How Safe Are You From Covid When You Fly?
April 26, 2021 7:26 PM Subscribe
To understand how risky it may be to board a flight now, start with how air circulates in a plane...
Not many super-spreader events on planes? What? In Australia and New Zealand we've documented plenty of them. We have a lot of inbound flights where everyone has tested COVID-free when they left the country they're coming from, and by day 12 of quarantine the numbers of infected are deep in the double-digits. They can usually trace it back to one spreader due to infection patterns. None of this is a shock if you've been reading NZ media; pretty sure The Spinoff documented exactly this nine months ago. It's been a big factor in why we are waiting to head home.
posted by rednikki at 9:29 PM on April 26, 2021 [37 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 9:29 PM on April 26, 2021 [37 favorites]
I have been trying to steer folks toward The Spinoff/Dr. Siouxsie Wiles for covid info well-explained for the general public, but it doesn't seem to have caught on here in North America. Nor do most of the people I know seem to know about/ remember/ or refer much to other repositories of pandemic information. Instead, lots of family and friends complain about how conflicting and confusing all of the information is. Like, sure, if your primary info source on the science of the pandemic is your state politicians or the previous federal administration, or random chain of suggested videos from the side column of YouTube or something. But why would you ask a highly partisan politician about science? Or random videos from YouTube's recommendation algorithm? Sigh.
Executive summary: everyone should follow Dr. Wiles on The Spinoff.
posted by eviemath at 10:19 PM on April 26, 2021 [17 favorites]
Executive summary: everyone should follow Dr. Wiles on The Spinoff.
posted by eviemath at 10:19 PM on April 26, 2021 [17 favorites]
Yeah, those purple clouds make me uncomfortable...
Am considering a road trip, but not considering getting on a plane full of randos.
posted by Windopaene at 10:32 PM on April 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
Am considering a road trip, but not considering getting on a plane full of randos.
posted by Windopaene at 10:32 PM on April 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
leaving us sitting in the plane on the tarmac without the engine-driven ventilation for two hours while they fixed it
Ryan Hisner did some air CO2 measurements on flights recently and put them on twitter. As he explains in the thread, CO2 in the air is a good way of checking how fresh the air is - depending on both the ventilation of the space, and the number of people present. (I know my company put in CO2 sensors to monitor air circulation, for example.)
Atmospheric CO2 is about 410 ppm, whereas the German authorities gave a limit of 700 ppm for classrooms. He measured up to 2650 ppm during the boarding/ take-off period of one flight, when the ventilation was off.
posted by scorbet at 10:32 PM on April 26, 2021 [28 favorites]
Ryan Hisner did some air CO2 measurements on flights recently and put them on twitter. As he explains in the thread, CO2 in the air is a good way of checking how fresh the air is - depending on both the ventilation of the space, and the number of people present. (I know my company put in CO2 sensors to monitor air circulation, for example.)
Atmospheric CO2 is about 410 ppm, whereas the German authorities gave a limit of 700 ppm for classrooms. He measured up to 2650 ppm during the boarding/ take-off period of one flight, when the ventilation was off.
posted by scorbet at 10:32 PM on April 26, 2021 [28 favorites]
I'm on team "people shouldn't be getting on planes right now," but I also want to recognize that for some people, getting on a plane isn't a frivolous decision, and I can understand their wanting to evaluate risks and plan ahead.
A coworker of mine had to relocate to a different continent during COVID in order to care for her mother, who was dying of cancer. Other people have lost their jobs and, therefore, their residency permits, forcing them to relocate.
People shouldn't be flying for vacations or business trips that could have been video calls, but I'm glad that there's info available for the minority of people who are dealing with an emergency but still want to be responsible and minimize risks to themselves and others.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 10:46 PM on April 26, 2021 [54 favorites]
A coworker of mine had to relocate to a different continent during COVID in order to care for her mother, who was dying of cancer. Other people have lost their jobs and, therefore, their residency permits, forcing them to relocate.
People shouldn't be flying for vacations or business trips that could have been video calls, but I'm glad that there's info available for the minority of people who are dealing with an emergency but still want to be responsible and minimize risks to themselves and others.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 10:46 PM on April 26, 2021 [54 favorites]
Not many super-spreader events on planes? What? In Australia and New Zealand we've documented plenty of them.
It depends on your definition of "super" spreader - NSW for example, were taking in 3000 inbound travellers per week and quarantining them for two weeks. At any one point, there were about 20-30 people in quarantine classified as covid positive. Dividing that by two, that means on average about 10-15 people out of every 3,000 inbound travellers ended up positive. Some of them would have been positive before they got on the flight and perhaps some were infected during the flight, we would not know, but say it's 50/50 - then your risk of getting infected on the flight is 6/3000 or 0.2%. I wouldn't classify those as super spreader events. That's a pretty good bet, you'd much rather risk flying back to Australia rather than stay wherever you were before.
Of course with the recent spike in case from India, the number of Covid positives in quarantine have doubled or even tripled. Interestingly, while New Zealand and UK have banned travel from India, Australia is still allowing travel in - it's probably a risk assessment they have to make, because they don't want to risk their citizens lives by leaving them in India either.
posted by xdvesper at 11:12 PM on April 26, 2021 [9 favorites]
It depends on your definition of "super" spreader - NSW for example, were taking in 3000 inbound travellers per week and quarantining them for two weeks. At any one point, there were about 20-30 people in quarantine classified as covid positive. Dividing that by two, that means on average about 10-15 people out of every 3,000 inbound travellers ended up positive. Some of them would have been positive before they got on the flight and perhaps some were infected during the flight, we would not know, but say it's 50/50 - then your risk of getting infected on the flight is 6/3000 or 0.2%. I wouldn't classify those as super spreader events. That's a pretty good bet, you'd much rather risk flying back to Australia rather than stay wherever you were before.
Of course with the recent spike in case from India, the number of Covid positives in quarantine have doubled or even tripled. Interestingly, while New Zealand and UK have banned travel from India, Australia is still allowing travel in - it's probably a risk assessment they have to make, because they don't want to risk their citizens lives by leaving them in India either.
posted by xdvesper at 11:12 PM on April 26, 2021 [9 favorites]
Ryan Hisner did some air CO2 measurements
Holy smokes, I'm convinced. I mean, I've had my suspicions for months but this seals the deal. I wonder how many of my fellow passengers got sick too.
posted by St. Oops at 11:45 PM on April 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
Holy smokes, I'm convinced. I mean, I've had my suspicions for months but this seals the deal. I wonder how many of my fellow passengers got sick too.
posted by St. Oops at 11:45 PM on April 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
The Harvard researchers found that many airports were not designed to mitigate the airborne spread of respiratory pathogens.
It's like a line from a hard-SciFi novel about, well, a pandemic...
posted by From Bklyn at 11:49 PM on April 26, 2021 [4 favorites]
It's like a line from a hard-SciFi novel about, well, a pandemic...
posted by From Bklyn at 11:49 PM on April 26, 2021 [4 favorites]
I need to move from Europe back to the US and I've been putting it off for over a year now. My family, many of whom are in health care and should know better, are angry because I have been refusing to fly until I get fully vaccinated.
This seems so obvious to me and it baffles me that it isn't to everyone.
posted by The Correspondent on the Continent at 12:18 AM on April 27, 2021 [23 favorites]
This seems so obvious to me and it baffles me that it isn't to everyone.
posted by The Correspondent on the Continent at 12:18 AM on April 27, 2021 [23 favorites]
Regardless of the covid risks, it was interesting to learn how plane ventilation works, at least.
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 12:21 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 12:21 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
xdvesper: Australia has halted all flights from India after the latest COVID issue in WA. They're also expecting a lot of infections due to the most recent flight into WA.
NZ stopped flights when a flight that left India with all-negative COVID tests arrived with 17 people infected. It's possible they all forged their tests, but more likely that at least some people were infected on board. That wasn't an isolated incident; there were a series of flights that arrived with double-digit infected numbers.
posted by rednikki at 12:42 AM on April 27, 2021 [12 favorites]
NZ stopped flights when a flight that left India with all-negative COVID tests arrived with 17 people infected. It's possible they all forged their tests, but more likely that at least some people were infected on board. That wasn't an isolated incident; there were a series of flights that arrived with double-digit infected numbers.
posted by rednikki at 12:42 AM on April 27, 2021 [12 favorites]
Australia's experience with incoming air passengers may be misleading in other contexts, because from what I understand the number of passengers allowed per flight here is now very low. If passengers are no longer seated next to each other it should significantly reduce transmission rates compared to flights in (e.g.) the USA. Has anyone got actual numbers on this?
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:18 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:18 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
Australia is still allowing travel in - it's probably a risk assessment they have to make, because they don't want to risk their citizens lives by leaving them in India either.
Hahahahahaha. If they have a shit about their citizens contracting overseas then they would have tried to get people home, but there are still hundreds of thousands of citizens who have been trying to get back since the pandemic but have not been able to because the government:
1) reduced the amount of people that can come in, making flights rare and expensive (like business class only kind of expensive)
2) there have been very very few repatriation flights
So most Australians that weren’t home either had to pay business class fare to get in or are still not home. (This is especially galling when Australia is hosting international tournaments/events but even their own citizens can’t get home).
posted by LizBoBiz at 2:03 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Hahahahahaha. If they have a shit about their citizens contracting overseas then they would have tried to get people home, but there are still hundreds of thousands of citizens who have been trying to get back since the pandemic but have not been able to because the government:
1) reduced the amount of people that can come in, making flights rare and expensive (like business class only kind of expensive)
2) there have been very very few repatriation flights
So most Australians that weren’t home either had to pay business class fare to get in or are still not home. (This is especially galling when Australia is hosting international tournaments/events but even their own citizens can’t get home).
posted by LizBoBiz at 2:03 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Interestingly, while New Zealand and UK have banned travel from India, Australia is still allowing travel in - it's probably a risk assessment they have to make, because they don't want to risk their citizens lives by leaving them in India either.
The UK is absolutely letting it's citizens and permanent residents come home from India, just nobody else. Of course, we are now also doing the expensive quarantine hotels thing so it's also prohibitively expensive for a lot of people. Not that I'm against it, in principle, but in practice "only those sufficiently well off can come home!" is... Problematic.
posted by stillnocturnal at 2:15 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
The UK is absolutely letting it's citizens and permanent residents come home from India, just nobody else. Of course, we are now also doing the expensive quarantine hotels thing so it's also prohibitively expensive for a lot of people. Not that I'm against it, in principle, but in practice "only those sufficiently well off can come home!" is... Problematic.
posted by stillnocturnal at 2:15 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
After air snakes into the plane
Looks like someone won a bet.
posted by acb at 2:23 AM on April 27, 2021 [72 favorites]
Looks like someone won a bet.
posted by acb at 2:23 AM on April 27, 2021 [72 favorites]
About 20 years ago, I was due to fly from Edinburgh to Stansted 2 days before Christmas. Because of high winds there were no flights taking off or landing and eventually the lounge filled up. To get us out of the way they transferred us onto our flight where we sat for about 4 hours, people coughing and sneezing as they do. I can now see we were also breathing very stale air for all that time.
The following day I did my pre-Xmas shopping and a couple of days later got very sick indeed, in bed, feverish, unable to move. After 2 days I managed to drag myself to the GP and was diagnosed with pneumonia and given some pills. I'm guessing an awful lot of people on that flight had a similar experience.
posted by epo at 2:24 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
The following day I did my pre-Xmas shopping and a couple of days later got very sick indeed, in bed, feverish, unable to move. After 2 days I managed to drag myself to the GP and was diagnosed with pneumonia and given some pills. I'm guessing an awful lot of people on that flight had a similar experience.
posted by epo at 2:24 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
I have been trying to steer folks toward The Spinoff/Dr. Siouxsie Wiles for covid info well-explained for the general public, but it doesn't seem to have caught on here in North America. Nor do most of the people I know seem to know about/ remember/ or refer much to other repositories of pandemic information. Instead, lots of family and friends complain about how conflicting and confusing all of the information is. Like, sure, if your primary info source on the science of the pandemic is your state politicians or the previous federal administration, or random chain of suggested videos from the side column of YouTube or something. But why would you ask a highly partisan politician about science? Or random videos from YouTube's recommendation algorithm? Sigh.
Way back in April last year, I said that at least we'd come out of this as a society with a healthy understanding of the exponential function, the trade-off between test sensitivity / specificity, and maybe even some widespread understanding of viral lifecycle.
Have we fuck. It remains essentially universal even in supposedly quality newspapers to say things like, "experts are worried that the spread of the virus is now exponential" to mean that it's growing quickly. Come on. After a 12 months of it being your job to present this information you should really know that it is always exponential.
Ditto on tests. I don't expect all journalists to have been experts on testing and how sensitivity, specificity, and prevalence interact to determine positive and negative predictive value before but there are people writing in the Guardian this week who are still churning out mindless sub-blog-post level stories about lateral flow tests without using any of those concepts to understand why they may be a good or bad idea.
If people who are paid to think and write about this stuff are still so wildly uninformed, then I'm hardly surprised that members of the public are as well.
posted by atrazine at 2:25 AM on April 27, 2021 [30 favorites]
Way back in April last year, I said that at least we'd come out of this as a society with a healthy understanding of the exponential function, the trade-off between test sensitivity / specificity, and maybe even some widespread understanding of viral lifecycle.
Have we fuck. It remains essentially universal even in supposedly quality newspapers to say things like, "experts are worried that the spread of the virus is now exponential" to mean that it's growing quickly. Come on. After a 12 months of it being your job to present this information you should really know that it is always exponential.
Ditto on tests. I don't expect all journalists to have been experts on testing and how sensitivity, specificity, and prevalence interact to determine positive and negative predictive value before but there are people writing in the Guardian this week who are still churning out mindless sub-blog-post level stories about lateral flow tests without using any of those concepts to understand why they may be a good or bad idea.
If people who are paid to think and write about this stuff are still so wildly uninformed, then I'm hardly surprised that members of the public are as well.
posted by atrazine at 2:25 AM on April 27, 2021 [30 favorites]
It's possible they all forged their tests, but more likely that at least some people were infected on board
The third option being that they tested negative pre-departure, but either they were infected shortly before the test, so that it wasn't picked up, or they were infected in the up to 72 hour window between the test and their flight. (Possibly even while at the centre getting tested...)
posted by scorbet at 2:31 AM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
The third option being that they tested negative pre-departure, but either they were infected shortly before the test, so that it wasn't picked up, or they were infected in the up to 72 hour window between the test and their flight. (Possibly even while at the centre getting tested...)
posted by scorbet at 2:31 AM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
There’s study of cases after a flight from Dubai to NZ that used genetic testing results to make the case that transmission happened in-flight. That even made U.S. media, eventually. I’m not sure there are a ton of examples where it has been established with this kind of rigor (which of course absence of evidence vs. evidence of absence)? I also think that this is a situation in which one easily ends up arguing about what “a lot” means relative to the volume of flights.
posted by atoxyl at 2:43 AM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 2:43 AM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Weren't they talking a while ago about bathing the space inside air recirculation ducts in an ultraviolet light of a wavelength that kills viruses? What happened with that?
posted by acb at 3:03 AM on April 27, 2021
posted by acb at 3:03 AM on April 27, 2021
But it's fair to say the answer to the question posed in the thread title is "very, very, very not"?
posted by Grangousier at 3:52 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by Grangousier at 3:52 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Weren't they talking a while ago about bathing the space inside air recirculation ducts in an ultraviolet light of a wavelength that kills viruses? What happened with that?
I think the issue here is more about what happens during the time the engines aren't running. Even recirculated air goes through a HEPA filter in a plane but getting onto and off of planes inevitably requires hours of time spent in indoor spaces and no matter how well filtered the air, you are close to people on planes in a way that even leaving middle seats open can't really fix.
posted by atrazine at 4:22 AM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
I think the issue here is more about what happens during the time the engines aren't running. Even recirculated air goes through a HEPA filter in a plane but getting onto and off of planes inevitably requires hours of time spent in indoor spaces and no matter how well filtered the air, you are close to people on planes in a way that even leaving middle seats open can't really fix.
posted by atrazine at 4:22 AM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
It is massively frustrating when you DO have to fly a lot to work. I have connected through Orlando a couple of times and the flights are full of 50-60 year old fully dressed-up disney fans and families off to disneyworld. How is that at all helping? You just HAD to go on holiday while other people are forced to travel?
It has got very, very busy the last few weeks. Charlotte airport was as busy as I have ever seen it, and we are in this weird pocket now (from what I can see/guess) where the flights are fewer and further apart still (because airlines are trying to claw back profit from empty ones for 9 months) so people connecting are left in the airports longer.
It sucks, and a significant portion of the people now are clearly of the 'this is all bullshit' chain of thought rather than a few months ago where it was mostly people being relatively respectful and cautious. Fortunately I got my second shot last week so it is a little less of a concern, but still annoying as hell to see.
posted by Brockles at 4:38 AM on April 27, 2021 [16 favorites]
It has got very, very busy the last few weeks. Charlotte airport was as busy as I have ever seen it, and we are in this weird pocket now (from what I can see/guess) where the flights are fewer and further apart still (because airlines are trying to claw back profit from empty ones for 9 months) so people connecting are left in the airports longer.
