Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
So a Person Is Vulnerable to the Virus; What’s Their Responsibility?
There’s a letter to the editor published in the Fairbanks News Miner by an elderly individual with bad lungs, which makes her (the name is Robin; could be a guy) vulnerable to the virus.
She was on a rant that the in the store she entered, Fred Meyer, one of the brands that the Kroger chain runs, had many people running around without masks. I go into that store every few days, and I confirm that roughly half the customers aren’t wearing masks. I’ll add that the vast majority of those, are wearing cloth masks, which the CDC says is better than nothing (which equals a false sense of security).
I did reply in the comments section that the store she went into has a program where you can order their stuff online, park at the store in a designated spot, and they will deliver the items to your car (or for a lot of us in Fairbanks, your pickup truck). I also said that they also have a phone number, and you can talk to a real person. (I think; I hope that the local number isn’t a digital menu.) Fairbanks is a smallish town. I posit that there probably isn’t a business here that won’t deliver purchases to the parking lot if you call and ask, especially if you explain you are vulnerable if you catch the virus.
The big point I wanted to make is that she has to take responsibility for her own health, and that includes asking for help if she needs it.
In a town like Fairbanks, with a low population density, a person can walk outside and easily maintain the 6ft social distance when they encounter people here and there. And you can get the essentials of life, and also non-essentials, without entering a store. You can do it with a dumb phone, though it helps to have a smartphone, tablet, or computer to go online.
People talk about protecting the vulnerable as if they have to be coddled, and they have to be isolated. Well, it depends. A lot don’t need coddling, and the isolation need not be restricted to their own homes. They can still get about, and not depend on everyone to wear masks.
It’s probably that way in the suburbs too. But they have to take responsibility too.
Published in General
I skimmed over this study and it doesn’t look all that convincing to me, though in fairness I didn’t give it a critical look. Here are some of their conclusions that make me unconvinced of the efficacy of wearing masks in public as a protection against the Covid Virus:
[Bold emphasis – mine]
And this:
[Bold emphasis – mine]
And then this:
[Again, bold type is my emphasis.
Now it does say that specifically wearing medical masks or N95 respirators reduced the risk of SARS by approximately 80%, but the above statement makes it clear that all other such masks are pretty much ineffective against SARS.
Am I missing anything?
I should add a part of the “Conclusions” of the study:
They go on to say: