Mt Whitney Zone Forums General Discussion Face Masks?!

Latest from the Inyo County Health Officer:

https://www.sierrawave.net/inyo-public-h...s-being-resded/

After all this time.

So, how to hike wearing a face mask?

I'd rather hike with a mask than to have the trails closed and not be able to hike at all.

The order says you don't need a mask while hiking, running, or exercising if you can maintain > 6 ft distance from people you don't live with.

It seems to me to be a common-sense "okay if we start to open up y'all need to be safe when in close contact with others" order.

Mono County is about the same:

https://webapps.mono.ca.gov/COVIDDocs//P...lic%20Order.pdf

"Facial coverings are not required under the following circumstances: •A person is outdoors and unlikely to interact with people who are not members of their household unit,except at a distance of more than six feet.Though it is prudent and courteous to wear a face covering when passing others on trails, multi-use paths or sidewalks.
•A person is performing work in a room or location that is physically separated from other persons by walls or other impermeable barriers.
•When in the sole company of members of their own household unit.
•A person is the sole occupant of a vehicle or is sharing a vehicle only with members of his or her own household unit.In addition, please note:
•Persons working outdoors shall wear face coverings when within six feet of any other person,or in any situation where the individual could contaminate a surface or object with which other persons come in contact. In all other circumstances, persons working outdoors are strongly encouraged to wear face coverings.
•Retail and other businesses open to the public shall require customers or patrons to wear face coverings. All staff interacting with the public are required to wear face coverings.
•Employees at restaurants and other establishments providing for on-site food consumption (upon authorization to open) shall wear face coverings. Patrons at those establishments are strongly encouraged to wear face coverings while not eating or drinking.Distance.
Wash. Stay Home and #CoverUpMono!"

Dale B. Dalrymple

A study of 7,000 people who were positive for coronavirus was done to trace how they became infected. While in close proximity outdoors, two became infected. All others were infected indoors by the typical known sources. That's two out of 7,000. Also, think of what happens to a lungful of exhaled smoke outdoors and how quickly it dissipates with the breeze to get an idea of how a contagious person's breath would be dispersed. As a retired RN, I'm a helluva lot more worried about being infected by careless people inside Vons and Target than by passing somebody on the trail unless that hiker/runner is coughing or panting in my face.

Not to mention that a person with an active covid infection is less likely to feel like hiking than making a quick trip to the store.

You're forgetting that many people can have the virus and not show any symptoms, but still can infect other people.

So even if you're feeling fine, you may still be able to spread the virus unknowingly.

As for masks on the trail:

I've been pretty picky as to where I hike and bike.

I generally take a long bike ride in the mornings so I can avoid most people on the trails/sidewalks.

As for hiking, I try to pick trails that are less traveled. I'm getting a little sick of Mt Diablo though...

In both cases, I have a buff handy in case I end up encountering a lot of people.

I’m NOT forgetting about asymptomatic or presymptomatic carriers. But they could be encountered either on the trail OR in a store. The point I am trying to make here is that symptomatic people are not likely going to be out there hiking. This cuts down on the number of people that can possibly make you sick. Because of this (as well as being out in the open vs indoors and there being fewer people to begin with), you are a whole lot less likely to get sick on a trail than in a store.

As for best times to hike in order to socially distance, I find that evenings work better than mornings. Most hikers actually hike early in the morning, and want to be off the trail the second the sun looks a little low. And most hikers don’t want to be out during dusk or a little after. It is during THESE times that you will most likely have the trail to yourself.

Can some one help me out here? Is the objective of social distancing to help suppress the spread in lieu of an effective vaccine?

What happens if - like HIV - a CV vaccine never actually becomes available? Now we're faced with a classic Hobson's choice.

To me that suggests the eons old traditional herd immunity strategy then becomes the default modus operandi.

Which also means that those who fear becoming effected can continue to self quarantine and/or wear protective gear while the rest of society goes back to living.

Hobbes, not sure what your question is. I think the "what if" part is unlikely -- that no vaccine can be made available.

I suppose in that situation, that most of us would then likely contract the virus, and most would survive, and the surviving herd would then continue on. On the other hand, if those who have contracted it can get a recurrence of the sickness, we could be in for a difficult future.

I'm pretty hopeful that a vaccine will be available, and also that once contracted (or vaccinated), that we can be free of COVID-19 for a decent period of time ( a year or two? ). It would be great if we could be free forever, but that's probably too much to hope for.