It sucks, and a significant portion of the people now are clearly of the 'this is all bullshit' chain of thought rather than a few months ago where it was mostly people being relatively respectful and cautious. Fortunately I got my second shot last week so it is a little less of a concern, but still annoying as hell to see.
posted by Brockles at 4:38 AM on April 27, 2021 [16 favorites]
My mom, who lives in South Carolina, wants to fly to Texas to see my 90 year old grandmother because sadly, they're having to put her in a LTC home. (One of my aunts had fully taken on the responsibility of having her move into her house to take care of her, but she's had health issues, including two surgeries, within the past two years. The other five aunts didn't want to take her care but everyone's past 65 so I get it.) But she's too scared too despite being fully vaccinated. Her logic is that yes, she may be vaccinated but not everyone might be. Hell, even my best friend in DC, a perfectly healthy sassy 45 year old woman, says she's not getting on a plane for a long time either. I mean, her family lives within the DC/Maryland/Delaware area so she can drive to see them, and me here in Canada for that matter.
Eventually I will have to do my own risk assessment as I am only partially vaccinated--if you are unaware of the utter shitshow of the vaccine rollout here in Ontario, read up and be horrified--because I am the only kid who lives in another country and I miss the hell out of my mom. I would have to fly to see her, or either drive a very very long way and I kinda don't have the time or money to take the time it would take to do that. Maybe I will have to make that time, I dunno.
I get it. Folks are wary. And frankly, I feel a little insulted and surprised seeing pictures and videos on my Instagram of fellow Americans just out there maskless, living like this is all over. I envy the confidence they have in being vaccinated and just going about their lives as before.
posted by Kitteh at 4:54 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Eventually I will have to do my own risk assessment as I am only partially vaccinated--if you are unaware of the utter shitshow of the vaccine rollout here in Ontario, read up and be horrified--because I am the only kid who lives in another country and I miss the hell out of my mom. I would have to fly to see her, or either drive a very very long way and I kinda don't have the time or money to take the time it would take to do that. Maybe I will have to make that time, I dunno.
I get it. Folks are wary. And frankly, I feel a little insulted and surprised seeing pictures and videos on my Instagram of fellow Americans just out there maskless, living like this is all over. I envy the confidence they have in being vaccinated and just going about their lives as before.
posted by Kitteh at 4:54 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Reading this, it seems to me that the big problem is leaving people to sit on planes without the ventilation on. How about just don't do that? Load up ONLY after the plane is cleared to go. To be honest, I've always marveled at just how effective that ventilation seems to be when operating. Not to get too graphic, but I've heard intestinal gas being released by nearby passengers, yet I smell nothing. Seems like the ventilation works well, when it's working.
posted by StickyCarpet at 4:57 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by StickyCarpet at 4:57 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
I have a former coworker who did a similar analysis (we were looking at it from a bioterrorism angle) and he basically came to the same conclusion. In-flight, airborne disease transmission is limited to roughly one row in front and behind the infected person. He didn't have any good answers about after the plane pulls up to the gate.
I have connected through Orlando a couple of times and the flights are full of 50-60 year old fully dressed-up disney fans and families off to disneyworld. How is that at all helping? You just HAD to go on holiday while other people are forced to travel?
I flew in to Orlando for work the day after Christmas and the airport was packed with families all wearing their "Smith Family Disney Vacation" t-shirts. Couldn't believe it.
posted by backseatpilot at 5:29 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
I have connected through Orlando a couple of times and the flights are full of 50-60 year old fully dressed-up disney fans and families off to disneyworld. How is that at all helping? You just HAD to go on holiday while other people are forced to travel?
I flew in to Orlando for work the day after Christmas and the airport was packed with families all wearing their "Smith Family Disney Vacation" t-shirts. Couldn't believe it.
posted by backseatpilot at 5:29 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Business traveler here. I stopped flying last February.
Now that I'm vaccinated, I may have to, as clients are starting to plan for in-person events far away.
More urgently, I'm dealing with an 89-year-old family member who is in bad shape half a continent away. I may have to hop on a plane for reasons of speed.
posted by doctornemo at 5:43 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Now that I'm vaccinated, I may have to, as clients are starting to plan for in-person events far away.
More urgently, I'm dealing with an 89-year-old family member who is in bad shape half a continent away. I may have to hop on a plane for reasons of speed.
posted by doctornemo at 5:43 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
At a meta level, can posters please flag posts like this "SLNYT"? Again with the paywall.
posted by doctornemo at 5:44 AM on April 27, 2021 [19 favorites]
posted by doctornemo at 5:44 AM on April 27, 2021 [19 favorites]
I've been interested in this topic for some time; here are a few more links
SciAm: Evaluating covid risk on planes trains and automobiles
MIT: How safe is air travel?.
BI: Airline workers have lower rates of COVID-19
It seems riskier than just staying home (of course), but much less risky than my intuition would have suggested.
posted by look upon my works progress administration at 5:57 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
SciAm: Evaluating covid risk on planes trains and automobiles
MIT: How safe is air travel?.
BI: Airline workers have lower rates of COVID-19
It seems riskier than just staying home (of course), but much less risky than my intuition would have suggested.
posted by look upon my works progress administration at 5:57 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
People shouldn't be flying for vacations
What if I'm fully vaccinated? The risk/impact is incredibly low.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:19 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
What if I'm fully vaccinated? The risk/impact is incredibly low.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:19 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
I'm not seeing super strong support in this NYT article for the idea that flying is massively more risky than other common activities. It describes air circulation on the plane in some detail, and notes risks in crowded places like airports, but no comparison to indoor or outdoor dining, grocery shopping, etc. It provides useful information, but, as far as I can tell, it doesn't answer the question posed in the title, much less give a definitive, "not at all," like many seem to be concluding here.
I'm not trying to say it's safe, or safer than you think, just that the question isn't actually addressed by the article.
posted by pykrete jungle at 6:31 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
I'm not trying to say it's safe, or safer than you think, just that the question isn't actually addressed by the article.
posted by pykrete jungle at 6:31 AM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
It's pretty ridiculous that at 13 months into this, there still isn't a good set of contact tracing data from airports and planes. My solution, should I ever have to fly, is a personal HEPA filter/fan unit that supplies clean air to a N95 mask.
posted by Jobst at 6:59 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by Jobst at 6:59 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
People shouldn't be flying for vacations
What if I'm fully vaccinated? The risk/impact is incredibly low.
Even fully vaccinated people can spread virus, is my understanding.
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:16 AM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
What if I'm fully vaccinated? The risk/impact is incredibly low.
Even fully vaccinated people can spread virus, is my understanding.
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:16 AM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
Am considering a road trip
My neighbors across the street had to drive across the country recently due to a sick parent (who died a couple of hours after they arrived, so it turned into a bereavement trip as well) -- they took every possible precaution (including a portable chemical toilet, sleeping in the car, bringing all their food with them, wearing masks while visiting outdoors in small groups at the burial, the priest even insisted that anyone attending must wear a mask or be kicked out [this is remarkable, as it was in the South]), and they still got it while on the trip. Nearly ran out of gas in the Mojave (more wind than expected, trying to limit their need to exit the vehicle so cutting gas close to the line), still got it. Chemical toilet for three weeks in their car, still got it.
...just, uhhh, a data point I guess. Take care.
(they're both fine now after a couple weeks of the usual Covid illness)
posted by aramaic at 7:16 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
My neighbors across the street had to drive across the country recently due to a sick parent (who died a couple of hours after they arrived, so it turned into a bereavement trip as well) -- they took every possible precaution (including a portable chemical toilet, sleeping in the car, bringing all their food with them, wearing masks while visiting outdoors in small groups at the burial, the priest even insisted that anyone attending must wear a mask or be kicked out [this is remarkable, as it was in the South]), and they still got it while on the trip. Nearly ran out of gas in the Mojave (more wind than expected, trying to limit their need to exit the vehicle so cutting gas close to the line), still got it. Chemical toilet for three weeks in their car, still got it.
...just, uhhh, a data point I guess. Take care.
(they're both fine now after a couple weeks of the usual Covid illness)
posted by aramaic at 7:16 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Re: NYT paywall...
In Chrome, open chrome://settings/siteData (I have it in my bookmark bar) and type "times" in the search bar. Delete all cookies and press back arrow until you get back to the site. You'll be able to read the article after a couple of annoyance clicks.
posted by hypnogogue at 7:17 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
In Chrome, open chrome://settings/siteData (I have it in my bookmark bar) and type "times" in the search bar. Delete all cookies and press back arrow until you get back to the site. You'll be able to read the article after a couple of annoyance clicks.
posted by hypnogogue at 7:17 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
They can but its exceedingly unlikely to 1) spread the virus when one is completely vaccinated and 2) do so asymptomatically.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:17 AM on April 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:17 AM on April 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
Operationally, it would be much easier (definitely not easy, but possible) for airlines to be obliged to run the ventilation any time there's passengers, or maybe staff, in the plane.
In terms of fuel cost from running the APUs or energy costs from the power carts, it's probably not cheap, but I have a very strong feeling that in terms of cases prevented vs. cost, it's one of the more effective possible ones. Not to mention that very likely this is within the powers of existing national aviation authorities to enforce.
posted by ambrosen at 7:22 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
In terms of fuel cost from running the APUs or energy costs from the power carts, it's probably not cheap, but I have a very strong feeling that in terms of cases prevented vs. cost, it's one of the more effective possible ones. Not to mention that very likely this is within the powers of existing national aviation authorities to enforce.
posted by ambrosen at 7:22 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
If the ventilation runs based on air coming through the turbines, *can* they run the ventilation when the plane isn't moving?
I flew in November, in Canada, and most people seemed very compliant and a bit worried that they were on a plane at all. Except the woman in front of me, who kept a snack on her tray table that she didn't actually eat for the entire five hour flight so she didn't have to wear her mask.
posted by jacquilynne at 7:25 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
I flew in November, in Canada, and most people seemed very compliant and a bit worried that they were on a plane at all. Except the woman in front of me, who kept a snack on her tray table that she didn't actually eat for the entire five hour flight so she didn't have to wear her mask.
posted by jacquilynne at 7:25 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
Mod note: Several comments and replies deleted as they were leading to a major derail. Folks, let's please not come for each other in these threads. Moreover, refrain from making wide-sweeping generalizations about people who do travel during this time. Things are nuanced. Please refer to our guidelines to see how you can best show up in threads. thanks!
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 7:47 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 7:47 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
as far as I can tell, it doesn't answer the question posed in the title, much less give a definitive, "not at all," like many seem to be concluding here.
Yeah, I agree, and this is super frustrating. It seems almost a willful refusal here to present useful information about comparative risks between various activities in various condition? I'm grateful to other people on this thread who posted contextualized data from other sources. When journalists do actually do the research and present their findings whaddaya know, it turns out flying is "much less risky than my intuition would have suggested."
But this article seems to exist in order to feed the large contingent of people who believe that getting vaccinated changes literally nothing in terms of how we can live our lives. Like,
>>Even fully vaccinated people can spread virus, is my understanding.
... I know it's probably not the commenter's intent, but this type of statement is of a piece with the original article, in terms of the selectiveness of information presented to convey a certain implication ("be afraid, be very afraid") while still sticking to literal facts. The lack of contextualization begins to come across as deliberate. Like, okay, so what if I can spread the virus in spite of being vaccinated? What should that mean?
Sigh. Unless the pandemic changes drastically in the US, I'm going to be flying this fall - I've got both leisure travel as well as a work trip booked. Worst case scenario, even if I do spread the virus to someone who has chosen to fly despite not being vaccinated and they end up experiencing serious complications, IDK if that will weigh on my conscience, to be honest. Obviously I'm going to cancel my plans if there's another wave or other variants have shown up in significant numbers which are not protected from by the vaccine... And of course I'm still wearing masks and social distancing... but otherwise, I don't think we should be expected to continue living as if this was still May 2020, or December 2020. There is a vaccine. It does change some things. Can we allow ourselves to say it and believe it?
posted by MiraK at 7:52 AM on April 27, 2021 [38 favorites]
Yeah, I agree, and this is super frustrating. It seems almost a willful refusal here to present useful information about comparative risks between various activities in various condition? I'm grateful to other people on this thread who posted contextualized data from other sources. When journalists do actually do the research and present their findings whaddaya know, it turns out flying is "much less risky than my intuition would have suggested."
But this article seems to exist in order to feed the large contingent of people who believe that getting vaccinated changes literally nothing in terms of how we can live our lives. Like,
>>Even fully vaccinated people can spread virus, is my understanding.
... I know it's probably not the commenter's intent, but this type of statement is of a piece with the original article, in terms of the selectiveness of information presented to convey a certain implication ("be afraid, be very afraid") while still sticking to literal facts. The lack of contextualization begins to come across as deliberate. Like, okay, so what if I can spread the virus in spite of being vaccinated? What should that mean?
Sigh. Unless the pandemic changes drastically in the US, I'm going to be flying this fall - I've got both leisure travel as well as a work trip booked. Worst case scenario, even if I do spread the virus to someone who has chosen to fly despite not being vaccinated and they end up experiencing serious complications, IDK if that will weigh on my conscience, to be honest. Obviously I'm going to cancel my plans if there's another wave or other variants have shown up in significant numbers which are not protected from by the vaccine... And of course I'm still wearing masks and social distancing... but otherwise, I don't think we should be expected to continue living as if this was still May 2020, or December 2020. There is a vaccine. It does change some things. Can we allow ourselves to say it and believe it?
posted by MiraK at 7:52 AM on April 27, 2021 [38 favorites]
Like pykrete jungle said, this is a strangely titled article, since it doesn't even meaningfully attempt to quantify in absolute or relative terms how risky flying is. It is a pretty cool design for interesting information about ventilation systems on airplanes, at least. Anyway, I'll be a fully vaccinated person wearing a mask on a flight this July, I haven't seen or read anything that makes me especially worried about that.
posted by skewed at 7:53 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by skewed at 7:53 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
I've flown four times since March last year, all related to severe family illness and then bereavement.
On two of those flights, I had an entire row to myself. I was most concerned about contracting anything at the departure gate, not on the plane.
posted by knapah at 8:00 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
On two of those flights, I had an entire row to myself. I was most concerned about contracting anything at the departure gate, not on the plane.
posted by knapah at 8:00 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
My solution, should I ever have to fly, is a personal HEPA filter/fan unit that supplies clean air to a N95 mask.
Can you explain what this is and where you can buy it?
posted by medusa at 8:00 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Can you explain what this is and where you can buy it?
posted by medusa at 8:00 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Worst case scenario, even if I do spread the virus to someone who has chosen to fly despite not being vaccinated and they end up experiencing serious complications, IDK if that will weigh on my conscience, to be honest.
I flew to see my mom recently. She lives alone and hadn't seen any of her children for nearly a year and a half. The risk of transmitting the virus while vaccinated is quite low, and the odds of encountering involuntarily unvaccinated people on a flight at this point are also low.
There is a vaccine. It does change some things. Can we allow ourselves to say it and believe it?
I'm starting to think that journalists as a class are just fundamentally incapable of writing intelligently about urgent public health issues. Even allowing, as one very much should, for scientific uncertainty and development in understanding over time, they've erred in every direction during the past year+ and don't seem to have learned anything from it, either. Their incentives are all wrong. The fundamental question--how/how much/how fast can a disease like COVID spread on an airplane--is of great interest, not only now, but for future illnesses, and yet.
posted by praemunire at 8:15 AM on April 27, 2021 [18 favorites]
I flew to see my mom recently. She lives alone and hadn't seen any of her children for nearly a year and a half. The risk of transmitting the virus while vaccinated is quite low, and the odds of encountering involuntarily unvaccinated people on a flight at this point are also low.
There is a vaccine. It does change some things. Can we allow ourselves to say it and believe it?
I'm starting to think that journalists as a class are just fundamentally incapable of writing intelligently about urgent public health issues. Even allowing, as one very much should, for scientific uncertainty and development in understanding over time, they've erred in every direction during the past year+ and don't seem to have learned anything from it, either. Their incentives are all wrong. The fundamental question--how/how much/how fast can a disease like COVID spread on an airplane--is of great interest, not only now, but for future illnesses, and yet.
posted by praemunire at 8:15 AM on April 27, 2021 [18 favorites]
I've had to fly a few times during the pandemic (got stuck in a rented apartment in a city across the country from where we usually live and own a place, where which we had been away from to tend to some family health stuff and had to move back because we couldn't afford it anymore, which was further complicated by lockdowns on each side) and exacerbating the plane problem is that the people who are flying for frivolous reasons (e.g. vacations pre-vaccines) tend to also be super lax about proper PPE usage (it's nose-out city). Even though it wasn't mandatory because we were flying domestic we self-isolated for 14 days after our flights because YIKES.
Aside from the risk of being infected, it's super unsettling being that close to people when you haven't even been that near to your loved ones in a long time, wow.
posted by urbanlenny at 8:28 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Aside from the risk of being infected, it's super unsettling being that close to people when you haven't even been that near to your loved ones in a long time, wow.
posted by urbanlenny at 8:28 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
I'm not sure I'll be at a cinema any time soon never mind a flight. Maybe if UK/EU had tried to get to zero rather than manage infections we would be in a better place but this year it will be the odd road trip and I'm cool with that. Been a very annoying year but perspective and all that, the sky hasn't fallen and we've saved millions of lives.
posted by twistedonion at 8:33 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by twistedonion at 8:33 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
Masking and social distancing for social pressure are good and worthwhile, but if that's not persuasive you should still be masking to protect yourself. The vaccines are not 100% effective and my ICU has seen a few fully vaccinated adults contract CoVID, include at least one who died. Anecdata, maybe.
posted by Pantengliopoli at 8:44 AM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
posted by Pantengliopoli at 8:44 AM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
I appreciate evidenceofabsence's comment above and thank them for that.
