Yet another perspective and article in the P&C. “ What the future of sports in US could look like with COVID-19.” https://www.postandcourier.com/health/c ... caff6.html
I respect the experience you have evidently had in infectious disease control and bone marrow transplant settings. I respect you in general. At the same time, I also believe that the 6 feet distance separation should be a clear rule and should be respected. Actually, even where it is a rule, it seems to be disobeyed very often. And I have read that 8-10 feet separation is what is truly needed for effectiveness. I think in a football game spectator setting, where people are jumping up and down and yelling/chanting loudly and continuously (well, supposedly, though maybe not quite so much at Furman football games), 8-10 feet would be definitely necessary because droplets carrying the contagious virus from people’s mouths and noses travel through the air for farther than just 5-6 feet.Furmanoid wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 9:11 amI kind of wonder if they will stick to the 6 ft thing. I know the standard rule for infectious disease control in icu or bone marrow transplant settings was always 3 ft in my experience (Augusta and Atlanta). Closer than 3ft you wear a mask. That’s for stuff just as contagious as rona though not as deadly for most of us. But for a bmt patient everything is deadly hence the need for a rule. Then the distance in public morphed to 6 ft during this crisis then 6 plus a mask. It seems like public health doctors overruling doctors who work in hospitals. But anyway there is clearly a dispersion difference between indoors and outdoors so maybe they’ll use a more realistic spacing especially if masks are being worn and the sick stay home. They could also have maybe one really spread out section for the old and compromised. I don’t see the point in spreading out the student section since they will immediately unspread after the game.
Yes to masks, and to logo masks.
I might be willing to wear a mask like this one...cavedweller2 wrote: ↑Sat May 09, 2020 10:41 amIf I am required to wear a mask to an outdoor football game I won’t go.
Suppose they are NOT required: Will you go (or stay) if NO ONE ELSE is wearing a mask?cavedweller2 wrote: ↑Sat May 09, 2020 10:41 amIf I am required to wear a mask to an outdoor football game I won’t go.
Same question to YOU: what will YOU do if NO ONE ELSE is wearing a non-required mask ... leave? ...stay?apaladin wrote: ↑Sat May 09, 2020 10:53 amEveryone seems to be expecting that many at the games will be infected. If you’re sick or have a fever or any symptoms stay home. Chances of getting infected in an open air stadium are very minimal. I think I am with Cavedweller, if it is so bad a mask is required I will stay home.
If masks are not required, I won’t go.cavedweller2 wrote: ↑Sat May 09, 2020 10:41 amIf I am required to wear a mask to an outdoor football game I won’t go.
You’re assuming that anyone that sneezes or coughs is infected. To answer the question if masks are not required I would go. I respect the rights of others to go or stay home as they choose.FU3 wrote: ↑Sat May 09, 2020 5:28 pmIf someone who sneezes or coughs at a game and they are not wearing a mask the droplets are going to spread a whole lot farther than 6 feet. This virus doesn’t give a rats ass what your opinion is whether you or someone you know will be infected by it. Because it is novel there is much that is unknown but it is factual that it is highly contagious. While the young have generally been spared there have been several deaths of young children the past week and dozens more hospitalized after testing for the disease and developing a rare infection. I believe Furman will require masks if there is a season because it is the rationale thing to do and a small ask for reducing the risk of sickening others.