Kids in village, minus masks.

7 p.m. Probably 75 kids in different parts of  Mpl. village. Counted 8 around Starbucks and the park,  maybe 10% without masks. 


This is an improvement over previously reported sightings.  However, we are not there yet.  Now if we can just get their parents to wear face coverings at the same level of compliance, we might get the rate of infection in our town to decrease.


Although possibly not directly related to maskless youngsters in the village, this morning around Starbucks and the park area there was loose garbage everywhere.


I dunno. 90% compliance seems pretty good to me.


drummerboy said:

I dunno. 90% compliance seems pretty good to me.

 ‘cept if you’re The one parent whose kid brings it home


Passed over a dozen kids hanging out on the park side of the train station around 6:30 Friday night. Most were not wearing masks.

If my kids were pre-teen / teen I would probably set their curfew for sunset, since for some reason humans of all ages make foolish decisions after dark.

Also, that age group is likely to make poor decisions due to their immature prefrontal cortex, parents have to be more controlling these days if they want to lower the risk of their children bringing COVID home.


Formerlyjerseyjack said:

 ‘cept if you’re The one parent whose kid brings it home

 I'm going to take this moment to point out that masks are more important for not spreading the virus. They're not as effective as protecting you from catching it.

It's best if everyone is wearing one.


mrincredible said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

 ‘cept if you’re The one parent whose kid brings it home

 I'm going to take this moment to point out that masks are more important for not spreading the virus. They're not as effective as protecting you from catching it.

It's best if everyone is wearing one.

 I don't agree.  I'm on an area first aid squad and not a single member has caught the virus from being with Covid patients in the ambulance, patients who by definition are going to be the sicker cases, with coughing, labored breathing fever etc.  If it's not the masks that are protecting EMTs, what is?


bub said:

 I don't agree.  I'm on an area first aid squad and not a single member has caught the virus from being with Covid patients in the ambulance, patients who by definition are going to be the sicker cases, with coughing, labored breathing fever etc.  If it's not the masks that are protecting EMTs, what is?

 Are you guys wearing regular surgical masks, or N95s?


mrincredible said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

 ‘cept if you’re The one parent whose kid brings it home

 I'm going to take this moment to point out that masks are more important for not spreading the virus. They're not as effective as protecting you from catching it.

It's best if everyone is wearing one.

 CDC has reversed itself and now says masks protect the wearer.....but these are the same people that said masks weren't necessary about 8 months ago.


jmitw said:

 CDC has reversed itself and now says masks protect the wearer.....but these are the same people that said masks weren't necessary about 8 months ago.

Ok. I feel better then.

The recommendations change as the science evolves. Eight months ago they didn't know as much about how the virus propagates and spreads. There could have been a downside to millions of Americans running out and buying up every mask they could find if it wasn't necessary.

The latest scientific brief from the CDC does show that wearing a mask may reduce the wearer's risk. But that's not the same as "reversing itself." The science is changing as studies are done. So recommendations change.

It continues to emphasize the importance of wearing a mask to prevent spreading virus to others.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html


N95s or better.  And no doubt the quality of the masks count.  But if you use a good one, it offers protection.  As for the message in the early days that non-medical people need not wear masks , I said and felt then that the message was driven by an impulse to preserve the limited supply for medical workers, not by science.  


mrincredible said:

bub said:

 I don't agree.  I'm on an area first aid squad and not a single member has caught the virus from being with Covid patients in the ambulance, patients who by definition are going to be the sicker cases, with coughing, labored breathing fever etc.  If it's not the masks that are protecting EMTs, what is?

 Are you guys wearing regular surgical masks, or N95s?

 My husband is a paramedic working in Bergen County for 11 months now.  When at work he wears the best possible protection he has access to.  He also treats every single patient as though they’re positive.  You’re in an MVA, he’ll assume you’re positive.  When not at work (supermarket, auto parts store, etc) he wears a double layer cotton mask.  He continues to test negative, both for Covid and for antibodies.

Not everyone has access to an N95, but any mask is better than no mask.  


bub said:

N95s or better.  And no doubt the quality of the masks count.  But if you use a good one, it offers protection.  

 Fair enough but this is my point. Wearing a decent ear loop mask you get on Amazon is not the same level of protection as an N95. And how many people in the grocery store or Starbucks or wherever are wearing a good mask? I see plenty of neck gaiters and homemade cloth masks which are primarily going to keep that person from dispensing globules of virus-laden spittle on people in their vicinity. 

The overall point i think I'm trying to make is this: we are being asked to wear a mask primarily to protect others from an infection we may not know we have. I think it changes the dynamic of the discussion, because some people seem to feel like it's their choice whether they should protect themselves. Like wearing a seat belt. Wearing a mask is more like having brakes in your car. You're protecting other people.


https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/11/933903848/wear-masks-to-protect-yourself-from-the-coronavirus-not-only-others-cdc-stresses


Another study highlighted by the CDC found that among 1,000 people contact-traced in Thailand,
those who reported always wearing a mask during high-risk exposures had
a greater than 70% reduced risk of becoming infected compared with
those who didn't wear masks under those circumstances.