My mother-in-law is a not especially healthy 75 year-old Romanian widow who hasn't seen her only child and grandchild in two years. She sits all day in a studio apartment, alone. If we can all get vaccinated, I wouldn't be excited to fly, but I'm going to understand if my wife wants to see her mom while she still can.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:12 AM on April 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
My mother-in-law is a not especially healthy 75 year-old Romanian widow who hasn't seen her only child and grandchild in two years. She sits all day in a studio apartment, alone. If we can all get vaccinated, I wouldn't be excited to fly, but I'm going to understand if my wife wants to see her mom while she still can.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:12 AM on April 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
I plan on flying home to see my family late June/July after I'm fully vaccinated. I know there is still some risk but I haven't hugged my mom since before my grandmother died and I want to make it there to see my other grandmother cause I don't know how much time she has left. If the pandemic ends with both of my grandmother's dead and me not being able to see them before they die I'll never forgive myself. It was hard enough not being able to go to the one funeral. At this point everyone I'll be seeing while I'm there is already vaccinated so I'm willing to take the risk. It may be selfish but this past year or so has been hard enough. For my already tenuous mental health I have to see them.
posted by downtohisturtles at 9:25 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by downtohisturtles at 9:25 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
> Can you explain what this is and where you can buy it?
You are looking for a PAPR, though searching for that brings up more industrial results than possibly desired. Amazon has a less-industrial version of the concept.
posted by fragmede at 9:25 AM on April 27, 2021
You are looking for a PAPR, though searching for that brings up more industrial results than possibly desired. Amazon has a less-industrial version of the concept.
posted by fragmede at 9:25 AM on April 27, 2021
the odds of encountering involuntarily unvaccinated people on a flight at this point are also low.
Uh... maybe where you live, but recall please that this is an international website (and that vaccine availability has varied even within the US).
posted by eviemath at 9:33 AM on April 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
Uh... maybe where you live, but recall please that this is an international website (and that vaccine availability has varied even within the US).
posted by eviemath at 9:33 AM on April 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
Heeding derail advice, I'm avoiding citing specific comments above to the best of my ability; ultimately these conversations are more complex - having taken a year+ to develop - that can be resolved in a single blue thread.
> There is a vaccine. It does change some things. Can we allow ourselves to say it and believe it?
I've been lucky to be in the right fields, at the right time for this pandemic; to know the pandemic was coming-- explaining to friends at CDCs south Asia emerging disease desk in December/January 2020 what coronaviruses in bats might mean; and to warn my family ahead of official announcements--and to plan with friends of mine that did outdoor BSL3/4 work (Sin Nombre in the 90s; HIV when it was a death sentence; and some nastier bugs) how we were going to do COVID-related air travel in February 2020 with still so many unknowns. I knowingly traveled by plane in the pandemic (with extensive PPE), for necessary work, when there was less to be optimistic about.
However, for myself and the academics I know that are publishing the big papers you're seeing in epidemiology & virology on COVID: we aren't even thinking of flying yet, and academia got an early vaccination pass in the US. On the other hand, those academics I know who are not in virus & epidemiology fields, they're flying: confident in their ability to generalize information outside their field (the need for optimism in the face of pandemic fatigue appears to be a strong driver of selection bias).
In the US, the CDC is thinking on population levels, best public health; not individual, best practice; they explicitly understand they're decreasing pandemic restrictions for the vaccinated to incentivize vaccination among the vaccine hesitant, despite continued risk. Note: even in the best case, for transmission models, you were more protective unvaccinated but following a fairly lax "test, travel, 1-week quarantine, test" protocol than you are vaccinated alone. However, that is assuming prior models with lower viral transmission and higher behavioral compliance; which we now know do not hold (new common VOCs have at least ~40-50% increased transmission; and pandemic fatigue is leading to widespread crumbling of behavior (see: Michigan)). CDC is balancing governance and population-level health; individuals are performing a different balancing act: morals, physical health, health of loved ones, mental health, etc.
There is much to be cautiously optimistic about! The vaccine did far more than most of us expected as a first pass (though SARS1 N- & S- vaccines and 2P-spike mutations we already knew before December 2019), vaccination confers a larger and broader response against SARS2 spike protein than natural infection, and ADE concerns are mostly unfounded. But we know best case is 5% "breakthrough" on the best vaccines (40% in the elderly) 2 weeks after 2nd dose; waning immunity by 5-8 months (likely we'll be getting boosters by the end of the year); and rapid viral evolution in immune-compromised individuals, means this is not over yet.
I strongly believe in public health as a field of compromises, one cookie cutter approach doesn't work. Personally, I'm not flying because it still isn't worth the risk to me to transmit to other people. I live to travel. But it isn't some great suffering that I can't wait a little longer.
> Can you explain what this is and where you can buy it?
Easier solution is a P100 respirator; easily overkill, but works, and more comfortable. You can still get actual 3M guaranteed ones.
posted by rubatan at 9:40 AM on April 27, 2021 [43 favorites]
> There is a vaccine. It does change some things. Can we allow ourselves to say it and believe it?
I've been lucky to be in the right fields, at the right time for this pandemic; to know the pandemic was coming-- explaining to friends at CDCs south Asia emerging disease desk in December/January 2020 what coronaviruses in bats might mean; and to warn my family ahead of official announcements--and to plan with friends of mine that did outdoor BSL3/4 work (Sin Nombre in the 90s; HIV when it was a death sentence; and some nastier bugs) how we were going to do COVID-related air travel in February 2020 with still so many unknowns. I knowingly traveled by plane in the pandemic (with extensive PPE), for necessary work, when there was less to be optimistic about.
However, for myself and the academics I know that are publishing the big papers you're seeing in epidemiology & virology on COVID: we aren't even thinking of flying yet, and academia got an early vaccination pass in the US. On the other hand, those academics I know who are not in virus & epidemiology fields, they're flying: confident in their ability to generalize information outside their field (the need for optimism in the face of pandemic fatigue appears to be a strong driver of selection bias).
In the US, the CDC is thinking on population levels, best public health; not individual, best practice; they explicitly understand they're decreasing pandemic restrictions for the vaccinated to incentivize vaccination among the vaccine hesitant, despite continued risk. Note: even in the best case, for transmission models, you were more protective unvaccinated but following a fairly lax "test, travel, 1-week quarantine, test" protocol than you are vaccinated alone. However, that is assuming prior models with lower viral transmission and higher behavioral compliance; which we now know do not hold (new common VOCs have at least ~40-50% increased transmission; and pandemic fatigue is leading to widespread crumbling of behavior (see: Michigan)). CDC is balancing governance and population-level health; individuals are performing a different balancing act: morals, physical health, health of loved ones, mental health, etc.
There is much to be cautiously optimistic about! The vaccine did far more than most of us expected as a first pass (though SARS1 N- & S- vaccines and 2P-spike mutations we already knew before December 2019), vaccination confers a larger and broader response against SARS2 spike protein than natural infection, and ADE concerns are mostly unfounded. But we know best case is 5% "breakthrough" on the best vaccines (40% in the elderly) 2 weeks after 2nd dose; waning immunity by 5-8 months (likely we'll be getting boosters by the end of the year); and rapid viral evolution in immune-compromised individuals, means this is not over yet.
I strongly believe in public health as a field of compromises, one cookie cutter approach doesn't work. Personally, I'm not flying because it still isn't worth the risk to me to transmit to other people. I live to travel. But it isn't some great suffering that I can't wait a little longer.
> Can you explain what this is and where you can buy it?
Easier solution is a P100 respirator; easily overkill, but works, and more comfortable. You can still get actual 3M guaranteed ones.
posted by rubatan at 9:40 AM on April 27, 2021 [43 favorites]
CDC: Fully vaccinated people don't need to wear masks outside
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:42 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:42 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
I wish people with expertise who come to these threads to speak based on their expertise would present information in a clear and understandable way with some context and reasoning provided.
>>even in the best case, for transmission models, you were more protective unvaccinated but following a fairly lax "test, travel, 1-week quarantine, test" protocol than you are vaccinated alone. However, that is assuming prior models with lower viral transmission and higher behavioral compliance; which we now know do not hold
Well then why are you mentioning those transmission models? As you note, they're based on incorrect assumptions, so why are you mentioning their conclusions at all? "Here is some data which I know is wrong which says vaccines don't make flying any safer." WTF!
>>The vaccine did far more than most of us expected as a first pass ... vaccination confers a larger and broader response against SARS2 spike protein than natural infection, and ADE concerns are mostly unfounded. But we know best case is 5% "breakthrough" on the best vaccines (40% in the elderly) 2 weeks after 2nd dose; waning immunity by 5-8 months (likely we'll be getting boosters by the end of the year); and rapid viral evolution in immune-compromised individuals...
Why would you list out both the protective factors and the risks without contextualizing them in any way, or providing any link between them? "The vaccine is kind of good. The disease is kind of bad. Therefore in my expert opinion it is not safe to fly." Huh??
>>... means this is not over yet.
Did anyone here say it was? Seems like you're trying to characterize anyone who dares to contemplate expanding our sphere of activities post-vaccine as people who think it's all over.
>> I strongly believe in public health as a field of compromises, one cookie cutter approach doesn't work.
And I strongly believe that asking for clear, evidenced, contextualized communication from experts is not the same as asking for one cookie cutter approach. Like, we don't need information and expert opinions to be dumbed down. We do need your expert opinions and conclusions to be presented with some level of detail, and with relevant, contextualized evidence that provides some logical support for your recommendations and conclusions. (And if such evidence doesn't exist yet, if there are gaps, then for God's sake please just say the experts don't know.)
>>Personally, I'm not flying because it still isn't worth the risk to me to transmit to other people.
So in your expert opinion, vaccines change literally nothing about the pandemic-related risks of air travel? Or did you mean to communicate, perhaps, that experts know so very little about the risks of vaccinated air travel that you don't want to chance it? I promise you this is not a sarcastic question. It is not a gotcha question. It's a super sincere plea for you to provide some basic context, comparative risk assessment, and clear information about why we should be afraid, be very afraid. (... that last bit is sarcastic, sorry, it's frustrating when experts don't communicate well.)
posted by MiraK at 10:29 AM on April 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
>>even in the best case, for transmission models, you were more protective unvaccinated but following a fairly lax "test, travel, 1-week quarantine, test" protocol than you are vaccinated alone. However, that is assuming prior models with lower viral transmission and higher behavioral compliance; which we now know do not hold
Well then why are you mentioning those transmission models? As you note, they're based on incorrect assumptions, so why are you mentioning their conclusions at all? "Here is some data which I know is wrong which says vaccines don't make flying any safer." WTF!
>>The vaccine did far more than most of us expected as a first pass ... vaccination confers a larger and broader response against SARS2 spike protein than natural infection, and ADE concerns are mostly unfounded. But we know best case is 5% "breakthrough" on the best vaccines (40% in the elderly) 2 weeks after 2nd dose; waning immunity by 5-8 months (likely we'll be getting boosters by the end of the year); and rapid viral evolution in immune-compromised individuals...
Why would you list out both the protective factors and the risks without contextualizing them in any way, or providing any link between them? "The vaccine is kind of good. The disease is kind of bad. Therefore in my expert opinion it is not safe to fly." Huh??
>>... means this is not over yet.
Did anyone here say it was? Seems like you're trying to characterize anyone who dares to contemplate expanding our sphere of activities post-vaccine as people who think it's all over.
>> I strongly believe in public health as a field of compromises, one cookie cutter approach doesn't work.
And I strongly believe that asking for clear, evidenced, contextualized communication from experts is not the same as asking for one cookie cutter approach. Like, we don't need information and expert opinions to be dumbed down. We do need your expert opinions and conclusions to be presented with some level of detail, and with relevant, contextualized evidence that provides some logical support for your recommendations and conclusions. (And if such evidence doesn't exist yet, if there are gaps, then for God's sake please just say the experts don't know.)
>>Personally, I'm not flying because it still isn't worth the risk to me to transmit to other people.
So in your expert opinion, vaccines change literally nothing about the pandemic-related risks of air travel? Or did you mean to communicate, perhaps, that experts know so very little about the risks of vaccinated air travel that you don't want to chance it? I promise you this is not a sarcastic question. It is not a gotcha question. It's a super sincere plea for you to provide some basic context, comparative risk assessment, and clear information about why we should be afraid, be very afraid. (... that last bit is sarcastic, sorry, it's frustrating when experts don't communicate well.)
posted by MiraK at 10:29 AM on April 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
Fully vaccinated people can venture outdoors without masks, according to updated guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued Tuesday.
So, running this through the maximalist filter, this'll be interpreted as "No more masks anywhere so long as there's an open window, nobody can ask if you're vaccinated (because HIPPA, ADA, or a general garbled scream about the Constitution), and a deep lung-clearing sigh when someone asks you to put on a mask before stepping indoors"
(Per above, having a water bottle or pretzel bag on hand so you can be 'leaving the mask off to eat' for 5 hours will still be A-OK)
posted by CrystalDave at 10:47 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
So, running this through the maximalist filter, this'll be interpreted as "No more masks anywhere so long as there's an open window, nobody can ask if you're vaccinated (because HIPPA, ADA, or a general garbled scream about the Constitution), and a deep lung-clearing sigh when someone asks you to put on a mask before stepping indoors"
(Per above, having a water bottle or pretzel bag on hand so you can be 'leaving the mask off to eat' for 5 hours will still be A-OK)
posted by CrystalDave at 10:47 AM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Sure but it also incentives people to get vaccinated.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:48 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:48 AM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Was the CDC previously saying that people in uncrowded outdoor spaces should be wearing masks?
posted by polecat at 10:50 AM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by polecat at 10:50 AM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Uh... maybe where you live, but recall please that this is an international website (and that vaccine availability has varied even within the US).
Yes. As an American living in America flying to visit my American mother living in America, I am concerned with American domestic air travelers. Feel free to use your knowledge and judgment to evaluate the applicability of that statement to your own situation.
Insisting on full specification of every degree of reference in every sentence when the context doesn't call for it is a waste of everyone's time.
posted by praemunire at 11:01 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Yes. As an American living in America flying to visit my American mother living in America, I am concerned with American domestic air travelers. Feel free to use your knowledge and judgment to evaluate the applicability of that statement to your own situation.
Insisting on full specification of every degree of reference in every sentence when the context doesn't call for it is a waste of everyone's time.
posted by praemunire at 11:01 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Was the CDC previously saying that people in uncrowded outdoor spaces should be wearing masks?
Yep.
A handy chart of current/new recommendations, for those interested.
posted by praemunire at 11:04 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Yep.
A handy chart of current/new recommendations, for those interested.
posted by praemunire at 11:04 AM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
I wish that articles like this at least tried to compare the risk to some reasonable baseline. Maybe it's just me and my academic math training being reductive, but I see things like "experts say don't do (x) because, remember, even vaccinated and wearing a mask it's still possible to spread covid" and I think that this statement means almost nothing, just that p>0. Well, if p=1 that's >0 but if p=1e-10 that's also >0. "no risk at all" is prima facie a bad bar, otherwise in non-covid times we wouldn't drive cars, ride bicycles, or eat sushi. We accept some things that cause risk to ourselves and others, in a complicated calculus.
Back when J+J was in the news because of blood clots, there were a lot of things on social media going around like "your risk of getting a blood clot from the J+J vaccine is like driving 50 miles" or whatever. On the one hand I feel positively about this, because I want the discourse to make this kind of comparison. On the other hand, all the comparisons of this kind that I saw were very back-of-the-envelope by non experts, and it seems plausible that they could be very very wrong.
I'm sure that the people writing guidelines -- such as are given by the CDC about travel, indoor and outdoor dining, etc -- who work for public health agencies or are academics in this field, are competent, highly numerate subject-matter experts. I would guess that they are at least doing some kind of back-of-the-envelope calculation of this kind, if not more sophisticated modelling. But as far as I can tell it's not available to the numerate layman. Maybe that's because the average reader does not want this level of detail, or maybe the epistemological conventions in these field are much less numerical (this seems unlikely but I don't know any virologists personally, just some bio-statisticians), or maybe other reasons. Maybe I just don't know where to look. Here's what I don't really know: could the author of this article have actually answered the question in its headline? (I went down a rabbit hole of trying to find the actual Harvard study it references but to no avail.) Could they have written "our best guess right now is that flying to Columbus increases your death risk to covid about the same as (x)" or "it appears that the marginal risk of covid to other people by your choosing to fly is like (y)"? Is it possible to make these kinds of estimates?
Would we even want this? What if it were "this is about as risky to yourself and others as driving", and everyone reasons "okay, well, in 2018 I drove my car, so..." and then if the estimates were spot on, well, 40000 people die ?
posted by look upon my works progress administration at 11:08 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Back when J+J was in the news because of blood clots, there were a lot of things on social media going around like "your risk of getting a blood clot from the J+J vaccine is like driving 50 miles" or whatever. On the one hand I feel positively about this, because I want the discourse to make this kind of comparison. On the other hand, all the comparisons of this kind that I saw were very back-of-the-envelope by non experts, and it seems plausible that they could be very very wrong.
