The Coronavirus Thread Part 2

[KunjanPSD]

1 minute ago, AnK said:

Is there any source material where it’s studied that aerosol released from someone’s mouth/nose can bypass the air conditioning system?!? 
 

I know for a fact that AC’s where major cause of concern when the pandemic started 

But all of a sudden Ppl stopped talking about them 

 

Coz if true then indeed sitting in your car is not safe either if your AC has been set to circulate outside air inside

There are numerous studies and that was the reason why centralized air-conditioning was especially said to be avoided.

I am not saying to not use your AC, that's a basic necessity but there is difference between using your AC at your home and in a car while driving in public places at ground level.

Our cars don't have air filters rated for such viruses or aerosols, I think only Tesla comes close. So that's the reason why you need to wear a mask in your car.

 

This is a small reference:

 

"Virus particles in return ducts can also re-enter a building when centralised air handling units are equipped with recirculation sectors. So, it is recommended to avoid central recirculation during SARSCoV-2 episodes by closing the recirculation dampers. 

When possible, it advises that decentralised systems such as fan coil units that use local recirculation, also should be turned off to avoid resuspension of virus particles at room level. Fan coil units have coarse filters which practically do not filter out particles with viruses. If not possible to turn off, these units are to be included into cleaning campaigns, because they might collect particles as any other surface in the room."

 

And here is one of the papers which discuss aerobiology in general:

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3556854/

 

 

 

[Right]

35 minutes ago, achilles said:

Got challan-ed in Delhi for not wearing a mask while driving. Alone. 

 

The High court is a goddamn troll. 

This is shameless highhandedness.

 

What stops them from coming to your house and challan you for not wearing a mask while you are taking a dump?

Edited April 19, 2021 by Right

[Right]

 

Alcoholism is an addiction, withdrawal throws people out.

Nothing to look here, I totally support these fellows buying their "meds".

 

[KunjanPSD]

3 minutes ago, Right said:

This is shameless highhandedness.

 

What stops them coming to your house and challan you for not wearing a mask while taking a dump?

Because then you really will be in your private place minding your private business.

[Right]

 

Union Health Minister replies to Dr MMS's letter, what a troll.

[hsk_colossus]

5 minutes ago, Right said:

 

Union Health Minister replies to Dr MMS's letter, what a troll.

Shameful from HM...

 

Edited April 19, 2021 by hsk_colossus

[Banz]

Don't enforce rules just for the sake of enforcing them (or for earning some bribes). There is no point in harrassing people travelling alone or with friends or family members in their cars with windows rolled up. If they drive long enough, the mask (especially if its a surgical or a cloth mask) becomes completely ineffective anyways.

 

That is just nitpicky and the net benefit is very little. The goal of the rules is to stop/reduce the spread of covid and that should be the primary consideration each time.

 

 

[The Panda]

My father has tested positive and he’s having breathing problems. He has just returned from his head office district. Will be admitting him to hospital soon. Please pray guys!

[Right]

2 minutes ago, The Panda said:

My father has tested positive and he’s having breathing problems. He has just returned from his head office district. Will be admitting him to hospital soon. Please pray guys!

 

Prayers.

 

Start arranging for Oxymeter/Oxygen/Bed/Remdesivir/Fabiflu/Favipiravir now itself.

He will need it in the next 2-3 days.

[KunjanPSD]

6 minutes ago, Banz said:

Don't enforce rules just for the sake of enforcing them (or for earning some bribes). There is no point in harrassing people travelling alone or with friends or family members in their cars with windows rolled up. If they drive long enough, the mask (especially if its a surgical or a cloth mask) becomes completely ineffective anyways.

 

That is just nitpicky and the net benefit is very little. The goal of the rules is to stop/reduce the spread of covid and that should be the primary consideration each time.

 

 

I don't understand how you are even able to come up with this logic.

Don't you people know that the virus is airborne? Rolling up your window won't do anything, your cars don't have an N95 mask on its inlet/outlet.

Govt. has made these rules to keep people safe, police on the other hand has always exploited the rules but that doesn't mean the rules shouldn't be made in the first place.

You can just wear a damn mask instead of advocating all this for your own convenience.

 

And if people drive long enough then masks are ineffective? Then by that logic if you walk long enough then masks are ineffective as well, don't wear masks when you go out then.

 

Rules are targeting to stop/reduce the spread of virus only but the damn population is not following them. If people start following the rules then no police wala will get a chance to extort you.

[KunjanPSD]

8 minutes ago, The Panda said:

My father has tested positive and he’s having breathing problems. He has just returned from his head office district. Will be admitting him to hospital soon. Please pray guys!

Bro, start looking for a bed right now. There is no guarantee you will find a bed till morning.

All the prayers with you.

[Banz]

2 hours ago, KunjanPSD said:

The fact that such articles are popping up seems sad to me.

Just wear a mask, how difficult is that? The virus is air-borne, one might not care about themselves but other people are still put at risk.

 

People are discussing because a high court passed a judgement on this. This sets a precendent. The key point was that 'personal vehicle is a public place', which contradicts previously made laws/judements. You can legally smoke in a car, as it is not considered a public place for the anti-smoking ban. Whether you support mask wearing in a car or not, 'car is a public place' isn't a valid justification for that. Onus was on them to show that not wearing mask in car can be dangerous, not take the easy way out with lawyerf**kery.
And this will have repercussions beyond covid,  unless fixed.

 

And don't get me wrong. I myself wear mask in car even when I'm alone. That doesn't mean we can't have this discussion.

 

Edited April 19, 2021 by Banz

[KunjanPSD]

2 minutes ago, Banz said:

 

People are discussing because a high court passed a judgement on this. This sets a precendent. The key point was that 'personal vehicle is a public place', which contradicts previously made laws/judements. You can legally smoke in a car, as it is not considered a public place for the anti-smoking ban. Whether you support mask wearing in a car or not, 'car is a public place' isn't a valid justification for that. Onus was on them to show that not wearing mask in car can be dangerous, not take the easy way out with lawyerf**kery.
And this will have repercussions beyond covid,  unless fixed.

 

Did people follow the mandatory mask rule before this judgement was made?

People aren't following the rules but are ready to revolt when High court goes to severe lengths to impose it.

 

How is govt. supposed to show that not wearing masks in car is dangerous? Are they supposed to get hold of volunteers to hold studies in such times? 

Isn't common sense enough to understand this?

 

You can't compare smoking with aerosol based viruses. Carbon in the smoke can be filtered out by your car's filter, these viruses cannot.

[Banz]

4 minutes ago, KunjanPSD said:

I don't understand how you are even able to come up with this logic.

Don't you people know that the virus is airborne? Rolling up your window won't do anything, your cars don't have an N95 mask on its inlet/outlet.

Govt. has made these rules to keep people safe, police on the other hand has always exploited the rules but that doesn't mean the rules shouldn't be made in the first place.

You can just wear a damn mask instead of advocating all this for your own convenience.

 

And if people drive long enough then masks are ineffective? Then by that logic if you walk long enough then masks are ineffective as well, don't wear masks when you go out then.

 

Rules are targeting to stop/reduce the spread of virus only but the damn population is not following them. If people start following the rules then no police wala will get a chance to extort you.

Once the virus gets out into the free air, it disperses thin enough to not be a threat of infection. The rules were not made so that people in the car don't breath out the virus to the outside air. It is to prevent people within the car from infecting each other. Which is why enforcing it on lone drivers and family members is stupid. Inside a car you have no social distancing and recirculating air. Even with an N95 mask, if there is an infected person every other traveller will be infected.

 

 

[TRMNTR]

7 minutes ago, Banz said:

 

People are discussing because a high court passed a judgement on this. This sets a precendent. The key point was that 'personal vehicle is a public place', which contradicts previously made laws/judements. You can legally smoke in a car, as it is not considered a public place for the anti-smoking ban. Whether you support mask wearing in a car or not, 'car is a public place' isn't a valid justification for that. Onus was on them to show that not wearing mask in car can be dangerous, not take the easy way out with lawyerf**kery.
And this will have repercussions beyond covid,  unless fixed.

 

And don't get me wrong. I myself wear mask in car even when I'm alone. That doesn't mean we can't have this discussion.

 

 

Rules aren't always black and white. They can differ according to the situation. Covid and smoking aren't comparable situations. By your logic, people can f**k in their cars because it's a private space.

[KunjanPSD]

1 minute ago, Mr. Comingle said:

Ok thanks. I didn't know the virus can actually bypass windows and everything. Will wear a mask in car also from now. 

It's not just about windows.

Let's say you have the windows down with the AC turned off in a car which has such no tolerances or leakage, then sure go ahead and not wear a mask.

But unfortunately cars aren't made like that and I don't think anyone turns the AC off.

Now if the cars had filters rated for such aerosols, I wouldn't have a problem with the AC as well but we don't.

 

Just think, you are passing to a busy place, people are moving around with masks under their chin and your car's AC is actually taking the air they are breathing out.

[The Panda]

15 minutes ago, Right said:

 

Prayers.

 

Start arranging for Oxymeter/Oxygen/Bed/Remdesivir/Fabiflu/Favipiravir now itself.

He will need it in the next 2-3 days.

 

14 minutes ago, AnK said:

Hospitalise/consult a doctor ASAP if oxygen is below 92 on oximeter 

 

10 minutes ago, KunjanPSD said:

Bro, start looking for a bed right now. There is no guarantee you will find a bed till morning.

All the prayers with you.

 

His Oxygen level is at 95 right now. Have already consulted doctors and arranging everything.

[TRMNTR]

2 minutes ago, The Panda said:

His Oxygen level is at 95 right now. Have already consulted doctors and arranging everything.

 

Take good care, buddy! 

[Banz]

13 minutes ago, KunjanPSD said:

Did people follow the mandatory mask rule before this judgement was made?

People aren't following the rules but are ready to revolt when High court goes to severe lengths to impose it.

 

How is govt. supposed to show that not wearing masks in car is dangerous? Are they supposed to get hold of volunteers to hold studies in such times? 

Isn't common sense enough to understand this?

 

You can't compare smoking with aerosol based viruses. Carbon in the smoke can be filtered out by your car's filter, these viruses cannot.

 

No one is revolting. That doesn't mean we can talk.

 

Yes it is the government's job to get this. They don't even have to do the studies themselves. More than a year has passed since the pandemic started. There should have been many studies by now. If I read studies showing that not wearing a mask increases virus aerosol concentration in the surroundings and poses a threat to pedestrians and other car drivers, I will take back my words. With all due respect to judges and lawyers, it is not their place to be deciding on these matters and certainly not using mundane points whether the law should apply to the inside of a car because it is a public place or not.

 

Also, don't misunderstand the smoking analogy. I was talking from a legal point of view not a practical one. You have 2 laws contradicting each other on the definition of a public place.

 

Anyways, no point in discussing further. I understand the point you are trying to make about blanket bans and no time on part of lawmakers to discuss all specific nuances.

Edited April 19, 2021 by Banz

[Banz]

7 minutes ago, The Panda said:

His Oxygen level is at 95 right now. Have already consulted doctors and arranging everything.

 

Hope you find a bed soon and everything turns out well.