Yes, we are very much counting on a vaccine to immunize as many people as possible in order to return society to (post-pandemic) normal, and social distancing, masks, and hand hygiene are the temporary bridge to get us there. Herd immunity is the Darwinian method to achieve the same goal. Herd immunity means that close to 95% of the population would have been infected. To achieve herd immunity with this virus, I've read experts predictions of one to two million American deaths. How many rational people would be okay with that? And the icing on that cake is that is that Dr. Fauci says this virus is almost the most contagious microbe he's ever seen, which is scary. To compare, HIV AIDS is only spread by direct contact with body fluids.

I just read an article by a NY Times editor who's a previously healthy 33 year old runner now about a month into COVID illness and still can't walk more than a few blocks without stopping. She was never sick enough to be hospitalized. She says that the day before she became symptomatic, she ran 3 miles, walked 10, and was running up the stairs in her apartment building with her laundry. The next day, she felt like she had hot tar buried deep in her chest and couldn't take a full breath unless she was on all fours. Then I read about the idiots in Wisconsin and other states crowding bars and restaurants celebrating their "freedom" and I just shake my head. They're no different from the pastors and churchgoers who are "bathed in the blood of Jesus," which hasn't protected some of them from dying anyway. Listen to the scientists and doctors, people. (End of rant.)

Edit: Last figures I read from a physician involved in studying COVID: About 35% of infected people will show no symptoms while another 25% will have such mild illness that they will not feel the need to seek medical care. That's 60% of infected people who don't realize they're capable of spreading the virus. And it's not practical (or even possible) to test every single person.

Herd immunity regarding Covid 19 is around 70%. The measles was around 95% but that had a R of 15 (one person infected 15 others). So measles was about 5-7 times more infectious.

A respected biologist had this reply to a comment on hiking (whether hiking behind someone else into the wind is risky).



Of course, this was not wearing a face covering. If you're uncomfortable drafting someone then pull up a bandana that's hanging around your neck until the wind blows differently or you take point.

Looking back, what should have been done was to quarantine all international arrivals (both people and cargo) early on, starting from January. The quarantine wouldn't end until they either test negative or until enough time has passed that they are no longer infectious. Aside from a few airline, shipping, and cruise industry bailouts, life would have gone on as usual. But of course, hindsight is 20/20.

Looking forward, the only way out of this without a cure or vaccine would be free, widespread, and rapid testing. Anything else would result in mass deaths, economic collapse, or both. If you tested negative recently, you'd be free to enter crowded bars, restaurants, stadiums, public transit, and any other densely populated area without a mask. If not, you'd only be allowed into grocery stores and would have to wear a mask at all times.

Economic collapse already happened. Approaching 40 million unemployed Americans. How many more people‘s lives have to be ruined - including children’s - until we reopen the Country.

The big caveat about testing, which the president didn't seem to understand when speaking about the VP's press secretary testing positive, is that you could be unknowingly infected on day 1, become contagious to others while asymptomatic on days 3 & 4 but test negative, then test positive on day 5 while possibly still feeling well. (Or not.) A test is a value in time which can change in 24 hours.

Bruce, nice to know someone else pays attention to the relevance of R0 and herd immunity levels. You're right about measles having a higher number than SARS-CoV-2.

I hate to be the one to break the news, but there will never be a vaccine. I know, never say never, but as we know there has never been a cold vaccine. The so called annual flu vaccine is nothing more than a guess at seasonal variance.

So if there isnt a vaccine, what then is the purpose of avoiding the inevitable? Isnt it better to get sick during the longer, sunnier, warmer days of summer with plenty of fresh air, good food and exercise?

All social distancing does - if effective, which of course its not - is to push the infection curve out to fall/winter.

Of course, lets not mention everyone who is normally social has already been sick. Its why there isnt a "second wave". It also explains why the fatals are the lagging edge socially restricted and co morbids.

Lastly, how is it that ostensibly those with a high risk tolerance are so fearful of a disease that is fatal to an avg age of 80. Or that nearly one half are from nursing homes, are hugely obese and/or from NY?

From my perspective its really trippy to see so called independent outdoors people so cowed and fearful. Makes one wonder if they actually hike or climb at all.

In my peer/assoc group - Calif middle age high net worth - the majority are back to handshakes, while the women are hugging.