I'm sure that the people writing guidelines -- such as are given by the CDC about travel, indoor and outdoor dining, etc -- who work for public health agencies or are academics in this field, are competent, highly numerate subject-matter experts. I would guess that they are at least doing some kind of back-of-the-envelope calculation of this kind, if not more sophisticated modelling. But as far as I can tell it's not available to the numerate layman. Maybe that's because the average reader does not want this level of detail, or maybe the epistemological conventions in these field are much less numerical (this seems unlikely but I don't know any virologists personally, just some bio-statisticians), or maybe other reasons. Maybe I just don't know where to look. Here's what I don't really know: could the author of this article have actually answered the question in its headline? (I went down a rabbit hole of trying to find the actual Harvard study it references but to no avail.) Could they have written "our best guess right now is that flying to Columbus increases your death risk to covid about the same as (x)" or "it appears that the marginal risk of covid to other people by your choosing to fly is like (y)"? Is it possible to make these kinds of estimates?
Would we even want this? What if it were "this is about as risky to yourself and others as driving", and everyone reasons "okay, well, in 2018 I drove my car, so..." and then if the estimates were spot on, well, 40000 people die ?
posted by look upon my works progress administration at 11:08 AM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
But we know best case is 5% "breakthrough" on the best vaccines (40% in the elderly) 2 weeks after 2nd dose
I'm also confused about this statement. I see estimates of about 60% for the elderly a few weeks after one dose. The estimates for efficacy after two are substantially higher.
posted by praemunire at 11:12 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
I'm also confused about this statement. I see estimates of about 60% for the elderly a few weeks after one dose. The estimates for efficacy after two are substantially higher.
posted by praemunire at 11:12 AM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
I'm also confused about this statement. I see estimates of about 60% for the elderly a few weeks after one dose. The estimates for efficacy after two are substantially higher.
This doesn't answer your question about those particular estimates, but let me plug a substack I like, your local epidemiologist, which collects numbers like this.
posted by look upon my works progress administration at 11:18 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
This doesn't answer your question about those particular estimates, but let me plug a substack I like, your local epidemiologist, which collects numbers like this.
posted by look upon my works progress administration at 11:18 AM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
V. handy, thanks! But the only indication of anything close to a mere 60% efficacy in 65+s I see is for J&J.
(Also, for people like me who had to learn some of this, 60% efficacy does not mean "40% of the vaccinated people exposed to the virus get it," it means "in comparing a vaccinated and an unvaccinated group, the vaccinated group has only 40% of the infections of the unvaccinated group." So if you take 100 people in each [otherwise comparable] group, and in the unvaccinated group, 5 people get it, in the vaccinated group, 2 will. Not 40.)
posted by praemunire at 11:32 AM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
(Also, for people like me who had to learn some of this, 60% efficacy does not mean "40% of the vaccinated people exposed to the virus get it," it means "in comparing a vaccinated and an unvaccinated group, the vaccinated group has only 40% of the infections of the unvaccinated group." So if you take 100 people in each [otherwise comparable] group, and in the unvaccinated group, 5 people get it, in the vaccinated group, 2 will. Not 40.)
posted by praemunire at 11:32 AM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
There is a vaccine. It does change some things. Can we allow ourselves to say it and believe it?
The vaccine does change things, but it isn't an on/off switch and risk levels are highly context dependent. I don't mean to suggest that people who are vaccinated need to hole up for eternity, just that they still need to be considerate of the risks associated with travel. Transmission is significantly reduced in people who have been vaccinated, but it isn't eliminated, studies are ongoing (so there aren't a ton of stats about transmission yet), most of the world isn't vaccinated, and a lot of places aren't out of the woods.
My feelings about this are colored by the fact that I live in Brooklyn. In NYC, about 1 out of every 265 people has died of COVID 19. In one zip code it's 1 in 100. That figure doesn't include 10,000+ non-COVID excess deaths, e.g., people who died of a heart attack when hospitals were overflowing and they couldn't access care. Cases are just now (finally) dropping from the winter peak, but we still have about twice as many cases per capita as the US as a whole. Hospitalizations are down, but we have three ICUs at 95-102% capacity. All of that hasn't stopped people from jumping on cheap flights and coming here, vaccinated or unvaccinated. NYC welcomed 23 million tourists in 2020, down from 67 million in 2019. That number is going to go up this year, and even if you apply the 0.4% infection rate in Pfizer and Moderna's pre-variant studies, that's a a whole lot of opportunities for things to go sideways, or for people to track NYC's bespoke, more-infectious COVID variant home.
The city is in a better position than we have been since the pandemic started, but only 28% of residents are fully vaccinated, and it's disproportionately rich white folks from neighborhoods that had relatively low rates of COVID to begin with. About 60% of the city is entirely unvaccinated. That goes up to 80%+ in neighborhoods where the pandemic hit worse, which also happens to be where you'll find people who serve food, work at airports and hotels, and drive cabs, which is to say, folks you're more likely to interact with as a tourist. We really, really need people's tourist dollars, but we aren't yet where we need to be, and people here are still largely at risk.
I desperately want to travel. I have spent most of the past year cooped up in a one-bedroom apartment on a concrete-lined block in a building without a yard, stoop, or fire escapes. I have spent a lot of time longingly looking at photos of Culebra, where I could work remotely during the day and bike to the beach to watch the sun set, but I still can't justify going there, even if I'm about to be fully vaccinated. Cases in Puerto Rico just spiked again. Culebra is a small and relatively poor island without a hospital, so if Culebrans need to be hospitalized, they have to be airlifted out. It's hard for people there to even get to regular doctor's appointments because only two of the six ferries that go there are functional, and those are tied up in a fight over privatization. No matter how I look at it, my desire to sit in the sun does not yet outweigh the risk, albeit small, that a fully vaccinated me poses to people living there. I hope that will eventually change. I just don't think we're there yet, and I hope that people's calculus is a little more complicated than "I'm vaccinated so it's fine."
posted by evidenceofabsence at 11:48 AM on April 27, 2021 [17 favorites]
The vaccine does change things, but it isn't an on/off switch and risk levels are highly context dependent. I don't mean to suggest that people who are vaccinated need to hole up for eternity, just that they still need to be considerate of the risks associated with travel. Transmission is significantly reduced in people who have been vaccinated, but it isn't eliminated, studies are ongoing (so there aren't a ton of stats about transmission yet), most of the world isn't vaccinated, and a lot of places aren't out of the woods.
My feelings about this are colored by the fact that I live in Brooklyn. In NYC, about 1 out of every 265 people has died of COVID 19. In one zip code it's 1 in 100. That figure doesn't include 10,000+ non-COVID excess deaths, e.g., people who died of a heart attack when hospitals were overflowing and they couldn't access care. Cases are just now (finally) dropping from the winter peak, but we still have about twice as many cases per capita as the US as a whole. Hospitalizations are down, but we have three ICUs at 95-102% capacity. All of that hasn't stopped people from jumping on cheap flights and coming here, vaccinated or unvaccinated. NYC welcomed 23 million tourists in 2020, down from 67 million in 2019. That number is going to go up this year, and even if you apply the 0.4% infection rate in Pfizer and Moderna's pre-variant studies, that's a a whole lot of opportunities for things to go sideways, or for people to track NYC's bespoke, more-infectious COVID variant home.
The city is in a better position than we have been since the pandemic started, but only 28% of residents are fully vaccinated, and it's disproportionately rich white folks from neighborhoods that had relatively low rates of COVID to begin with. About 60% of the city is entirely unvaccinated. That goes up to 80%+ in neighborhoods where the pandemic hit worse, which also happens to be where you'll find people who serve food, work at airports and hotels, and drive cabs, which is to say, folks you're more likely to interact with as a tourist. We really, really need people's tourist dollars, but we aren't yet where we need to be, and people here are still largely at risk.
I desperately want to travel. I have spent most of the past year cooped up in a one-bedroom apartment on a concrete-lined block in a building without a yard, stoop, or fire escapes. I have spent a lot of time longingly looking at photos of Culebra, where I could work remotely during the day and bike to the beach to watch the sun set, but I still can't justify going there, even if I'm about to be fully vaccinated. Cases in Puerto Rico just spiked again. Culebra is a small and relatively poor island without a hospital, so if Culebrans need to be hospitalized, they have to be airlifted out. It's hard for people there to even get to regular doctor's appointments because only two of the six ferries that go there are functional, and those are tied up in a fight over privatization. No matter how I look at it, my desire to sit in the sun does not yet outweigh the risk, albeit small, that a fully vaccinated me poses to people living there. I hope that will eventually change. I just don't think we're there yet, and I hope that people's calculus is a little more complicated than "I'm vaccinated so it's fine."
posted by evidenceofabsence at 11:48 AM on April 27, 2021 [17 favorites]
Sure but it also incentives people to get vaccinated.
Sure, and that's well and good, but every time something gets announced for incentivizing people to get vaccinated and then it has to be walked back or tightened up, that causes harm to "getting people to listen the next time". It doesn't matter *why* things need to be walked back.
So if we want to claim "you can be outside without a mask" (no level of nuance survives transmission, so all the caveats about "only with people in your household, only not in a crowd, only when it's well-ventilated" are meaningless), that doesn't mix well with counties/states talking about needing to go back to Level 2 restrictions, etc.
I get that all the above nuance is required, personally. But look at travel records continuing to be set over Spring Break, Christmas, Thanksgiving, etc. Memorial Day is going to be no different, I'm certain. Every time there's "wait, cases are going up, let's lock back down" more people go "ok, it's political, states can't make up their mind" and check out figuring it's all a sham.
posted by CrystalDave at 12:01 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Sure, and that's well and good, but every time something gets announced for incentivizing people to get vaccinated and then it has to be walked back or tightened up, that causes harm to "getting people to listen the next time". It doesn't matter *why* things need to be walked back.
So if we want to claim "you can be outside without a mask" (no level of nuance survives transmission, so all the caveats about "only with people in your household, only not in a crowd, only when it's well-ventilated" are meaningless), that doesn't mix well with counties/states talking about needing to go back to Level 2 restrictions, etc.
I get that all the above nuance is required, personally. But look at travel records continuing to be set over Spring Break, Christmas, Thanksgiving, etc. Memorial Day is going to be no different, I'm certain. Every time there's "wait, cases are going up, let's lock back down" more people go "ok, it's political, states can't make up their mind" and check out figuring it's all a sham.
posted by CrystalDave at 12:01 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
It seems almost a willful refusal here to present useful information about comparative risks between various activities in various condition?
I share this frustration, and feel that some of the pithy responses to the post title here are overly dismissive and unhelpful. Actually acting on the best information available to us includes being willing to challenge our preconceptions, even if the conclusions are not in line with our intuitions about risk.
And the fact of the matter is that studies repeatedly show that this particular risk -- transmission during time in an airplane cabin -- is surprisingly low! e.g., e.g., e.g. Given the probabilities reported by actual empirical results, it's not at all clear that time spent on a medium haul flight with proper PPE is any higher risk than activities that many have deemed to have acceptable risk like spending time in grocery stores, retail, etc. If this result is unintuitive (it was to me!), that may be reflective of our poor ability as humans to intuit the vast variance in efficacy of ventilation systems in different spaces, and how that has a strong effect on risk.
These results don't contradict the idea that travel is a major aggravating factor from a public health perspective. But the results from studies like these should not be ignored or downplayed; rather, they should bolster our understanding of why that's true by allowing us to narrow down the root causes more effectively. For example, travel frequently involves meeting people and potentially joining households at the destination, which would obviously have the effect of contributing to spread if people choose to ignore quarantine and indoor gathering guidelines.
The data from these studies can lead to some uncomfortable truths. If data suggests that the primary cause of disease spread from travel is due to mixing households at the end, or last-mile transit, or what-have-you, it may imply that travel risk is uncomfortably inversely correlated with wealth and privilege. I.e., some may be able to reduce risk by affording dedicated spaces to keep households separate at their destination, where that may be less feasible for travelers without that privilege. But we shouldn't refuse to grapple with these ideas just because they're uncomfortable.
It's frustrating to see pieces like the article hem and haw about risk by first acknowledging extremely low risk from the flight itself, but then falling all over itself emphasizing that there might be risks in the terminal, while boarding, etc. That's likely true, but without making any attempt to quantify those risks, it really comes across as working backwards from the conclusion of "air travel must be high risk" rather than arguing from evidence. To somebody who may be trying to understand comparative risk, this kind of piece ends up coming across as intellectually dishonest and less trustworthy for it.
posted by Expecto Cilantro at 12:16 PM on April 27, 2021 [18 favorites]
I share this frustration, and feel that some of the pithy responses to the post title here are overly dismissive and unhelpful. Actually acting on the best information available to us includes being willing to challenge our preconceptions, even if the conclusions are not in line with our intuitions about risk.
And the fact of the matter is that studies repeatedly show that this particular risk -- transmission during time in an airplane cabin -- is surprisingly low! e.g., e.g., e.g. Given the probabilities reported by actual empirical results, it's not at all clear that time spent on a medium haul flight with proper PPE is any higher risk than activities that many have deemed to have acceptable risk like spending time in grocery stores, retail, etc. If this result is unintuitive (it was to me!), that may be reflective of our poor ability as humans to intuit the vast variance in efficacy of ventilation systems in different spaces, and how that has a strong effect on risk.
These results don't contradict the idea that travel is a major aggravating factor from a public health perspective. But the results from studies like these should not be ignored or downplayed; rather, they should bolster our understanding of why that's true by allowing us to narrow down the root causes more effectively. For example, travel frequently involves meeting people and potentially joining households at the destination, which would obviously have the effect of contributing to spread if people choose to ignore quarantine and indoor gathering guidelines.
The data from these studies can lead to some uncomfortable truths. If data suggests that the primary cause of disease spread from travel is due to mixing households at the end, or last-mile transit, or what-have-you, it may imply that travel risk is uncomfortably inversely correlated with wealth and privilege. I.e., some may be able to reduce risk by affording dedicated spaces to keep households separate at their destination, where that may be less feasible for travelers without that privilege. But we shouldn't refuse to grapple with these ideas just because they're uncomfortable.
It's frustrating to see pieces like the article hem and haw about risk by first acknowledging extremely low risk from the flight itself, but then falling all over itself emphasizing that there might be risks in the terminal, while boarding, etc. That's likely true, but without making any attempt to quantify those risks, it really comes across as working backwards from the conclusion of "air travel must be high risk" rather than arguing from evidence. To somebody who may be trying to understand comparative risk, this kind of piece ends up coming across as intellectually dishonest and less trustworthy for it.
posted by Expecto Cilantro at 12:16 PM on April 27, 2021 [18 favorites]
I live in a neighborhood where 1 in 12 people got the virus--one of the worst-hit neighborhoods by every measure in Manhattan all the way through (though of course the outer boroughs have suffered more). I care very much about not infecting my neighbors. If the vaccine did nothing to prevent transmission, but 100% prevented my suffering symptoms regardless, I would not partake even of the non-essential public activities permitted under city and state law right now. But that's not the case.
I don't begrudge anyone exercising some extra care for themselves, especially in connection with exposure to the very most vulnerable, or just for their own peace of mind. There's stuff I haven't done yet. I'll certainly continue to adhere to local masking and other safety protocols, as I have throughout this whole period, if for no other reason than that service personnel shouldn't have to sort out who's vaccinated and who's not. If immunity is shown to fall off significantly after [x] period, I'll modify my behavior after [x] period. I'll definitely line up the second a booster is recommended and available. But ultimately it all comes down to how much of a risk I am to other people, and post-vaccination, right now, the answer is: not very much at all. (*) That is what I keep in mind in considering what others' responsibilities are, and why I flew to see my mom. I keep seeing this attitude that only zero COVID risk is good enough, and, I mean, not only is that not achievable (even in countries where there are currently no cases, travel will eventually bring it back in), that is not the attitude people take towards every other threat they pose to their neighbors. (If the flu example makes one's head explode, consider driving.)
(*) I mean, yeah, I probably wouldn't go for fun to a tiny island where the health care system is overwhelmed, but that's because any health care I needed or caused someone else to need would put added and unneeded pressure on the system. Fortunately, I have no trips to tiny islands booked.
posted by praemunire at 12:21 PM on April 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
I don't begrudge anyone exercising some extra care for themselves, especially in connection with exposure to the very most vulnerable, or just for their own peace of mind. There's stuff I haven't done yet. I'll certainly continue to adhere to local masking and other safety protocols, as I have throughout this whole period, if for no other reason than that service personnel shouldn't have to sort out who's vaccinated and who's not. If immunity is shown to fall off significantly after [x] period, I'll modify my behavior after [x] period. I'll definitely line up the second a booster is recommended and available. But ultimately it all comes down to how much of a risk I am to other people, and post-vaccination, right now, the answer is: not very much at all. (*) That is what I keep in mind in considering what others' responsibilities are, and why I flew to see my mom. I keep seeing this attitude that only zero COVID risk is good enough, and, I mean, not only is that not achievable (even in countries where there are currently no cases, travel will eventually bring it back in), that is not the attitude people take towards every other threat they pose to their neighbors. (If the flu example makes one's head explode, consider driving.)
(*) I mean, yeah, I probably wouldn't go for fun to a tiny island where the health care system is overwhelmed, but that's because any health care I needed or caused someone else to need would put added and unneeded pressure on the system. Fortunately, I have no trips to tiny islands booked.
posted by praemunire at 12:21 PM on April 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
I'm asking for: the information that keeps getting promised to us in the headlines and in the opening paragraphs of the comments of people who say they are experts in the field: how safe is it to be on a commercial airplane? It's reasonable to ask for the numbers and scientific data that we were promised in these headlines and opening paragraphs.
I'm objecting to: the misdirection, misinformation, uncontextualized fearmongering, and outright gaslighting that usually follows the headlines (or opening paragraphs. It is reasonable to object to these things.
