting for Trump over Biden doesn't make me a "Trumpie". Same as you voting for Biden doesn't make you a Dem. I have said multiple times that I want someone else but I'm playing the cards that are dealt. But you can continue to rail on people for making a choice in front of them as being "weak or simple minded" which is complete bullshit but I guess it makes you feel better. All I am doing is making a choice on what is given to me.
I cannot control how Desantis campaigned but I'm thrilled to have him running the state where I live. He is way better than who is running California. Who you probably didn't vote for Newsome so I'm not going to blame or insult you.
But you can continue to bash people for making a choice that's in front of them. The same way you are with voting for Biden. You feel he is the lesser of 2 evils. I think you're wrong but it is what it is.
and you’re right. Not all Trump supporters are weak and simpleminded. Only 99% are…I kinda kid. You’re the exception to the rule. FYI, I like the majority of your posts. You seem reasonable most of the time. My apologies for the insults and thanks for the Snickers. I wish there ate candy sometimes.
(no message)
(no message)
efficacy of 6ft vs 10ft vs 3ft vs 20ft, etc. spacing for all the millions of people who need to go to the store for food, or any number of other "Must Do" tasks at the beginning of a pandemic that ultimately killed over a million Americans...the CDC gave it their best guess, but delivered the more important message that without vaccines everyone should avoid other people unless absolutely necessary.
This resurrection of a GOP political attempt to discredit true science is infantile as well as counter-productive to Public Health...and the fact that Baron champions this nonsense is further evidence of his having become unhinged...as if that were necessary. Just because he has personal issues doesn't give him the license to constantly spread misinformation and weaken public trust in those who devote their careers to keeping fellow citizens alive and healthy.
(no message)
world say both Baron and Rand Paul are wrong...plus, as I've often posted, i am fortunate to. have family members who are ID and Pulmonary/Critical Care Docs who also highly admire Dr. Fauci...and strongly disagree with Baron.
I trust that Baron is an outstanding physician in his chosen field...he should defer to those in ID...it's a puzzlement that he doesn't.
You barking at BVZ is comical. BVZ was right and you were wrong.
(no message)
Baron's position cost no lives. The Great Fauchino's extraordinarily flawed personal medical philosophy where he accepts nothing but RCTs as valid cost over 500,000 of our fellow Americans their lives.
And until you read Dr. Risch's paper, you have no standing to respond to what I just said.
publication retracted the paper...plus, his Yale Medical School colleagues wrote a paper denouncing his paper...and finally, the FDA as well as the WHO both stopped recommending HCQ+...
btw, I've read two of the studies Dr. Risch opined about...both were found to have serious errors that invalidated their claims...it's all documented...do yourself a favor and read about them...you'll see why you've made a poor choice in promoting Dr. Risch.
For some unknowable reason, this won't have any effect on you, whatsoever....it is what it is ;-).
It had no basis in science. That is a fact.
rule (Feb. 2020), they had no knowledge of how SARS-CoV-2 was really transmitted...they did the best they could with implementing Social Distancing without limiting one person at a time to go food shopping, etc...we've learned from the experience and will apply that learning to future viral outbreaks.
It's a simple as that...unless you're an Anal Retentive who gets very anxious when confronted with uncertainty.
(no message)
Dr. Fauci, Moderna, Pfizer and all the dedicated researchers...not clowns like RFK Jr. or, "Frontline Doctors" like Stella Emmanuel.
Turns out this one - unlike the others - was aerosolized.
Turns out this one - unlike the others - could be spread by asymptomatic people.
Hang Fauci!
The Cult is trying very hard to make him a scapegoat. History will disagree.
(no message)
and deadly…thankfully, we had Dr. Fauci and the thousands of other medical professionals leading us through the constant mutations/variants…and not the likes of Dr. Zero.
(no message)
(no message)
Turns out this one was different.
i know, I know. Fauci is the devil to you psychopaths. So I am pissing into the wind here.
But there was no way to base guidelines on controlled scientific studies for a brand new virus. I bet, if you thought about it for ten seconds, you could understand why.
No evidence of 6 feet ever. No other coronaviruses with such evidence that he could site either. But here you are again pretending to know shit as you argue with an actual doctor like you actually know something when you don't. I wish you could understand how ignorant you sound to me right now.
...from the attached article...
-----------------
If you live in the United States, chances are you’ve heard guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about social distancing. Per the organization’s website, individuals should stay at least six feet (two meters, or one tall person) away from one another—a form of social distancing—to help prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus that causes Covid-19.
But the CDC isn’t the only word on social distancing. The World Health Organization recommends that people stay at least half that distance apart—three feet, (one meter, or about a toddler’s height). Meanwhile, an opinion published in late March in the Journal of the American Medical Association by a particle fluid dynamicist at the Massachusetts Institutes of Technology suggested that people might do well to stay more than 27 feet apart (8.2 meters, or several tall people) to avoid infecting one another.
These conflicting recommendations are understandable, considering that SARS-CoV-2 didn’t exist (to the best of our knowledge) six months ago. Scientists are scrambling to figure out the details of how it spreads from person to person—but there isn’t a single study that can definitively describe all the ways the virus transmits between hosts. For now, these guides for social distancing are based on data collected on other pathogens—some of which may be outdated.
The WHO’s three-foot recommendation originates with work done in the 1930s done by William Wells, a Harvard researcher who studied tuberculosis. He found that droplets—bits of spit, mucus, and sputum (aka phlegm) emitted when we breathe, cough, or sneeze—tend to land within three feet of where they’re expelled.