This thing is over; all that is left is to inform the frightened to come out and play.

Hobbes, I hate to be the one to break the news, but every sentence in your post is either factually incorrect or absurd reasoning. And too much to delve into. Again, ignoring science...

COVID-19 is just like climate change and evolution. Some of us go with the science. Some of us ignore the science and believe whatever we want to believe. The economy is screwed because tens of thousands of people are dying, not because your governor (or mine) is a malevolent idiot. The solution is better testing and contact tracing. Blindly opening up the economy and scoffing at masks and social distancing will kill a lot of people, many of whom aren’t black, brown, diabetic, or over 65. Some of those people will be your friends, neighbors, and relatives, if not you. Some of those people will be MY friends, neighbors, and relatives, if not ME. It will make the funeral directors rich, but it won’t save the economy.

I haven’t been to the doctor, ophthalmologist, dentist, or barber. I’ve been to Walmart and Home Depot once each, and my favorite Indian restaurant (for takeout) twice. But I’m not living in fear, cowering at home. I haven’t missed a day of horseback riding in six months, and I’ve tagged 67 summits so far in 2020. Lots of skiing and 11 more peaks on the Tahoe Ogul List. I plan to stay away from other people as much as I can, and wear a mask when I can’t. If everybody else does the same, we should get through this.

Ok, let's follow the science.

First, let's start with masks. From the Annals of Internal Medicine: "In conclusion, both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS–CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface."

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

Now, let's move on to the mortality rate. I agree with other posters that COVID-19 appears to be highly transmissible, but it also appears to be much less deadly than the "modeling" predicted (So I guess in a way your COVID-19/climate change comparison was valid). Several antibody studies have recently been completed and the results suggest the infection rate has been much higher (to be expected given the R factor) and the true mortality rate much lower.

Link to the Stanford antibody study:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v2

Link to report regarding the joint USC and LA County Health Department antibody study results:

https://news.usc.edu/168987/antibody-testing-results-covid-19-infections-los-angeles-county/

And link to LA County's formal press release on the antibody study:

http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/media/mediapubhpdetail.cfm?prid=2328

Furthermore, the science indicates that nearly everyone who recovers from COVID-19 develops antibodies:

https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/05/07...rus-antibodies/

And with respect to "at risk" populations, 40% of all COVID-19 deaths in the US have been in nursing home and assisted living populations:

https://freopp.org/the-covid-19-nursing-home-crisis-by-the-numbers-3a47433c3f70


In fact, it appears the actions of the governors in our nation's "hot zones" (California, New York, New Jersey) have actually inflated the COVID-19 death toll by seeding the virus among our most vulnerable:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/us/nursing-homes-coronavirus.html


A common sense and science-based response to a virus that we know is highly contagious yet not particularly dangerous to young/healthy populations would be to isolate those most vulnerable (i.e. nursing home, assisted living, and 80+ year old individuals) and allow the rest of us to go about our lives and develop herd immunity to this new illness.

But of course, we are in an election season so I'm not holding my breath.

This was a study done with 4 participants who coughed into a petri dish from 8 inches away! No way a surgical or cloth mask will protect you from a cough from such close range!

Read the comments following this crap study.

Cloth masks are estimated by one respected biologist to block 50 to 70 percent of viral particles.

Masks work. The four countries with this virus most under control: South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan, are also the countries with the most widespread mask use.

"One respected biologist", eh? And you are aware that correlation does not equal causation with respect to the Asian countries you referenced, right?

Here is a meta-analysis of numerous studies, most of which included surgical face masks (not the homemade masks and buffs most are currently using) and it concluded a "that wearing facemasks can be very slightly protective against primary infection from casual community contact."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1

And here is a large randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of cloth face masks that cautioned against the use of cloth masks and suggested they may actually increase the incidence of illness:

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006...pe2=tf_ipsecsha

Here is the WHO in January stating there was no evidence that medical grade masks protect non-sick persons in a community setting:

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/documents/advice-on-the-use-of-masks-2019-ncov.pdf

And here is the UK's deputy chief medical officer recently warning that mask use by the general public may be doing more harm than good:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/healt...s-a9396811.html

The masks requirements, especially the ones allowing for use of homemade cloth masks, are a "feel good" measure but not one based in science. But if it makes you feel safer, then by all means continue using one. I was merely responding to an earlier comment that the "science was settled."

Cheers.