Neither this ask nor the objection can reasonably be characterized as taking the position that "it's all over" or "I'm vaccinated so it's fine." Neither can be understood by any reasonable person as "the vaccine is an on/off switch". Nevertheless that is how it's repeatedly being construed. Why?
>> [if] it has to be walked back or tightened up, that causes harm to "getting people to listen the next time"... no level of nuance survives transmission... check out figuring it's all a sham.
>> So, running this through the maximalist filter, this'll be interpreted as "No more masks anywhere so long as there's an open window
... I wonder folks here feel like they're the CDC speaking to the general public on this thread, feeling like you need to boil everything way down to the bluntest and simplest words lest the whole world misinterpret your MeFi comment as permission to travel to Culebrans or whatever?
But you're not the CDC and this is not the general public. There is room for nuance and data here (I hope!). Let the CDC figure out population-level communiques about health; can we over here try to find out what the NYT headline promised but failed to deliver on??
posted by MiraK at 12:22 PM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
I'm objecting to: the misdirection, misinformation, uncontextualized fearmongering, and outright gaslighting that usually follows the headlines (or opening paragraphs. It is reasonable to object to these things.
Neither this ask nor the objection can reasonably be characterized as taking the position that "it's all over" or "I'm vaccinated so it's fine." Neither can be understood by any reasonable person as "the vaccine is an on/off switch". Nevertheless that is how it's repeatedly being construed. Why?
>> [if] it has to be walked back or tightened up, that causes harm to "getting people to listen the next time"... no level of nuance survives transmission... check out figuring it's all a sham.
>> So, running this through the maximalist filter, this'll be interpreted as "No more masks anywhere so long as there's an open window
... I wonder folks here feel like they're the CDC speaking to the general public on this thread, feeling like you need to boil everything way down to the bluntest and simplest words lest the whole world misinterpret your MeFi comment as permission to travel to Culebrans or whatever?
But you're not the CDC and this is not the general public. There is room for nuance and data here (I hope!). Let the CDC figure out population-level communiques about health; can we over here try to find out what the NYT headline promised but failed to deliver on??
posted by MiraK at 12:22 PM on April 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
can we over here try to find out what the NYT headline promised but failed to deliver on??
I feel like everyone would like a little more certainty in these troubling and uncertain times, but I feel like asking random internet commenters to provide it might be a road that leads to disappointment. The best source of information is probably peer-reviewed scientific papers, but I would be very surprised if those had come to a consensus about the exact level of danger posed by air travel right now. I don’t think anyone really knows.
posted by snofoam at 12:43 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
I feel like everyone would like a little more certainty in these troubling and uncertain times, but I feel like asking random internet commenters to provide it might be a road that leads to disappointment. The best source of information is probably peer-reviewed scientific papers, but I would be very surprised if those had come to a consensus about the exact level of danger posed by air travel right now. I don’t think anyone really knows.
posted by snofoam at 12:43 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
**Correction: 65+ ~60% was for waning immunity following natural infection.
Dutch Study 47%: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00575-4/fulltext
Another cohort study I don't have time to find right now estimates ~70% (for natural infection).
Elderly, in general have more waning immunity; but I wanted to quick post to not lead people down a distracting path. I don't recall coming across good cohort studies that track older individuals, post vaccine, yet; though I'm sure there are some coming out; they're out there for younger people, but these seem outside the purview of this post.
MiraK, my post was not meant to be normative or indictment of you (or anyone) as I fear you might have seen it. I'll endeavor to craft specific responses when I have time available. As I stated: "public health is a field of compromises, one cookie cutter approach doesn't work." Individuals are different and will have different needs and struggle differently under duress. Public Health's goal is to balance all of those needs & responses for the best overall outcome, with any luck and a lot of effort, and without judgement (the judgement gets in the way of good outcomes).
posted by rubatan at 12:45 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Dutch Study 47%: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00575-4/fulltext
Another cohort study I don't have time to find right now estimates ~70% (for natural infection).
Elderly, in general have more waning immunity; but I wanted to quick post to not lead people down a distracting path. I don't recall coming across good cohort studies that track older individuals, post vaccine, yet; though I'm sure there are some coming out; they're out there for younger people, but these seem outside the purview of this post.
MiraK, my post was not meant to be normative or indictment of you (or anyone) as I fear you might have seen it. I'll endeavor to craft specific responses when I have time available. As I stated: "public health is a field of compromises, one cookie cutter approach doesn't work." Individuals are different and will have different needs and struggle differently under duress. Public Health's goal is to balance all of those needs & responses for the best overall outcome, with any luck and a lot of effort, and without judgement (the judgement gets in the way of good outcomes).
posted by rubatan at 12:45 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
I live in a neighborhood where 1 in 12 people got the virus--one of the worst-hit neighborhoods by every measure in Manhattan all the way through (though of course the outer boroughs have suffered more).
This is the crazy part about the corona virus - I still don't know 12 people in total who have even gotten it, know 0 personally who have died, and only one who was hospitalized, and that person had severe COPD, a liver damaged from alcoholism and got a day of treatment and they were fine.
I know multiple medical professionals in multiple US states, and nearly all have traveled, many have flown and taken vacations (including Disney) through this.
I think that's why it is extremely difficult to have over-arching rules at the state level or about air travel when the person to person experience is so dramatically different. Maybe I am just extremely lucky, but I don't think so because I've been to the hospital (dedicated covid ward shut down months ago) multiple times in the past year.
posted by The_Vegetables at 12:51 PM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
This is the crazy part about the corona virus - I still don't know 12 people in total who have even gotten it, know 0 personally who have died, and only one who was hospitalized, and that person had severe COPD, a liver damaged from alcoholism and got a day of treatment and they were fine.
I know multiple medical professionals in multiple US states, and nearly all have traveled, many have flown and taken vacations (including Disney) through this.
I think that's why it is extremely difficult to have over-arching rules at the state level or about air travel when the person to person experience is so dramatically different. Maybe I am just extremely lucky, but I don't think so because I've been to the hospital (dedicated covid ward shut down months ago) multiple times in the past year.
posted by The_Vegetables at 12:51 PM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
> Can you explain what this is and where you can buy it?
Easier solution is a P100 respirator; easily overkill, but works, and more comfortable. You can still get actual 3M guaranteed ones.--rubatan
Those things don't filter the air breathing out, so if you have Covid but no symptoms yet (one of the nasty tricks of the disease), you'll be infecting everyone else. Masks with air vent outlets are actually illegal to use as Covid masks in many locations.
If you wear one of these, block the air vent so breathing out is also filtered.
posted by eye of newt at 12:58 PM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
Easier solution is a P100 respirator; easily overkill, but works, and more comfortable. You can still get actual 3M guaranteed ones.--rubatan
Those things don't filter the air breathing out, so if you have Covid but no symptoms yet (one of the nasty tricks of the disease), you'll be infecting everyone else. Masks with air vent outlets are actually illegal to use as Covid masks in many locations.
If you wear one of these, block the air vent so breathing out is also filtered.
posted by eye of newt at 12:58 PM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
Micromorts, or a 1 millionth chance of dying, is a good way to compare risk, which we almost all need in order to draw on intuitions for past activities and apply them to new activities. It's also helpful to reveal just how mistaken we all are about the relative risks of lots of things we already do. It would be nice if Covid risks were translated to micromorts, but I think a lot of responsible people are reluctant to do this because there is so much uncertainty in each step of the estimate. For some comparative numbers:
1 micromort:
250 miles of driving
20 miles of walking or biking
1000 miles of air flight
1 day of skiing
1 cigarette
2 months living with a smoker
Skydiving jump: 8 micromorts
Being murdered in US: 50 micromorts per year
NYC in May 2020, from covid: 50 micromorts per day
So for a comparison against those baselines, if we take xdvesper's calculation for the chance of contracting covid on that flight as 0.2% and the chance of death from covid at 1%, we have 0.002*0.01*1,000,000 = 20 micromorts per flight. On the other hand, if you are young, healthy, and vaccinated, then your risk of catching it is ~1/10th and your risk of dying is ~1/10th, so the flight risk is now 0.2 micromorts. That difference matters a lot, at least for some people. 20 micromorts is 5000 miles of driving or 3 skydiving jumps; 0.2 micromorts is just 50 miles of driving or 5 puffs on a cigarette.
posted by chortly at 12:59 PM on April 27, 2021 [24 favorites]
1 micromort:
250 miles of driving
20 miles of walking or biking
1000 miles of air flight
1 day of skiing
1 cigarette
2 months living with a smoker
Skydiving jump: 8 micromorts
Being murdered in US: 50 micromorts per year
NYC in May 2020, from covid: 50 micromorts per day
So for a comparison against those baselines, if we take xdvesper's calculation for the chance of contracting covid on that flight as 0.2% and the chance of death from covid at 1%, we have 0.002*0.01*1,000,000 = 20 micromorts per flight. On the other hand, if you are young, healthy, and vaccinated, then your risk of catching it is ~1/10th and your risk of dying is ~1/10th, so the flight risk is now 0.2 micromorts. That difference matters a lot, at least for some people. 20 micromorts is 5000 miles of driving or 3 skydiving jumps; 0.2 micromorts is just 50 miles of driving or 5 puffs on a cigarette.
posted by chortly at 12:59 PM on April 27, 2021 [24 favorites]
@praemunire "the odds of encountering involuntarily unvaccinated people on a flight at this point are also low."
Not sure how you mean this, because they wouldn't be getting on planes right now, they'd be waiting on their vaccine?
Involuntarily unvaccinated people sure have been doing some flying -- for whatever reasons -- and overall flight volume has not dropped.
And there are plenty of us left in the U.S. About 70% of adults want the vaccine, and 37% are vaccinated, so that's 30% of the adult population. All of the children, of course.
posted by away for regrooving at 1:11 PM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Not sure how you mean this, because they wouldn't be getting on planes right now, they'd be waiting on their vaccine?
Involuntarily unvaccinated people sure have been doing some flying -- for whatever reasons -- and overall flight volume has not dropped.
And there are plenty of us left in the U.S. About 70% of adults want the vaccine, and 37% are vaccinated, so that's 30% of the adult population. All of the children, of course.
posted by away for regrooving at 1:11 PM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Yes. As an American living in America flying to visit my American mother living in America, I am concerned with American domestic air travelers. Feel free to use your knowledge and judgment to evaluate the applicability of that statement to your own situation.
Insisting on full specification of every degree of reference in every sentence when the context doesn't call for it is a waste of everyone's time.
See: international website. I don't keep track of other metafilter poster's personal details. (Seriously: I have to learn 100-200 new student names every year, and that section of my brain space is at a premium and already in a chaotic jumble. Plus, I don't care.) More importantly, that's irrelevant to the point I was making, which was about thoughtfulness and empathy to other members of the international metafilter community. Please try to avoid being accidentally xenophobic through assuming a white, US-centric frame of reference, in particular.
On the basic thoughtfulness and empathy front, those of us who live in regions that followed an elimination approach and have been able to do regular life things (except travel outside our region) since early last summer without much by way of pandemic restrictions haven't been posting as if that was the case everywhere, because we realized that that would be kind of shitty for everyone living in areas that had a much more incompetent or uncaring official pandemic response (eg. the US under the previous federal administration). I am very glad for family and friends in the US that things have turned around so much there, and I certainly don't begrudge folks who are relieved to have gotten vaccinated posting about that. But maybe US folks here on metafilter could now return the favor and be more thoughtful of the rest of this metafilter community in your pandemic-related posting? Keep in mind, for example, that regardless of covid safety in US airplanes and airports, many of us still won't be able to see our family for a least a few more months and maybe longer due to ongoing actual border closures as well as the vaccination issue?
On the avoiding accidental xenophobia front, many temporary foreign workers and undocumented residents of the US haven't had access to vaccines, and temporary foreign workers at least often have to fly in to their employment sites within the US, so anyone in this thread assuming that the only unvaccinated people flying within the US these days are folks who don't want the vaccine are factually incorrect. In general, Mefites who live in the US sometimes have family outside of the US, or Mefites who live outside of the US sometimes have family in the US, and most countries around the world have had less access to vaccines than the US - often significantly less access.
I at least have relatively low personal risk despite not having access to vaccination yet. But on the more extreme end of the basic empathy and kindness + avoiding accidental xenophobia considerations in phrasing of US-centric comments about pandemic topics on a website with an international community, please keep in mind the following Harsha Walia tweet:
Insisting on full specification of every degree of reference in every sentence when the context doesn't call for it is a waste of everyone's time.
See: international website. I don't keep track of other metafilter poster's personal details. (Seriously: I have to learn 100-200 new student names every year, and that section of my brain space is at a premium and already in a chaotic jumble. Plus, I don't care.) More importantly, that's irrelevant to the point I was making, which was about thoughtfulness and empathy to other members of the international metafilter community. Please try to avoid being accidentally xenophobic through assuming a white, US-centric frame of reference, in particular.
On the basic thoughtfulness and empathy front, those of us who live in regions that followed an elimination approach and have been able to do regular life things (except travel outside our region) since early last summer without much by way of pandemic restrictions haven't been posting as if that was the case everywhere, because we realized that that would be kind of shitty for everyone living in areas that had a much more incompetent or uncaring official pandemic response (eg. the US under the previous federal administration). I am very glad for family and friends in the US that things have turned around so much there, and I certainly don't begrudge folks who are relieved to have gotten vaccinated posting about that. But maybe US folks here on metafilter could now return the favor and be more thoughtful of the rest of this metafilter community in your pandemic-related posting? Keep in mind, for example, that regardless of covid safety in US airplanes and airports, many of us still won't be able to see our family for a least a few more months and maybe longer due to ongoing actual border closures as well as the vaccination issue?
On the avoiding accidental xenophobia front, many temporary foreign workers and undocumented residents of the US haven't had access to vaccines, and temporary foreign workers at least often have to fly in to their employment sites within the US, so anyone in this thread assuming that the only unvaccinated people flying within the US these days are folks who don't want the vaccine are factually incorrect. In general, Mefites who live in the US sometimes have family outside of the US, or Mefites who live outside of the US sometimes have family in the US, and most countries around the world have had less access to vaccines than the US - often significantly less access.
I at least have relatively low personal risk despite not having access to vaccination yet. But on the more extreme end of the basic empathy and kindness + avoiding accidental xenophobia considerations in phrasing of US-centric comments about pandemic topics on a website with an international community, please keep in mind the following Harsha Walia tweet:
Half my whatsapp groups are pictures from vaccine appointments, and the other half is people frantically crowdsourcing for oxygen tanks and beds while announcing covid deaths of friends/relatives/neighbours.posted by eviemath at 1:20 PM on April 27, 2021 [28 favorites]
Global vaccine apartheid in real time is infuriating and devastating.
Not sure how you mean this, because they wouldn't be getting on planes right now, they'd be waiting on their vaccine?
Public-facing airline personnel are vaccinated. If you want to be vaccinated, haven't been, and don't get on a flight (e.g., me until a couple of weeks ago), then you aren't being exposed to me on a flight and I don't have to worry about you. If you don't want to be vaccinated, get on a flight without some compelling reason, and are exposed to me, I am not overly concerned with your welfare (although honestly, I'm lying about that, because you are substantially protected by my vaccination and masking, and I wouldn't do it if you weren't, but it feels better to say it, and it's true that I'm not attempting to eradicate every stray chance of harm to you). So, now, with vaccinations open to all 16+, we're talking about the people who have a genuinely compelling reason to fly and have been unable to get vaccinated despite trying to. That's not a size-zero group, but it's a pretty small group, and shrinking daily.
I feel like this shouldn't be controversial? From the POV of assessing the direct risks of flight, it doesn't matter if 30% of people who want vaccinations haven't yet gotten them, if they're not flying.
posted by praemunire at 1:23 PM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Public-facing airline personnel are vaccinated. If you want to be vaccinated, haven't been, and don't get on a flight (e.g., me until a couple of weeks ago), then you aren't being exposed to me on a flight and I don't have to worry about you. If you don't want to be vaccinated, get on a flight without some compelling reason, and are exposed to me, I am not overly concerned with your welfare (although honestly, I'm lying about that, because you are substantially protected by my vaccination and masking, and I wouldn't do it if you weren't, but it feels better to say it, and it's true that I'm not attempting to eradicate every stray chance of harm to you). So, now, with vaccinations open to all 16+, we're talking about the people who have a genuinely compelling reason to fly and have been unable to get vaccinated despite trying to. That's not a size-zero group, but it's a pretty small group, and shrinking daily.
I feel like this shouldn't be controversial? From the POV of assessing the direct risks of flight, it doesn't matter if 30% of people who want vaccinations haven't yet gotten them, if they're not flying.
posted by praemunire at 1:23 PM on April 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Flagged as fantastic, Chortly.
posted by MiraK at 1:24 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by MiraK at 1:24 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
From the POV of assessing the direct risks of flight, it doesn't matter if 30% of people who want vaccinations haven't yet gotten them, if they're not flying.
As a logical implication, I have no quibbles with this statement. It happens to be false that people who want to be vaccinated but haven't yet had the opportunity aren't flying (even to/within the US), is the problem.
posted by eviemath at 1:29 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
As a logical implication, I have no quibbles with this statement. It happens to be false that people who want to be vaccinated but haven't yet had the opportunity aren't flying (even to/within the US), is the problem.
posted by eviemath at 1:29 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
It happens to be false that people who want to be vaccinated but haven't yet had the opportunity aren't flying (even to/within the US), is the problem.
Since I didn't say that, then we have no disagreement.
