2. best-of
  3. 156963-76964

CAN WE AUDIOPHILES DO OUR PART?

So we're all tired of hearing about nothing but Covid-19 (or, as I term it, the C-Plague). What can we do, as audiophiles, to help with all this.
I was amazed, and delighted, when I went to the Cardas website to see that they are doing their part. Go to their website and you'll see their director, Angela Cardas, wearing a mask. If you click on the Cardas Nautilus logo in the upper left corner, you'll see pictures of people there in the factory making masks with sewing machines. I called the company to congratulate them, and spoke with a woman named Darla, who said it was their way, during this economic slump, to keep their employees working and also their way of trying to "do our part."
I'm not writing all this to advertise Cardas products. They are a very good company, but trust your ears, not anything I write, when it comes to buying their products. They do get credit, however, for helping me come to a realization that pushed me in the right direction. I called a woman I am friends with, who is 85 years old and is a good seamstress, to suggest she start making masks. She already was--and is. By phone she has organized several other women to do the same, and right now they are needing more material and elastic. I managed to gather about 50 pounds of material and am starting to gather elastic while also getting more material. But I don't sew. I can't help out with that. Any ideas as to what we--all of us who are good with our ears and focused with our budgets--can do to help out in other ways?

I realize this is an odd topic to bring to an audio forum, but it was a very socially responsible audio company that got me to thinking about it, and frankly I believe I should be socially responsible enough to do what I can to get other people to thinking about it. While also being open to other people's ideas about ways someone like me who is "just an audiophile" can help.

Thank you, in advance, for any and all ideas on this.



baumli
heaudio123
689 posts
 
Pretty much any metropolitan area that has not implemented strict measures had a large outbreak, and even with strict measures, the outbreaks are significant. To say we don't know if they are related is ludicrous, based on available data we have for this virus already.

While antibody rates are higher then expected, the sampling so far is minimal, and there is nothing to indicate a mortality overall of at least 1%, which if 50% of the US became infected, would be 1.6 million people, except it would end up being much higher because at that infection rate, the hospitals would be overwhelmed and the death rate would go up.  It is because of the effectiveness of distancing measures this has been avoided. It is so easy to see in the graphs the direct impacts of these measures. To claim we can say that for sure is ludicrous.

There is no evidence, beyond some weak anecdotal evidence, of it being around longer than thought, except maybe a few weeks to a month.  See the post I made earlier about the choir practice and how supercarriers can infect huge numbers in close quarters. Look at meat packing plant infection rates. If it had been around longer, these things would have been happening.


Epidemiology and medical doctor are not the same skill set as well. It really gives you little in the way of special skills to predict what will happen. Someone good at math, statistics and modelling will be far better qualified.

How do cases get found in those that strictly isolated? ... 1) They were not as strict as claimed (or most likely thought). 2) The incubation period can be longer than 2 weeks.


Walmarts are grocery stores.


Well that's just the problem. First, as you say, came the dire predictions. They did not pan out. Not anywhere close. You suggest that is because of the stringent response. But, as a physician you understand that because two things are true does not mean they are related. And in the case of stay at home orders, shutting down schools and closing businesses (but not Walmart of course) there is no solid evidence that it worked or even could work. Recent data of testing all the members of large groups is showing that large percentages of those testing positive were completely asymptomatic. Much larger than previously thought. This shows several things including that the virus is more pervasive than previously thought, less deadly than previously thought and probably around longer than thought. This, coupled with the fact that an increasing number of cases are being found in those who have strictly followed social isolation as well as new cases in nursing homes that have followed strict guidelines.

heaudio123
689 posts
 
Of course masks properly worn can protect you if of the N95 or good filtering type. Your statement is all a bunch of if .. if .. if. The most likely action is the drop is in the air and you inhale it. Flow studies and simulations have shown this is the most likely airborn transfer ... inhaled, though eyes can be a transfer point (ears? .. not heard that). The mask does prevent you from touching your mouth and nose, and after you take off your mask, you should sanitize your hands. Someone sneezing on you is not normal.


If someone who has the virus whether he knows it or not sneezes in your general direction the cloud of Water droplets carrying the virus can land anywhere on your face, hands, hair, not only on the mask. You can get infected via the ears and eyes or by rubbing your face at some later point in time your hands. Plus you can handle mask with droplets on it later unwittingly. So, no, actually the mask will not protect you. It offers a false sense of security if you think you can’t contract the virus by wearing a mask in public.

glupson
7,842 posts
 
"If a person has risk factors that make them more likely to contract the virus and/or suffer dire consequences..."
Is there anybody who does not fall into that category?
audition__audio
1,373 posts
 
O.K. I know of no person that believes they cant spread the virus when wearing a mask.

It is well known that masks reduce the wearer's chance of spreading the disease. I would suggest also that a mask helps reduce the chance of getting the virus. This would seem to me to be pretty obvious. 

Again no one of even average intelligence doesnt know that the virus can be spread through the nose, mouth and yes even eyes.

What is your point?



heaudio123
689 posts
 
No not any barrier. Droplets (not large sneeze/cough particle), have a tendency to break up in the air and the heaviest ones drop fastest. A home made mask is more effective at preventing the exhalation of large droplets, that it is at preventing ingress when the average particle size has reduced some distance from the inhaler. As exhalation is under pressure, the home-made masks are not as good at filtering out small particles being exhaled, but they are better at stopping inhalation. Not intuitive, but ACTUAL TESTS, not anecdotal guesses have shown this. To this end, home made masks (not well made with HEPA), and non-N95/N100 masks, provide more benefit to everyone else, than they do to you.  Things won't be logical if you based your logic on guesses and not actual science.


First, we know that coronavirus is spread by droplets. Virtually any barrier in front of the face will keep droplets out of the nose and mouth of the wearer. In that regard, the mask being worn is primarily to protect the wearer and is effective in that role. So if you need a mask you should wear one to protect yourself. Sure there may be some added protection for others if you wear a mask. But not much over the mask they should be wearing if they need one. So in this case the idea that we should wear a surgical or homemade mask to protect others is not really logical.

More to discover