I have rarely been indoors other than my own home since the pandemic started.  We do not go to the supermarket or eat in restaurants.  My fleeting passing interactions with strangers occur mostly outdoors.  I rarely wear an N95 in these non EMS settings.  I feel safe wearing the cloth masks most other people wear and keeping my distance.  I'm not in a position to say that your own mask protects you exactly as much as other people wearing masks does but I'm convinced that it helps a lot.  Consistent with what I said about our squad's experience, I recall Cuomo in one of his daily briefings a while back saying front line health care workers across the board were faring better than the general population because of masks.  


This is the best explanation I have seen thus far. 


But then the guy wearing pants gets twice as wet. If its virus and a mask and the analogy holds true, then the guy wearing a mask gets twice as sick.

So............


F*@^ me!  I ain't wearing no mask no more.


Formerlyjerseyjack said:

But then the guy wearing pants gets twice as wet. If its virus and a mask and the analogy holds true, then the guy wearing a mask gets twice as sick.

So............

F*@^ me!  I ain't wearing no mask no more.

 If you are so sick that you that you have lost control of your bladder, you should probably be self isolating... on a toilet.


Formerlyjerseyjack said:

But then the guy wearing pants gets twice as wet. If its virus and a mask and the analogy holds true, then the guy wearing a mask gets twice as sick.

So............

You had me going there, until I remembered that breathing isn’t like pissing at all. 


DaveSchmidt said:

You had me going there, until I remembered that breathing isn’t like pissing at all. 

 Not if you are doing it correctly. 


It seems - anecdotally, at least - that as soon as grocery store staff and workers at big box stores began wearing masks, the incidents of those places having to close due to employees being sick/testing positive went down dramatically. (I’m sure someone somewhere is studying that.)


You don’t need anecdotes.  Look at infection rates in states with mask mandates and infection rates in states with no mask mandates.

Spoiler alert:  North Dakota has it so bad and their healthcare systems are so overwhelmed that they’re actually forcing healthcare workers who test positive to keep working so long as they’re asymptomatic. 


spontaneous said:

You don’t need anecdotes.  Look at infection rates in states with mask mandates and infection rates in states with no mask mandates.

Spoiler alert:  North Dakota has it so bad and their healthcare systems are so overwhelmed that they’re actually forcing healthcare workers who test positive to keep working so long as they’re asymptomatic. 

 why are we still arguing about masks?


drummerboy said:

 why are we still arguing about masks?

 Because people aren’t wearing them. 

When the recommendation first came out I can understand, but at this point there is more than enough evidence to show that they work, yet some people still refuse to wear them and argue that they’re pointless.


So many people here are arguing that they don't need to wear a face covering over their nose and mouth when they are standing on the sidewalk in front of their house talking to their neighbor or a contractor; taking a walk around the block, walking for exercise (you don't need to wear a mask when you are exercising); walking the dog(s); giving their baby in the stroller some air; riding their bike or jogging (on the sidewalk); getting into/out of their car which is parked at the curb; eating/drinking while sitting on a bench adjacent to the sidewalk or while they are out for their walk; the list goes on.  Which of these do you think is a legitimate reason for not wearing a face covering in public?  What other reasons have you heard?


As the instigator of thread drift, let me try to pull the discussion back to the original complaint. 

Why are young people neglecting to wear a mask around other people? Maybe it has to do with how they are taught the importance of wearing a mask. Teenagers have this tendency to think they're invulnerable, so telling them a mask protects the wearer maybe doesn't motivate them past that. Especially since throughout history teens have engaged in risky behavior as a means to impress their peers.

But if you get them to understand that a) you can have the virus and be infective without symptoms and b) wearing a mask lowers the chances you will spread the virus, maybe that gets them thinking about it in a different way.


As the instigator of thread drift, let me try to pull the discussion back to the original complaint. 

Why are young people neglecting to wear a mask around other people? Maybe it has to do with how they are taught the importance of wearing a mask. Teenagers have this tendency to think they're invulnerable, so telling them a mask protects the wearer maybe doesn't motivate them past that. Especially since throughout history teens have engaged in risky behavior as a means to impress their peers.

But if you get them to understand that a) you can have the virus and be infective without symptoms and b) wearing a mask lowers the chances you will spread the virus, maybe that gets them thinking about it in a different way.


If these youth are not concerned about infecting others, maybe they will be concerned that such action on their part seriously impacts each of them.  The maskless youth hanging out in the village need to understand that just because they are LESS likely to develop a serious case of COVID does not mean that they are immune to the disease or to the complications that can result from infection.  There are children dying of this disease.  There are children contracting this disease who will develop life long chronic disabilities as a result.  Children in our community as young as one-year-of-age have gotten COVID.  They can catch it too and very likely will if they continue congregating in groups less than six feet apart without each of them wearing a face covering.  


joan_crystal said: If these youths are not concerned about infections others, maybe they will be concerned that such actions on their part seriously impacts each of them.

 

Where did you ever get that idea? Most offenders are middle schoolers.



In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.