(Just to avoid confusion for others, there is no citizenship or legality-of-residence documentation requirement for COVID vaccination in the U.S.)
posted by praemunire at 1:35 PM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Since I didn't say that, then we have no disagreement.
(Just to avoid confusion for others, there is no citizenship or legality-of-residence documentation requirement for COVID vaccination in the U.S.)
posted by praemunire at 1:35 PM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Public-facing airline personnel are vaccinated.
This is not true--my uncle is a pilot, and he wasn't prioritized for vaccines in the state where he lives. A lot of pilots/flight attendants/service people were not in priority groups, and might have only been opened up to vaccines on the 19th. I'm also guessing--based on my uncle's experience--there's a strong inverse correlation between the age of the pilot (and eligibility for the vaccine in many states) and who's flying. My uncle had seniority, and basically sat the entire last year out, and has only recently been signing up to fly reserve; younger folks have been flying because they needed to.
posted by damayanti at 1:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
This is not true--my uncle is a pilot, and he wasn't prioritized for vaccines in the state where he lives. A lot of pilots/flight attendants/service people were not in priority groups, and might have only been opened up to vaccines on the 19th. I'm also guessing--based on my uncle's experience--there's a strong inverse correlation between the age of the pilot (and eligibility for the vaccine in many states) and who's flying. My uncle had seniority, and basically sat the entire last year out, and has only recently been signing up to fly reserve; younger folks have been flying because they needed to.
posted by damayanti at 1:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Neither this ask nor the objection can reasonably be characterized as taking the position that "it's all over" or "I'm vaccinated so it's fine." Neither can be understood by any reasonable person as "the vaccine is an on/off switch". Nevertheless that is how it's repeatedly being construed. Why?
I think I was primarily responding to:
>>Personally, I'm not flying because it still isn't worth the risk to me to transmit to other people.
So in your expert opinion, vaccines change literally nothing about the pandemic-related risks of air travel?
In the interest of nuance, I was trying to suggest that being vaccinated does change the calculus but isn't the only variable. So if someone decides to stay home even after they've been vaccinated, it doesn't mean they're insisting that vaccines change nothing at all, just that the change doesn't currently outweigh all of the other factors they're taking into account.
I was also trying to say that, in general (not aiming this at people in this thread, but "generally in the world"), I hope people are considering other contextual variables before traveling, including risks to people in the place they're traveling to, even though articles like this tend to be narrowly focused on things like "Am I going to get sick from the plane ride (but not during my time airport, or traveling to and from the airport, or at my destination)?" or "If I interact with exactly one (1) person how likely is it that they will get sick?"
posted by evidenceofabsence at 1:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
I think I was primarily responding to:
>>Personally, I'm not flying because it still isn't worth the risk to me to transmit to other people.
So in your expert opinion, vaccines change literally nothing about the pandemic-related risks of air travel?
In the interest of nuance, I was trying to suggest that being vaccinated does change the calculus but isn't the only variable. So if someone decides to stay home even after they've been vaccinated, it doesn't mean they're insisting that vaccines change nothing at all, just that the change doesn't currently outweigh all of the other factors they're taking into account.
I was also trying to say that, in general (not aiming this at people in this thread, but "generally in the world"), I hope people are considering other contextual variables before traveling, including risks to people in the place they're traveling to, even though articles like this tend to be narrowly focused on things like "Am I going to get sick from the plane ride (but not during my time airport, or traveling to and from the airport, or at my destination)?" or "If I interact with exactly one (1) person how likely is it that they will get sick?"
posted by evidenceofabsence at 1:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
I hope people are considering other contextual variables before traveling, including risks to people in the place they're traveling to, even though articles like this tend to be narrowly focused on things like "Am I going to get sick from the plane ride (but not during my time airport, or traveling to and from the airport, or at my destination)?" or "If I interact with exactly one (1) person how likely is it that they will get sick?"
I think this is fair, and, setting aside tiny poor islands/similar localities currently suffering from overwhelmed health systems, would be interested to hear what factors you consider, and what you base that on.
posted by praemunire at 1:43 PM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
I think this is fair, and, setting aside tiny poor islands/similar localities currently suffering from overwhelmed health systems, would be interested to hear what factors you consider, and what you base that on.
posted by praemunire at 1:43 PM on April 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
@praemunire "the odds of encountering involuntarily unvaccinated people on a flight at this point are also low."
What difference does involuntarily make? People who are vaccinated and unvaccinated are clearly flying, as pointed out above. This is why people are confused by this statement you made. I've been reading it over and over and take it the same way eviemath did.
posted by tiny frying pan at 1:53 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
What difference does involuntarily make? People who are vaccinated and unvaccinated are clearly flying, as pointed out above. This is why people are confused by this statement you made. I've been reading it over and over and take it the same way eviemath did.
posted by tiny frying pan at 1:53 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
While Biden announced in late February that it should be ICE policy going forward not to engage in enforcement activities at vaccination sites, vaccine eligibility is still not yet the reality for many. (This report is from January, which may be old news now, but I can't find much more recent. The Color of Covid from the end of March.)
I'm pretty frustrated with the covid-denying, conspiracist folks. But to characterize even all voluntarily unvaccinated people in that category appears to be inaccurate, which raises significant ethical issues if making a distinction between how much we care about the involuntarily unvaccinated versus voluntarily unvaccinated in the US.
Put in "small" type because this is probably getting far afield from the original topic of pandemic safety and air travel.
posted by eviemath at 2:01 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
I'm pretty frustrated with the covid-denying, conspiracist folks. But to characterize even all voluntarily unvaccinated people in that category appears to be inaccurate, which raises significant ethical issues if making a distinction between how much we care about the involuntarily unvaccinated versus voluntarily unvaccinated in the US.
Put in "small" type because this is probably getting far afield from the original topic of pandemic safety and air travel.
posted by eviemath at 2:01 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
4 Takeaways From Our Investigation Into ICE's Mishandling of COVID-19 (NYT reprint via Yahoo News, April 26, 2021)
(I think use of small type is discouraged, as it is less accessible/readable for many users.)
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:26 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
(I think use of small type is discouraged, as it is less accessible/readable for many users.)
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:26 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Chortly’s table is quite helpful - though some of the numbers are less useful or generalizable (for instance your chance of being murdered in the US depends hugely on your race, socioeconomic status, neighbour hood etc... ). Overall though, these numbers reinforce the difference between following guidance for public health purposes vs following guidance for personal risk. The individual personal risks are small. But once you multiply that over populations of millions, you get to the thousands of deaths that have led COVID-19 to be the third largest cause of death in North America in 2020.
I have a pretty high risk tolerance: I enjoyed a couple hundred micromorts recreationally last Sunday. Relative to that, there’s almost no activity that would expose me to similar risk because of COVID. But I’m not following public health guidance for my own sake, I’m doing it because that’s our collective responsibility.
What is frustrating is when governments (provinces in my case) do not provide clear rules formulated under advisement by competent professionals informed by as good data as we can obtain. In some cases, it is clear that governments have been disinclined to communicate rules against the advice of public health professionals when the political calculus required it. “Easy” rules (use stupid amounts of hand sanitizer) are prioritized contra, eg. actually enforcing meaningful protections in workplaces where a significant portion of transmission is occurring.
You think it’s hard to gauge personal risk? Try having to figure out for yourself what you ought to do for collective risk abatement!
posted by bumpkin at 2:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
I have a pretty high risk tolerance: I enjoyed a couple hundred micromorts recreationally last Sunday. Relative to that, there’s almost no activity that would expose me to similar risk because of COVID. But I’m not following public health guidance for my own sake, I’m doing it because that’s our collective responsibility.
What is frustrating is when governments (provinces in my case) do not provide clear rules formulated under advisement by competent professionals informed by as good data as we can obtain. In some cases, it is clear that governments have been disinclined to communicate rules against the advice of public health professionals when the political calculus required it. “Easy” rules (use stupid amounts of hand sanitizer) are prioritized contra, eg. actually enforcing meaningful protections in workplaces where a significant portion of transmission is occurring.
You think it’s hard to gauge personal risk? Try having to figure out for yourself what you ought to do for collective risk abatement!
posted by bumpkin at 2:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
What difference does involuntarily make? People who are vaccinated and unvaccinated are clearly flying, as pointed out above.
How much I as a fallible human being care about their well-being. In the end, as I said originally, it doesn't really make much difference; if I didn't think traveling vaccinated and adhering to all precautions posed only a modest risk to all the people on the plane with me, vaccinated or unvaccinated, I wouldn't do it. But I have feelings, too, and like most people the degree to which I engage in extra precautions beyond what I consider to be actually required is affected by my feelings. I do feel more for someone unvaccinated who has no choice but to fly than someone who flies unvaccinated on purpose just to own the libs.
(vaccine eligibility is still not yet the reality for many
Point taken, though I think those informal policies have been largely stamped out now; I just don't want anyone reading this discussion to think that U.S. citizenship or legal residency is a formal requirement for the vaccine and get discouraged from seeking it out. That's all.)
posted by praemunire at 2:49 PM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
How much I as a fallible human being care about their well-being. In the end, as I said originally, it doesn't really make much difference; if I didn't think traveling vaccinated and adhering to all precautions posed only a modest risk to all the people on the plane with me, vaccinated or unvaccinated, I wouldn't do it. But I have feelings, too, and like most people the degree to which I engage in extra precautions beyond what I consider to be actually required is affected by my feelings. I do feel more for someone unvaccinated who has no choice but to fly than someone who flies unvaccinated on purpose just to own the libs.
(vaccine eligibility is still not yet the reality for many
Point taken, though I think those informal policies have been largely stamped out now; I just don't want anyone reading this discussion to think that U.S. citizenship or legal residency is a formal requirement for the vaccine and get discouraged from seeking it out. That's all.)
posted by praemunire at 2:49 PM on April 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Since all of this is unknowable about strangers, it's a particularly pointless derail. Sorry to engage in it.
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:51 PM on April 27, 2021
posted by tiny frying pan at 2:51 PM on April 27, 2021
Well, the clinic I've been volunteering at, which has a very large Latino/a population, does require a photo ID. Haven't seen a case where someone with a non-usa ID has shown up though. Still, the supply has so exceeded the demand, can't think they would turn someone away. Now the kid who was with his mom, and said he was 18+, when he wasn't, he got rejected hard...
posted by Windopaene at 2:54 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by Windopaene at 2:54 PM on April 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
I just don't want anyone reading this discussion to think that U.S. citizenship or legal residency is a formal requirement for the vaccine and get discouraged from seeking it out.
This is, perhaps, the issue I'm confused about on this specific topic. It sounds like some states do have residency requirements for receiving vaccines, such as requiring a Florida ID in Florida, from the latest details I could find (see eg. the links I provided; I couldn't tell if Texas was only considering limiting vaccine availability to state residents, or if they had actually done so, from the one article)? Since states have a lot of leeway in some of the details involved in setting up their vaccine roll-outs (fortunately now with some guidance and coordination from the US federal government!), there seems to be some confusing variation. Is there anywhere that collects all state vaccine roll-out details in some nicely centralized and easy to read or search manner?
posted by eviemath at 3:01 PM on April 27, 2021
This is, perhaps, the issue I'm confused about on this specific topic. It sounds like some states do have residency requirements for receiving vaccines, such as requiring a Florida ID in Florida, from the latest details I could find (see eg. the links I provided; I couldn't tell if Texas was only considering limiting vaccine availability to state residents, or if they had actually done so, from the one article)? Since states have a lot of leeway in some of the details involved in setting up their vaccine roll-outs (fortunately now with some guidance and coordination from the US federal government!), there seems to be some confusing variation. Is there anywhere that collects all state vaccine roll-out details in some nicely centralized and easy to read or search manner?
posted by eviemath at 3:01 PM on April 27, 2021
these numbers reinforce the difference between following guidance for public health purposes vs following guidance for personal risk. The individual personal risks are small. But once you multiply that over populations of millions, you get to the thousands of deaths
Yeah. I think that's kind of where I'm coming from. I might have opinions about the people on a flight who refused to get vaccinated and have been partying in Tulum and ignoring mask restrictions, but they're going to breathe on a whole lot of other people. 60% of people are totally unvaccinated in the US, and that number goes up for most other countries. That means there are a whole lot of breathed-on unprotected people who could get sick even though they never set foot anywhere near a plane.
Would I, individually, once I'm fully vaccinated, be unlikely to transmit our local extra-infectious COVID variants to an unvaccinated flyer who then goes and breathes on other folks? Sure. But every time someone from around here gets on a flight the dice get rolled again, and when you get up into millions of rolls, things eventually and repeatedly go wrong.
would be interested to hear what factors you consider, and what you base that on
I guess I've been trying to weigh where the pandemic is at both at my origin and destination, so case counts, whether numbers are rising and falling, how burdened the healthcare system is, how many people are vaccinated and what that distribution looks like, what resources people have at hand, how many people are at risk, and how things are likely to go if cases start spiking again. On a more individual level, I've been breaking down the different stages of travel and trying to think about what each one means, especially when it comes to exposing other people.
I also just kind of want to see how things play out for a bit, since there's sort of a race between vaccination, variant spread, seasonal change, and loosening (or tightening) restrictions right now. We should also have better data on post-vaccination transmission soon since a bunch of studies are in process. I'm looking forward to seeing the results.
And just to make sure: I'm not trying to judge anyone for going to see their mom (the hypothetical Tulum partiers, maybe.) I just hope people (again, in general!) are thinking about things on a network level and not just an individual one.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 3:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Yeah. I think that's kind of where I'm coming from. I might have opinions about the people on a flight who refused to get vaccinated and have been partying in Tulum and ignoring mask restrictions, but they're going to breathe on a whole lot of other people. 60% of people are totally unvaccinated in the US, and that number goes up for most other countries. That means there are a whole lot of breathed-on unprotected people who could get sick even though they never set foot anywhere near a plane.
Would I, individually, once I'm fully vaccinated, be unlikely to transmit our local extra-infectious COVID variants to an unvaccinated flyer who then goes and breathes on other folks? Sure. But every time someone from around here gets on a flight the dice get rolled again, and when you get up into millions of rolls, things eventually and repeatedly go wrong.
would be interested to hear what factors you consider, and what you base that on
I guess I've been trying to weigh where the pandemic is at both at my origin and destination, so case counts, whether numbers are rising and falling, how burdened the healthcare system is, how many people are vaccinated and what that distribution looks like, what resources people have at hand, how many people are at risk, and how things are likely to go if cases start spiking again. On a more individual level, I've been breaking down the different stages of travel and trying to think about what each one means, especially when it comes to exposing other people.
I also just kind of want to see how things play out for a bit, since there's sort of a race between vaccination, variant spread, seasonal change, and loosening (or tightening) restrictions right now. We should also have better data on post-vaccination transmission soon since a bunch of studies are in process. I'm looking forward to seeing the results.
And just to make sure: I'm not trying to judge anyone for going to see their mom (the hypothetical Tulum partiers, maybe.) I just hope people (again, in general!) are thinking about things on a network level and not just an individual one.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 3:39 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Sure, and that's well and good, but every time something gets announced for incentivizing people to get vaccinated and then it has to be walked back or tightened up, that causes harm to "getting people to listen the next time". It doesn't matter *why* things need to be walked back.
I have encountered multiple people in real life and many online saying they aren’t going to get vaccinated because “it doesn’t stop you from spreading the virus” (and they aren’t worried about getting the virus, themselves). I’ll refrain from blaming this on anybody specific but the messaging as people have actually heard it has erred far away from “incentivizing getting the vaccine.”
posted by atoxyl at 3:41 PM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
I have encountered multiple people in real life and many online saying they aren’t going to get vaccinated because “it doesn’t stop you from spreading the virus” (and they aren’t worried about getting the virus, themselves). I’ll refrain from blaming this on anybody specific but the messaging as people have actually heard it has erred far away from “incentivizing getting the vaccine.”
posted by atoxyl at 3:41 PM on April 27, 2021 [9 favorites]
Up here in Ontario, we are currently in lockdown number 3. Our ICUs are overburdened enough where we are farming out the very sick from Toronto to other hospitals in the province, our premier just rejected paid sick days for those who don't have the privilege of working from home, we aren't able to get enough vaccines into arms in a timely fashion (we are the only country I know of going four months between first and second doses) due to supply, and I am just tired as a healthcare worker. I wish I could travel, believe me.
posted by Kitteh at 4:03 PM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 4:03 PM on April 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
I know different public health issues require different interventions, but having some experience with “harm reduction” - which is part of the field of public health - it’s weird to me how bad a lot of messaging has been when it comes to understanding what people want to do and how they perceive the risks of doing it.
posted by atoxyl at 4:12 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 4:12 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Looking forward to feeling like I could go party in Tulum...
Looks like a pretty nice beach
posted by Windopaene at 5:39 PM on April 27, 2021
Looks like a pretty nice beach
posted by Windopaene at 5:39 PM on April 27, 2021
Tulum partiers
I live on a Caribbean island, and although the pandemic has been bad, I think it would have been much worse if it wasn’t a place where so much is done outside. Neither governments nor the population have taken sufficient measures overall, from masking to restrictions to testing to vaccination, and medical resources are very limited. There is a high incidence of comorbidities, and there have been a lot of deaths for the population, but it could have been much worse. I really hope vaccination rates in North America are good as the tourism market picks up because they are not good here and there is a high level of vaccine skepticism.
posted by snofoam at 5:58 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
I live on a Caribbean island, and although the pandemic has been bad, I think it would have been much worse if it wasn’t a place where so much is done outside. Neither governments nor the population have taken sufficient measures overall, from masking to restrictions to testing to vaccination, and medical resources are very limited. There is a high incidence of comorbidities, and there have been a lot of deaths for the population, but it could have been much worse. I really hope vaccination rates in North America are good as the tourism market picks up because they are not good here and there is a high level of vaccine skepticism.
posted by snofoam at 5:58 PM on April 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
There's a culture of dangerous optimism around vaccines that I've seen from Americans online that I think is linked to the CDC's earned lack of credibility on Covid safety protocols.
