danlb_2000
Premium Member
Still less blunt then shutting down restaurants entirely.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion
- Thread starter Parker in NYC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- coronavirus covid covid-19
- Status
Still less blunt then shutting down restaurants entirely.
oceanbreeze77
Well-Known Member
its sticky because Europe doesn't really do takeout.
Dan Deesnee
Well-Known Member
Well by this logic all cigarette companies should immediately be shut down, all manufacturers of blatantly unhealthy foods such as Oreo's, ice creams, candy, soda, all should be shut down. Diabetes, obesity, heart disease, those all cost (and have cost) the world far, far more medically than Covid ever will.
Like you said, why should all the rest of us have our healthcare premiums increased because someone doesn't want to eat healthier?
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I never got one until my son was due to be born in January in the middle of flu season 10+ years ago (this year was my 11th flu shot). After that I just kept doing it. I haven’t gotten the flu since I started getting it, but my wife did get the flu last year even though she got the shot. It’s not 100% effective for sure, but it takes minutes to get and free so I do it.
I know, I can't even explain to you why I don't get one, just one of those mindsets, if it isn't broke don't fix it, my body that is.
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
sullyinMT
Well-Known Member
School president and AD also said no. I just found it ironic, is all.
Miss Bella
Well-Known Member
GimpYancIent
Well-Known Member
Does not line up with what is on the actual CDC site. Anyone can look it up.
Miss Bella
Well-Known Member
Can you link it I don't see it.
Dan Deesnee
Well-Known Member
Are you implying the entire article as well as the pdf is fake?
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Its the same CDC study that was released a while back:
Here’s the CDCs summary of the findings:
Summary
What is already known about the topic?
Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report?
Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice?
Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect custom- ers, employees, and communities.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Its not fake, it’s just someone taking existing statistics and interpreting them a different way. If you do a search it appears on several places online.
Heres basically the same story:
CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks
Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.
thefederalist.com
GimpYancIent
Well-Known Member
Anyone can go to CDC.gov and see for themselves. All I say is fact checking should not be limited to a few self designated people. Anybody can fact check. I prefer to cross check things for myself, there is a lot of manure being shoveled these days.
DisneyDebRob
Well-Known Member
Raises more questions then answers. We see so many of these articles questioning masks and if they have any benefit to helping prevent catching the virus. They are always small little studies. I hate to call this one a study at all with about 150 people in it. They don’t make any reference to whether they were wearing the mask correctly. We know if it’s not worn right, there’s a much bigger chance of it not working.
At the top of the chart it says..
“people who received positive and negative results”. What does that even mean? That the small study becomes even smaller because not all of them were positive?
I’ll stick with the multitude of health organizations and reputable studies that have done numerous peer reviewed studies.
At the top of the chart it says..
“people who received positive and negative results”. What does that even mean? That the small study becomes even smaller because not all of them were positive?
I’ll stick with the multitude of health organizations and reputable studies that have done numerous peer reviewed studies.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I think it’s pretty promising that almost 85% of all subjects studied often or always wear masks. Good job on that people
I could always wear a mask when required (even the right way) but if I frequently eat in restaurants (without a mask) or go to bars (where they are open) with no mask I’m still at higher risk of Covid. I could also have been infected by my wife or kids or someone else I live with. People who always wear a mask when required don‘t wear one at home with a family member. 2/3 of the Covid positive people In the study who had close contact with another positive person said they were a family memeber or close friend. What the study doesn‘t address is how many of the people who always wore masks either got infected at home from a family member or close friend or got infected at a bar/restaurant with no masks required.
One other point, the mask stops you from infecting others. A stat we will never know is how many more people would have been infected if the 130 Covid positive people who often or always wore masks didn’t wear them.
Last edited:
OrlandoRising
Well-Known Member
That's a lot easier said than done when it comes to scientific studies like this, which are not written for a general audience. Fact-checking and reporting add important context, though I'd prefer if study authors did plain-language studies themselves.
As for the fact-checking on this one https://healthfeedback.org/claimrev...f-covid-19-as-viral-social-media-posts-claim/
Flawed reasoning: The comparison made in the claim is not related to mask effectiveness, but is simply the result of the fact that the study included many more people who wear masks as compared to people who never wore masks to begin with. Of all 314 individuals in the study, there were only 11 who never wore masks. By default, a comparison of the proportions of people who wore masks and those who never wore masks would show mask wearers to be the majority.
Misleading: An underlying assumption of the claim is that masks are mainly intended to protect the wearer from infection. However, health authorities advise the public to use masks with the aim of reducing the spread of infection to other people in case one is infected. Face masks are not intended to protect the wearer from infection.
If I can add my own observation, several of the articles promoting this misrepresentation make it seem like the study was a comprehensive look at the mask-wearing habits of all COVID-19 cases in the study period. That's false. It only included 314 people at 11 medical centers.
oceanbreeze77
Well-Known Member
People can say they wear a mask but they can also wear it under their nose, on their chin, the take it off to talk to others, and it still counts as "wearing a mask"
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
Plus, people lie.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
So?
I wore a mask to the doctors office this week but was asked to lower it for a temperature scan. Does that mean I shouldn’t be counted as wearing a mask?
oceanbreeze77
Well-Known Member
I was just pointing out a flaw in the survey from the article.
- Status