Those droplets—a term researchers use to refer to biggish particles, ones that are more than five microns in diameter—can last on surfaces for a few hours to days, depending on the temperature. That’s why other precautions like hand washing and disinfecting are so important to prevent the spread of disease.
The three-foot cutoff for droplets has stuck around for nearly a century, and to be fair, scientists haven’t had reason to doubt its validity. Other viral outbreaks, like the flu, SARS, and MERS, which are also transmitted through droplets, seemed to behave similarly—at least enough so that authorities didn’t feel the need to update their guidance.
Rules vs. guidelines
We take comfort in the certainty of rules that scientists and public health officials give us—particularly with those that are meant to keep us safe. But as with most things in biology, the more scientists learn more about the ways that viruses spread, the clearer it is that these rules are more like guidelines.
When the SARS pandemic hit in 2003, for example, scientists found some evidence that the three-foot cutoff may not be enough. Researchers looked at the prevalence of SARS infections within a single flight, and concluded that droplets of the virus could actually travel between passengers six feet apart—not three.
The study, which looked at just over 100 people and was published in the New England Journal of Medicine, was allegedly the basis for the CDC updating their message to say that people should stay six feet apart to prevent transmission, according to a recent episode of Radiolab. Quartz tried to find the origins of the six-foot guideline with the CDC, but after multiple attempts over two weeks, the agency failed to comment.
Now, there’s anecdotal evidence that the six-foot cutoff may not be enough, either. “It is possible that special circumstances might lead to increased or decreased risks,” Giorgia Sulis, an infectious disease physician and epidemiologist at McGill University, told Quartz in an email. But with limited time to have studied SARS-CoV-2, none of those special situations have been investigated in detail.
One thing that could dramatically influence recommendations for social distancing is if SARS-CoV-2 could not merely be transmitted via droplets, but in even smaller particles called aerosols. Unlike heavier droplets which fall more or less to the ground, aerosols evaporate in the air, where they linger. This gives them a chance to spread out even farther, and increases the likelihood that someone inhales, swallows, or touches them (and then touches their nose or mouth).
Certain behaviors might promote aerosol formation—like being intubated to be put on a ventilator, or disconnected from it. Both the WHO and CDC note that Covid-19 may be transmitted through aerosols in health care settings. And anecdotal reports suggest it could happen outside the hospital: For example, there have been reports of people who were presymptomatic and singing within each other’s company spreading the virus to one another.
It’s certainly plausible that Covid-19 could be airborne. Already, scientists know that some infections, like measles, colds, chickenpox, and noroviruses are airborne. And previous work has suggested that everyone emits some potentially infectious material when speaking or singing. Lydia Bourouiba, the scientist who studies fluid dynamics at MIT, has done work that shows that coughs and sneezes can be projected with such force that they emit both droplets and aerosols capable of traveling between 23 and 27 feet. But none of this has been demonstrated in a lab with SARS-CoV-2 in particular.
Specific environments could change the virus’ transmission dynamics, too. “Walking in the open air, regardless of weather conditions, is likely much less concerning compared to interaction in closed spaces where air circulation is more limited,” Sulis says.
Time spent in the presence of a potential source could also affect transmission. So could viral load. “The longer the exposure time, the higher the chances of getting infected,” says Sulis, although again, infection risks are “limited” for those who interact from afar. And if a person is carrying a larger number of virion particles (viruses that haven’t found their way into one of our cells), they’d have more opportunities to spread those particles to others.
Without specific studies on SARS-CoV-2, all scientists and public health officials have are vague guidelines—which are at odds with the public’s desire for hard and fast answers. It’s possible that there is a specific, safe distance to remain apart to stop the spread of Covid-19. And it could be six feet when passing someone on foot outside on a blustery day, but farther when sitting at a distance from them to have a conversation. There simply isn’t enough data to be sure.
Which is likely why, even though six feet is a good guideline, it’s not wise to walk right up to it, literally speaking. Given the devastation of this pandemic, it’s best to give your neighbors as wide a berth as possible. Or, stay inside and look out the window instead.
-------------------
In short, no one fully understood the transmission of COVID-19 in the very beginning when the 6 ft recommendation was made...but there was existing data for previous viruses and short of a detailed study in 2020, so the CDC and WHO went with what they had...
Note one consistent advisory in ALL studies...wearing masks was an essential component to the mitigation plan...unlike BVZ's opinion.
Link: https://qz.com/1831100/where-does-the-six-feet-social-distancing-guideline-come-from
You're an academic. Ty doesn't have the integrity to read Dr. Risch's paper, which was written AFTER all the studies were in. Do you?
After all, you read one paper.
Or, more accurately, you read the summary of one paper.
It’s not like any others were produced on this issue. You are the authority.
Dr. Risch reviewed every study conducted on HCQ+.
treatment never conducted even one RCT that demonstrated efficacy...unlike Pfizer and Moderna which did...and you participated in, if I remember correctly...kind of ironic, wouldn't you say?
(no message)
Dr. Fauci shortly after he announced his retirement...not one of them would pay any attention to your assessment.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
No self-awareness. Common sense should have told them Fauci was full of shit but they defended him. Good cult member act like that, amirite?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
They knew fucking nothing, and when I tried to tell them, they accused me of their own ignorance.
wants your username to be brought up again...ever.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)