The CDC has given out bad advice a bunch of times, from suggesting early on that masks were ineffective and that testing was only required for people who had recently been overseas, to denying aerosol transmission was a major factor in transmission for months, to promoting school reopening well before it was reasonable or safe based on a single poorly constructed study, and suggesting shortening quarantine periods to 10 days based entirely on expedience and not the virus itself.
The CDC having limited credibility is now a problem because they have to push the very unpopular but necessary messaging that vaccines aren't a silver bullet.
Real world studies are currently showing ~90% effectiveness for vaccines in preventing symptomatic infection and somewhat lower effectiveness in preventing asymptomatic transmission.
As currently advised by the CDC, a ~90% effective vaccine means still needing to mask up indoors and avoid some high risk activities until case numbers fall significantly. It means leisure travel should probably still be limited to low risk road trips.
I can't blame anyone for wanting to believe that vaccines are a get out of jail ticket after a year plus of a painfully circumscribed life.
Suggesting that the CDC should be letting vaccinated people go hog wild and fly to Disneyworld or Cancun is just a bad idea though both because it isn't reasonable until case rates fall further and it will erode the remaining trust people have in the CDC.
posted by zymil at 6:10 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
The CDC has given out bad advice a bunch of times, from suggesting early on that masks were ineffective and that testing was only required for people who had recently been overseas, to denying aerosol transmission was a major factor in transmission for months, to promoting school reopening well before it was reasonable or safe based on a single poorly constructed study, and suggesting shortening quarantine periods to 10 days based entirely on expedience and not the virus itself.
The CDC having limited credibility is now a problem because they have to push the very unpopular but necessary messaging that vaccines aren't a silver bullet.
Real world studies are currently showing ~90% effectiveness for vaccines in preventing symptomatic infection and somewhat lower effectiveness in preventing asymptomatic transmission.
As currently advised by the CDC, a ~90% effective vaccine means still needing to mask up indoors and avoid some high risk activities until case numbers fall significantly. It means leisure travel should probably still be limited to low risk road trips.
I can't blame anyone for wanting to believe that vaccines are a get out of jail ticket after a year plus of a painfully circumscribed life.
Suggesting that the CDC should be letting vaccinated people go hog wild and fly to Disneyworld or Cancun is just a bad idea though both because it isn't reasonable until case rates fall further and it will erode the remaining trust people have in the CDC.
posted by zymil at 6:10 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Real world studies are currently showing ~90% effectiveness for vaccines in preventing symptomatic infection and somewhat lower effectiveness in preventing asymptomatic transmission.
They're showing a higher than 90% effectiveness for preventing symptomatic infection and even a very high rate (I've seen studies over 90% for all infections) of preventing asymptomatic infections. Every study that comes out (and they are released pretty regularly) shows dramatic decreases in infection above and beyond our hopes for the mRNA vaccines, and pretty damn good ones for the others.
This reduction in risk is multiplied by the small chance of getting exposed to the virus at all (which, even when the pandemic is bad, is still quite small for most people), and then an additional reduction in risk that comes from you being masked, and your seatmates being masked, which is generally the case on airplanes most of the time (and you can choose to not remove your mask at all if you want to be extra careful!). This all equates to a vanishingly small chance that a vaccinated person is going to spread COVID to others on an airplane.
We are at the point at which all adult Americans can get vaccinated, if they want to. If you are reaching for the example of an undocumented immigrant or rare foreign national on the plane who can't get vaccinated, it seems to me like you're stretching for excuses to make people feel guilty about a pretty damn safe activity. At what point are people allowed to stop agonizing over vanishingly unlikely risks for every person they might encounter, when they've done the #1 thing that makes them far less dangerous to everyone, which is getting vaccinated? Take the rate of infection in your area into account before flying, wear a mask, but for gods sakes if you're vaccinated you have done your part to stop this pandemic and you can get on the plane to Disney World if you want to go.
posted by ch1x0r at 7:20 PM on April 27, 2021 [19 favorites]
They're showing a higher than 90% effectiveness for preventing symptomatic infection and even a very high rate (I've seen studies over 90% for all infections) of preventing asymptomatic infections. Every study that comes out (and they are released pretty regularly) shows dramatic decreases in infection above and beyond our hopes for the mRNA vaccines, and pretty damn good ones for the others.
This reduction in risk is multiplied by the small chance of getting exposed to the virus at all (which, even when the pandemic is bad, is still quite small for most people), and then an additional reduction in risk that comes from you being masked, and your seatmates being masked, which is generally the case on airplanes most of the time (and you can choose to not remove your mask at all if you want to be extra careful!). This all equates to a vanishingly small chance that a vaccinated person is going to spread COVID to others on an airplane.
We are at the point at which all adult Americans can get vaccinated, if they want to. If you are reaching for the example of an undocumented immigrant or rare foreign national on the plane who can't get vaccinated, it seems to me like you're stretching for excuses to make people feel guilty about a pretty damn safe activity. At what point are people allowed to stop agonizing over vanishingly unlikely risks for every person they might encounter, when they've done the #1 thing that makes them far less dangerous to everyone, which is getting vaccinated? Take the rate of infection in your area into account before flying, wear a mask, but for gods sakes if you're vaccinated you have done your part to stop this pandemic and you can get on the plane to Disney World if you want to go.
posted by ch1x0r at 7:20 PM on April 27, 2021 [19 favorites]
If there's a culture of dangerous vaccine optimism in America, then it's definitely countered by the vaccine despondence - as evidenced several times in this thread - on Metafilter.
posted by sagc at 7:24 PM on April 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
posted by sagc at 7:24 PM on April 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
If there's a culture of dangerous vaccine optimism in America, then it's definitely countered by the vaccine despondence
Ah, but that's the "fun" part: you can have dangerous vaccine optimism in some groups co-existent with complete covid denialism in some other groups, and vaccine despondency in yet other groups; and rather than canceling each other, they can all simultaneously lead to people not keeping up with masking and hand-washing and physical distancing measures, leading to a sort of positive interference exacerbating negative public health outcomes! And you need almost opposite public health messaging for the different groups; but it's hard to ensure that targetted public health messaging reaches exactly the intended audience, yet people tend to get upset and distrustful if different messaging goes out to different groups.
Hopefully we at least come out of this with a better appreciation for how complex, difficult, and important a job public health is. And also an understanding that politicians not taking messaging or policy recommendations from public health experts or changing the messaging to serve their own political goals is really counterproductive. (Likelihood that any of those lessons will actually be learned? :/)
posted by eviemath at 10:29 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Ah, but that's the "fun" part: you can have dangerous vaccine optimism in some groups co-existent with complete covid denialism in some other groups, and vaccine despondency in yet other groups; and rather than canceling each other, they can all simultaneously lead to people not keeping up with masking and hand-washing and physical distancing measures, leading to a sort of positive interference exacerbating negative public health outcomes! And you need almost opposite public health messaging for the different groups; but it's hard to ensure that targetted public health messaging reaches exactly the intended audience, yet people tend to get upset and distrustful if different messaging goes out to different groups.
Hopefully we at least come out of this with a better appreciation for how complex, difficult, and important a job public health is. And also an understanding that politicians not taking messaging or policy recommendations from public health experts or changing the messaging to serve their own political goals is really counterproductive. (Likelihood that any of those lessons will actually be learned? :/)
posted by eviemath at 10:29 PM on April 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
I am not overly concerned with your welfare
Well there you are, a bit different than what you had stated. Not that I have occasion to disagree -- I'm not getting on ant planes myself -- but I've recently looked at some scenarios of family tragedy where somebody unvaccinated was going to be either flying or... not.
posted by away for regrooving at 12:24 AM on April 28, 2021
Well there you are, a bit different than what you had stated. Not that I have occasion to disagree -- I'm not getting on ant planes myself -- but I've recently looked at some scenarios of family tragedy where somebody unvaccinated was going to be either flying or... not.
posted by away for regrooving at 12:24 AM on April 28, 2021
if you're vaccinated you have done your part to stop this pandemic and you can get on the plane to Disney World if you want to go.
I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning. Stopping the pandemic means stopping the spread of the virus. Vaccination is a gambit to achieve herd immunity and thereby stop the spread of the virus. Until herd immunity has been achieved, a vaccinated individual can still carry and spread the virus as far as I'm aware.
posted by dmh at 4:34 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning. Stopping the pandemic means stopping the spread of the virus. Vaccination is a gambit to achieve herd immunity and thereby stop the spread of the virus. Until herd immunity has been achieved, a vaccinated individual can still carry and spread the virus as far as I'm aware.
posted by dmh at 4:34 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
> a vaccinated individual can still carry and spread the virus as far as I'm aware.
This is true only in the most literal sense of the words you are using, tantamount to saying "gravity is just a theory".
posted by MiraK at 4:47 AM on April 28, 2021 [6 favorites]
This is true only in the most literal sense of the words you are using, tantamount to saying "gravity is just a theory".
posted by MiraK at 4:47 AM on April 28, 2021 [6 favorites]
Honestly, this is a new level of American exceptionalism I didn't expect, but I should have. So yay for everyone who can go back to life as it was pre-pandemic I guess?
(If you want to have a go at me, great. I'm glad you will be snarky at someone who wants the same level of safety for everyone not in the US. Meanwhile, I will continue to field questions at my job as to why we can't vaccine people until we get more doses.)
posted by Kitteh at 4:58 AM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
(If you want to have a go at me, great. I'm glad you will be snarky at someone who wants the same level of safety for everyone not in the US. Meanwhile, I will continue to field questions at my job as to why we can't vaccine people until we get more doses.)
posted by Kitteh at 4:58 AM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning. Stopping the pandemic means stopping the spread of the virus.
Let’s say I have a 10 in 100 chance of catching and spreading the virus under normal circumstances. The vaccine cuts that to 2 in 100. If everyone else has had the opportunity to get a vaccine, their chances of catching it from me specifically are vanishingly small since I have only a 2 in 100 chance of spreading it and of that they have a 1 in 100 chance of catching it from me.
My wife and I rebooked a vacation in Hawaii that we canceled last year. We made sure to do it after we were fully vaccinated and after vaccines were open to everyone. We’re still following all masking regulations and doing to mandatory test before we fly. Our risk assessment is not everyone’s risk assessment and that’s fine, but now that everyone who wants the vaccine can generally get one I’m a little less concerned over the willfully unvaxxed. Even the 2 in 100 chance of me giving it to someone wholly unvaccinated is extremely small. California as a whole has an extremely high vaccination rate as it is. Hawaii is doing well too with overall low case rates. That gets better every day. I think I’d be somewhat more hesitant to go places with higher infection and positivity rates or to countries where people haven’t had the opportunity to get vaccinated.
At some point everyone needs to determine when it’s ok to leave the house. People resistant to the vaccines make the odds of achieving full hurd immunity low. There’s not going to be a point where someone says the pandemic is over and it’s safe to leave your house. Everyone’s going to have to make a determination there and I’ve made mine. I’ve done what I can in that regard.
posted by mikesch at 5:00 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
Let’s say I have a 10 in 100 chance of catching and spreading the virus under normal circumstances. The vaccine cuts that to 2 in 100. If everyone else has had the opportunity to get a vaccine, their chances of catching it from me specifically are vanishingly small since I have only a 2 in 100 chance of spreading it and of that they have a 1 in 100 chance of catching it from me.
My wife and I rebooked a vacation in Hawaii that we canceled last year. We made sure to do it after we were fully vaccinated and after vaccines were open to everyone. We’re still following all masking regulations and doing to mandatory test before we fly. Our risk assessment is not everyone’s risk assessment and that’s fine, but now that everyone who wants the vaccine can generally get one I’m a little less concerned over the willfully unvaxxed. Even the 2 in 100 chance of me giving it to someone wholly unvaccinated is extremely small. California as a whole has an extremely high vaccination rate as it is. Hawaii is doing well too with overall low case rates. That gets better every day. I think I’d be somewhat more hesitant to go places with higher infection and positivity rates or to countries where people haven’t had the opportunity to get vaccinated.
At some point everyone needs to determine when it’s ok to leave the house. People resistant to the vaccines make the odds of achieving full hurd immunity low. There’s not going to be a point where someone says the pandemic is over and it’s safe to leave your house. Everyone’s going to have to make a determination there and I’ve made mine. I’ve done what I can in that regard.
posted by mikesch at 5:00 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
Y'all, I'm tired and I apologize for my tone. I'm just tired and frustrated. My partner is on eight different wait lists for his first AZ jab like everyone in his age group. My in-laws are 75+ and they can't get their first shots yet because the goddamn online booking system is a shambles for elderly people.
posted by Kitteh at 5:08 AM on April 28, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 5:08 AM on April 28, 2021 [8 favorites]
This is true only in the most literal sense of the words you are using, tantamount to saying "gravity is just a theory".
Both the US CDC and the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control acknowledge transmission by vaccinated individuals as a risk factor of some unknown but potentially significant magnitude, and that consideration seems warranted if we look at Chile, which has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, but nevertheless had to re-impose lockdown last month.
posted by dmh at 5:16 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
Both the US CDC and the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control acknowledge transmission by vaccinated individuals as a risk factor of some unknown but potentially significant magnitude, and that consideration seems warranted if we look at Chile, which has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, but nevertheless had to re-impose lockdown last month.
posted by dmh at 5:16 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
Kitteh: I'm just tired and frustrated.
You're not alone. My partner can probably be vaccinated next month; I expect that I'll have to wait another month after that, at least. It's all so slow and inefficient. It's driving me nuts. Should't we be able to do a better job of this?
I'm happy for US Americans that they can now mostly get vaccinated if they so choose. That's great, really it is. I wish it were more universally true. And I appreciate those of you who demonstrate that they're mindful of the fact that it isn't.
We all need a (socially distant and masked for now) hug.
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:26 AM on April 28, 2021 [7 favorites]
You're not alone. My partner can probably be vaccinated next month; I expect that I'll have to wait another month after that, at least. It's all so slow and inefficient. It's driving me nuts. Should't we be able to do a better job of this?
I'm happy for US Americans that they can now mostly get vaccinated if they so choose. That's great, really it is. I wish it were more universally true. And I appreciate those of you who demonstrate that they're mindful of the fact that it isn't.
We all need a (socially distant and masked for now) hug.
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:26 AM on April 28, 2021 [7 favorites]
Even within the US, this
but now that everyone who wants the vaccine can generally get one
is false. As noted by several of us, with supporting links.
posted by eviemath at 6:19 AM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
but now that everyone who wants the vaccine can generally get one
is false. As noted by several of us, with supporting links.
posted by eviemath at 6:19 AM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
I should add that I'm speaking from a European perspective, where for the most part vaccine availability and distribution are not nearly as far along as in the US. Of course mass vaccination reduces all Covid-related risks by an enormous amount, and I am happy for people to start making plans again.
But what may work for the US may not (yet) work in other parts of the world, at least until vaccination rates improve. Since US perspectives are so dominant in media and culture globally, and the situation in the US seems to allow for some measure of normalcy to return to life, I am a little concerned that many people in Europe and elsewhere will prematurely absorb the message that things are "back to normal", when the local situation doesn't actually warrant it (yet).
I suppose I an optimistic overall, but I dread the prospect of Freedom Summer followed by a Vaccine Surge seguing into Forever War.
posted by dmh at 6:47 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
But what may work for the US may not (yet) work in other parts of the world, at least until vaccination rates improve. Since US perspectives are so dominant in media and culture globally, and the situation in the US seems to allow for some measure of normalcy to return to life, I am a little concerned that many people in Europe and elsewhere will prematurely absorb the message that things are "back to normal", when the local situation doesn't actually warrant it (yet).
I suppose I an optimistic overall, but I dread the prospect of Freedom Summer followed by a Vaccine Surge seguing into Forever War.
posted by dmh at 6:47 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
The Covid Vaccine is a Delicious Great Big Slice of Cheese - it's a particularly good slice of cheese in the Swiss cheese model of complex risk and risk reduction, and once sufficient proportions of people are vaccinated, does lower the risk of many activities in important ways that affect how careful people have to be with other measures. But it isn't a panacea, and we still need other cheese slices while the pandemic is still ongoing.
posted by eviemath at 6:52 AM on April 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 6:52 AM on April 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
I have to fly for work. Twice every three weeks I get on a plane with a 100 other people flying for work. Going to work everyone is tested three hours before the flight. Going home the company doesn't want to know (they'd have to pay for your accomodation and food for the quarantine period) so no testing; not even a questionnaire or temperature screening. Between the ventilation and enforced masking the flight doesn't concern me much but having to sit around an airport for four hours is of concern.
Managed to get my first shot last week, hopefully fully vaccinated in a month.
posted by Mitheral at 6:55 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
Managed to get my first shot last week, hopefully fully vaccinated in a month.
posted by Mitheral at 6:55 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
There are innumerable equity and privilege issues here. Who gets on planes? People with money, people with jobs that require travel, and people in emergencies. Who gets vaccines? People with money/special access, people living in countries with science or buying power, and people in emergencies (in this case, people at greatest risk).
I may be stuck without a second dose for months, or I may not. Because of this I can't plan anything at all, all I know is what's happening this minute because a press conference in 8 minutes could change my situation (quite literally! though I don't expect it to). And I have a shitload of privilege! I'm just in a place where we can't manufacture our own vaccines, and we are at others' mercy. Do you really want us flying around? (Rhetorical question - but it's reality.)
posted by wellred at 6:57 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
I may be stuck without a second dose for months, or I may not. Because of this I can't plan anything at all, all I know is what's happening this minute because a press conference in 8 minutes could change my situation (quite literally! though I don't expect it to). And I have a shitload of privilege! I'm just in a place where we can't manufacture our own vaccines, and we are at others' mercy. Do you really want us flying around? (Rhetorical question - but it's reality.)
posted by wellred at 6:57 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
One of the difficulties is that humans aren't naturally very good at reasoning about distributed or collective risk. So details like what proportion of the total population are vaccinated may feel less relevant to your personal risk as a person who is vaccinated, but do in fact affect your personal risk levels of engaging in various activities, and even more so affect collective risk. We can end up in prisoner's dilemma type situations where what seems to be the best individual choice (all other factors being equal) leads to a worse collective outcome. Fortunately, unlike the prisoner's dilemma setup, we can communicate with each other and coordinate our actions and choices!
posted by eviemath at 6:59 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 6:59 AM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
One of the other details that this pandemic at least should have taught us is that the world is far more interconnected than most of us really realized. Vaccination rates in other countries affect risk levels in the US, for example.
posted by eviemath at 7:02 AM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 7:02 AM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
There’s not going to be a point where someone says the pandemic is over and it’s safe to leave your house.
That is not remotely true. People have already said it's over and many more will continue to. Eventually someone credible will say it if you're patient.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 7:32 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
That is not remotely true. People have already said it's over and many more will continue to. Eventually someone credible will say it if you're patient.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 7:32 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
The one upshot of vaccine hesitancy in the US is that we're about to have an unbelievable surplus of vaccine doses and nothing to do but export them.
On the one hand, a disproportionate number of the people who have been vaccinated here are the people who were already least at risk. So I'm not comfortable with our simply dusting our hands off and pretending like we're done.
On the other, I hope that we start shipping out surplus doses soon. And then buy more doses and ship those out, too.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 10:32 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
On the one hand, a disproportionate number of the people who have been vaccinated here are the people who were already least at risk. So I'm not comfortable with our simply dusting our hands off and pretending like we're done.
On the other, I hope that we start shipping out surplus doses soon. And then buy more doses and ship those out, too.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 10:32 AM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
I flew on 4 planes in January (a round trip flight with a layover each way) in the US due to a dying family member. I wore a 3M N100 from the second I got out of my car at the airport until I was actually inside the hotel room. No snacks, no drinks, nothing. I am very high risk so there really was no other acceptable alternative.
It was extremely unpleasant, to say the least, 12+ hours straight of an N100 is pretty challenging, especially with reduced lung capacity. BUT, it is doable. You just need to ensure you cover the exhaust port with a surgical mask (I used double-sided tape for mine) so you aren't breathing out unfiltered air.
posted by zug at 10:42 AM on April 28, 2021 [1 favorite]
It was extremely unpleasant, to say the least, 12+ hours straight of an N100 is pretty challenging, especially with reduced lung capacity. BUT, it is doable. You just need to ensure you cover the exhaust port with a surgical mask (I used double-sided tape for mine) so you aren't breathing out unfiltered air.
posted by zug at 10:42 AM on April 28, 2021 [1 favorite]
A (much more scattered, IMO) version of this was posted earlier, but the CDC Safer Activities Infographic is really an excellent visualization of the comparative risks of various activities, and the effect of vaccination and masking on those risks.
It doesn't cover flying specifically, but I feel like this is such a clear and concise guide -- on a topic (that safety is not all-or-nothing and is contingent on a number of factors) that's being so poorly served by public discussion right now -- that I feel compelled to try to share it wherever I can.
posted by bjrubble at 12:06 PM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
It doesn't cover flying specifically, but I feel like this is such a clear and concise guide -- on a topic (that safety is not all-or-nothing and is contingent on a number of factors) that's being so poorly served by public discussion right now -- that I feel compelled to try to share it wherever I can.
posted by bjrubble at 12:06 PM on April 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
One thing that nobody has discussed is, assuming we can’t eliminate COVID, what can we do to ameliorate its worst outcomes? Specifically, I’m thinking of taking preventative Vitamin D or Fluvoxamine if infected. The results I link are preliminary but worth pursuing aggressively, imho.
Effective treatment options would take pressure off vaccine uptake to end the pandemic. I recognize that good science sometimes takes time. Part of the reason the CDC isn’t raising the checkered flag and declaring mission accomplished or giving more definitive guidance is because there are simply too many variables and/or unknowns to give the simple, easily understood “rules” that the general public wants/needs.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 3:11 PM on April 28, 2021
Effective treatment options would take pressure off vaccine uptake to end the pandemic. I recognize that good science sometimes takes time. Part of the reason the CDC isn’t raising the checkered flag and declaring mission accomplished or giving more definitive guidance is because there are simply too many variables and/or unknowns to give the simple, easily understood “rules” that the general public wants/needs.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 3:11 PM on April 28, 2021
Joseph Mercola's name on that Vitamin D paper gives me significant pause though.
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 3:26 PM on April 28, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 3:26 PM on April 28, 2021 [10 favorites]
Vitamin D can prevent respiratory tract infections and reduce their severity; similar Vitamin D effect on COVID-19, from last month's (non-Mercola) meta-analysis of 43 studies:
We assessed the association between vitamin D and risk, severity, and mortality for COVID-19 infection, through a review of 43 observational studies. Among subjects with deficient vitamin D values, risk of COVID-19 infection was higher compared to those with replete values (OR = 1.26; 95 % CI, 1.19-1.34; P < .01). Vitamin D deficiency was also associated with worse severity and higher mortality than in nondeficient patients (OR = 2.6; 95 % CI, 1.84-3.67; P < .01 and OR = 1.22; 95 % CI, 1.04-1.43; P < .01, respectively). Reduced vitamin D values resulted in a higher infection risk, mortality and severity COVID-19 infection. Supplementation may be considered as preventive and therapeutic measure.-- Petrelli, F., Luciani, A., Perego, G., Dognini, G., Colombelli, P. L., & Ghidini, A. (2021). Therapeutic and prognostic role of vitamin D for COVID-19 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 43 observational studies. The Journal of steroid biochemistry and molecular biology, 211, 105883. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2021.105883
posted by Iris Gambol at 5:03 PM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
We assessed the association between vitamin D and risk, severity, and mortality for COVID-19 infection, through a review of 43 observational studies. Among subjects with deficient vitamin D values, risk of COVID-19 infection was higher compared to those with replete values (OR = 1.26; 95 % CI, 1.19-1.34; P < .01). Vitamin D deficiency was also associated with worse severity and higher mortality than in nondeficient patients (OR = 2.6; 95 % CI, 1.84-3.67; P < .01 and OR = 1.22; 95 % CI, 1.04-1.43; P < .01, respectively). Reduced vitamin D values resulted in a higher infection risk, mortality and severity COVID-19 infection. Supplementation may be considered as preventive and therapeutic measure.-- Petrelli, F., Luciani, A., Perego, G., Dognini, G., Colombelli, P. L., & Ghidini, A. (2021). Therapeutic and prognostic role of vitamin D for COVID-19 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 43 observational studies. The Journal of steroid biochemistry and molecular biology, 211, 105883. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2021.105883
posted by Iris Gambol at 5:03 PM on April 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
I would like to hear considerably less of the pernicious idea that everyone who wants a vaccine in the US can get one:
We are *still* hearing from people fighting vaccine bills and getting turned away from appointments. (Propublica Twitter thread)
posted by thatwhichfalls at 6:15 PM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
We are *still* hearing from people fighting vaccine bills and getting turned away from appointments. (Propublica Twitter thread)
posted by thatwhichfalls at 6:15 PM on April 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
There is no "mission accomplished". My 2nd BioNTech jab is tomorrow and the UK has announced it's intention to purchase 60M doses for booster shots in the autumn.
posted by epo at 2:51 AM on April 29, 2021
posted by epo at 2:51 AM on April 29, 2021
RE Vitamin D: Are these sorts of levels that can be obtained with a regular multi-vitamin or it the sort of thing where you need to be taking ten times the recommended daily dose?
posted by Mitheral at 5:31 AM on April 29, 2021
posted by Mitheral at 5:31 AM on April 29, 2021
Don't take more than the recommended dose unless directed by a doctor. It is fat-soluble, so it can build up over time and cause toxicity if you are taking too much. As I understand it with regards to COVID, excess Vitamin D doesn't confer extra protection but Vitamin D deficiency puts you at added risk for severe disease.
I have been taking a multivitamin with 100% RDA of Vitamin D as a preventative. For me, it is a situation where I don't know if the science strongly backs taking a daily supplement, but the risk of doing so is low, so I have decided it is worth it for me.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:31 AM on April 29, 2021 [2 favorites]
I have been taking a multivitamin with 100% RDA of Vitamin D as a preventative. For me, it is a situation where I don't know if the science strongly backs taking a daily supplement, but the risk of doing so is low, so I have decided it is worth it for me.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:31 AM on April 29, 2021 [2 favorites]
I am sensitive to the fact that we don't know about transmission after vaccination, but it's also true that almost all the news in vaccinated populations is encouraging. The story came out yesterday that a fairly small (417 patient) observational study of adults age 65+ found that full mRNA vaccination was 94% protective against hospitalization. Even one dose was 64% effective after two weeks. That's just great, great news since 80% of deaths have been among those age 65 and over. Doubly so because the flu vaccination is known to be less effective in that age group, which is why there's a stronger dose. Could vaccinated seniors be passing on the virus while asymptomatic or only mildly sick? Sure, it's possible. We don't have the data to say that they can't. But if 19 times out of 20 they are not getting sick enough to be hospitalized, how much viral load can they really be shedding? Let alone younger people for whom the vaccine appears to be even more effective, preventing almost all infection, including asymptomatic.
I'm just a general science person, not an epidimiologist, but I've been reading the news pretty closely and it almost seems like there hasn't been anything to come out that indicates a likelihood of post-vaccination transmission. The one thing has been the low efficacy of non-mRNA shots against variants. I do worry about that. I hope we in the US help other countries get to the same level of vaccination as quickly as possible. I hope we have greatly reduced international travel for the time being. But in my impression the risk of getting on a plane is low. The airflow on planes is pretty amazing. Pre-pandemic I was seated next to a person on a 12-hour flight who coughed every minute. It was super gross and I sure I was going to get sick between that and jetleg, but I didn't.
posted by wnissen at 2:02 PM on April 29, 2021 [4 favorites]
I'm just a general science person, not an epidimiologist, but I've been reading the news pretty closely and it almost seems like there hasn't been anything to come out that indicates a likelihood of post-vaccination transmission. The one thing has been the low efficacy of non-mRNA shots against variants. I do worry about that. I hope we in the US help other countries get to the same level of vaccination as quickly as possible. I hope we have greatly reduced international travel for the time being. But in my impression the risk of getting on a plane is low. The airflow on planes is pretty amazing. Pre-pandemic I was seated next to a person on a 12-hour flight who coughed every minute. It was super gross and I sure I was going to get sick between that and jetleg, but I didn't.
posted by wnissen at 2:02 PM on April 29, 2021 [4 favorites]
The airflow on planes is pretty amazing. While the engines are running.
posted by epo at 8:26 AM on April 30, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by epo at 8:26 AM on April 30, 2021 [3 favorites]
There's a culture of dangerous optimism around vaccines that I've seen from Americans online that I think is linked to the CDC's earned lack of credibility on Covid safety protocols.
Sorry but the vaccine pessimism is substantially more dangerous at the moment. 90+ percent effectiveness is really good. There is no plausible intervention that is going to be more effective than getting a 90 percent effective vaccine into, say, 80 percent of people. Yes there is a possibility - probably an inevitability - of mutations reducing effectiveness, but a.) by most data so far that’s quite a ways from “reducing to zero” and b.) that’s the job of science and pharma here, to keep on top of the emerging varieties in case another booster is needed months or years down the line.
posted by atoxyl at 9:24 AM on April 30, 2021 [6 favorites]
Sorry but the vaccine pessimism is substantially more dangerous at the moment. 90+ percent effectiveness is really good. There is no plausible intervention that is going to be more effective than getting a 90 percent effective vaccine into, say, 80 percent of people. Yes there is a possibility - probably an inevitability - of mutations reducing effectiveness, but a.) by most data so far that’s quite a ways from “reducing to zero” and b.) that’s the job of science and pharma here, to keep on top of the emerging varieties in case another booster is needed months or years down the line.
posted by atoxyl at 9:24 AM on April 30, 2021 [6 favorites]
Excessive hedging about the effectiveness of vaccines is essentially the same mistake as the initial warnings about masks. In the case of vaccines the moral hazard - the risk of people throwing all other caution to the wind - is probably more real, but the effectiveness of the vaccines alone is also almost certainly much higher than that of masks (except perhaps if you wear an n95 or better at all times, which is definitely not what most people do).
posted by atoxyl at 9:29 AM on April 30, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 9:29 AM on April 30, 2021 [3 favorites]
I am sensitive to the fact that we don't know about transmission after vaccination
But the word "know" does a lot of work in this sentence. The health officials are playing the same game they played, as atoxyl says, with masks where they use the word in a narrow technical sense while knowing, and counting on, the general audience taking it to mean "know" in a broader colloquial sense.
We don't "know" about transmission after vaccination in the sense that we have not yet collected definitive data proving in a scientifically rigorous manner that transmission is radically lower. But that in no way means that we have no idea how vaccination affects transmission or that the odds are, like, 50/50. Basically everything we know about disease transmission and how other vaccines work tells us that the Pfizer and Moderna shots not only prevent 90% of symptomatic cases but are at least that effective at reducing transmission.
It would be veeeery surprising if that didn't turn out to be the case. So when CDC et al say we don't know about transmission yet they're playing the role of social engineers, as with masking early in the pandemic. They're not lying but they're saying things they know will be taken in a way that doesn't necessarily accurately reflect reality.
posted by Justinian at 1:16 AM on May 1, 2021 [2 favorites]
But the word "know" does a lot of work in this sentence. The health officials are playing the same game they played, as atoxyl says, with masks where they use the word in a narrow technical sense while knowing, and counting on, the general audience taking it to mean "know" in a broader colloquial sense.
We don't "know" about transmission after vaccination in the sense that we have not yet collected definitive data proving in a scientifically rigorous manner that transmission is radically lower. But that in no way means that we have no idea how vaccination affects transmission or that the odds are, like, 50/50. Basically everything we know about disease transmission and how other vaccines work tells us that the Pfizer and Moderna shots not only prevent 90% of symptomatic cases but are at least that effective at reducing transmission.
It would be veeeery surprising if that didn't turn out to be the case. So when CDC et al say we don't know about transmission yet they're playing the role of social engineers, as with masking early in the pandemic. They're not lying but they're saying things they know will be taken in a way that doesn't necessarily accurately reflect reality.
posted by Justinian at 1:16 AM on May 1, 2021 [2 favorites]
To put it another way, if you (or the CDC or WHO) are waiting for something that reduces risk by literally 100% we're going to be here a while.
posted by Justinian at 1:19 AM on May 1, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by Justinian at 1:19 AM on May 1, 2021 [2 favorites]
Nobody here has said that they're waiting for something that reduces risk by literally 100%.
A few people have said that they want to remain cautious for the time being because the majority of people haven't been vaccinated, there are several intense outbreaks right now thanks to extra-infectious variants, and it will be nice to have more concrete data on transmission, even with the understanding that transmission rates are almost certainly drastically reduced after vaccination.
On post-vaccination transmission: preliminary data from Public Health England suggests that people who got sick after receiving a first dose of the Pfizer or AstraZenica vaccine were 40-50% less likely to transmit COVID to a household member, which is promising.
In the US, a college campus-based study on post-vaccine transmission called Prevent COVID U will look at the Moderna vaccine and is currently looking to recruit 12,000 students, if anyone is interested or knows someone who might be.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 11:18 AM on May 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
A few people have said that they want to remain cautious for the time being because the majority of people haven't been vaccinated, there are several intense outbreaks right now thanks to extra-infectious variants, and it will be nice to have more concrete data on transmission, even with the understanding that transmission rates are almost certainly drastically reduced after vaccination.
On post-vaccination transmission: preliminary data from Public Health England suggests that people who got sick after receiving a first dose of the Pfizer or AstraZenica vaccine were 40-50% less likely to transmit COVID to a household member, which is promising.
In the US, a college campus-based study on post-vaccine transmission called Prevent COVID U will look at the Moderna vaccine and is currently looking to recruit 12,000 students, if anyone is interested or knows someone who might be.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 11:18 AM on May 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
Justinian, I think you and I are saying the same thing. We don't know because it hasn't been studied in large samples in the U.S., but almost all the signs point to transmission being drastically reduced. Lots of things could still go wrong, and the rest of the world has barely started to get vaccinated, so I think they're being more cautious for the sake of a broader public health impact.
posted by wnissen at 1:05 PM on May 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by wnissen at 1:05 PM on May 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
« Older Queerantine & Lesbian TikTok | The most miserable wage slave Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by St. Oops at 9:15 PM on April 26, 2021 [8 favorites]