I was just responding to that bullshit study you posted. You probably missed the part where it was subjected to coughs from 8" away? More likely you didn't even read it.

Cloths masks offer some protection, not 100%. But some protection is better than none. For a study to conclude simply that they are "ineffective", because they couldn't withstand such a viral load from close range is ridiculous.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Events were much less deadly than the models predicted because the models warned us to change our behavior by stay-at-home. No reputable sources claimed the death rate to be the ratio of deaths to confirmed cases. It looks like your pursuit of science has enabled you to correct your false assumption.


The article also notes that there is still no evidence for disease resistance due to these antibodies or how long any such resistance might last.

Dale B Dalrymple

Well this horse will drink the water from what the rest of the world drinks, thank you.

If cloth masks were ineffective, then why are they being required nearly everywhere? You can cling to a few articles or studies which support your viewpoint, but if they are being used virtually everywhere in the world, then my hunch is that they are on to something.

The WHO only says they don't recommended medical grade masks, because they should be reserved for healthcare and medical doctors and nurses. They make no mention of cloth masks. The CDC does however.

You're asking the right questions. Why are cloth masks being required nearly everywhere now when we know they are ineffective?

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspect...ased-sound-data

Just two comments on the above link: 1. In today's world 6-week old articles aren't state-of-the-art.
2. The article was posted on Apr 1.

Face masks are used to protect others from us, when in close proximity, not us from them. Even breathing out produces vapor carrying potential viruses. The rest of our exterior, hands, hair, clothing, etc., might also be contaminated. The following article is advice to doctors:

https://www.theapprenticedoctor.com/the-protective-clothing-surgeons-wear/

So, is anyone willing to prep and dress like a surgeon? Probably not.

What is the problem? Only the truly paranoid have anything to worry about, and that fear is what allows most of us to be easily controlled by the government.

The most hazardous place in the world is the local grocery store, not the Mt Whitney trail or any other trail.

Hike on, and don't get freaked out.

I totally agree with Bob.

I am 70, and the wearing of a face mask at 10,000 or higher restricts my air intact. Even at the store when wearing a mask, I can feel the warm air in the mask and then re-inhaling it again.

paul

Paul

The state and county mask rules generally don't require you to wear your mask when outdoors and well separated from other people, but when you get to the top of Whitney, if there are four jerks huddled together in the hut, coughing and pressure breathing without masks on, don't join them. OK?

Dale B. Dalrymple

Thanks Dale!!!!!

I've climbed Whitney over 24 times and climbing it again doesn't interest me at all. And you are so right about the four jerks.

Good to hear from you.

paul

Thanks for posting the various links; information that people can assess to formulate an educated decision. Those that require critical thinking in decision making, can make a very good argument that wearing masks outdoors in open, sparse areas, offer very little additional protection for transmitting or catching CoVid-19. San Diego medical examiner actually said something to the effect of we are still collecting data, but it's better than nothing. Health authorities creating edicts under emergencies should have to at least provide some sort of data supporting those emergencies orders that impact millions. I have yet to see any scientific-based data supporting the additional benefit of wearing a mask outdoors. It's better than nothing is not supportive for an emergency order. If others are so concerned about people not wearing masks outdoors, Stay Safe and Stay Home!

This right here demonstrates why this subject, like so many other political topics, is in essence just another religious tract.

How is it that the most accomplished runner/hiker/climber on this board also chooses to believe his particular 'science' supports masks and social distancing?

A simple observational study conducted in any middle-upper middle class neighborhood in SoCal will readily demonstrate that men are not abiding by social conditioning mandates. Why is that? Because they have money, power & status, or that their intellect - which enabled higher achievement - also avails themselves to independent inquiry?

From an objective perspective, it really is quite fascinating. The realist in me appreciates & admires the naked power grabs being made under these times of duress. That's how the game is played; the will to power.

Still, I tend to have a soft spot for those respective dead letters ie the DoI and Constitution. Somewhere lost in the fog of time is the assertion that men are born free with certain natural, inalienable rights, that they create limited government under strict stipulations only to further advance their wants & desires to protect against force & fraud.

Anyway, all this discussion is rather moot. Soon enough, the country will be fully opened, and the great hangover, remonstrations and assessing of blame will commence. I can fairly predict that in relatively short-order, all 57 states will be holding constitutional conventions to amend their respective governing documents to ensure this shameful episode of the most base and grossest violations of basic human rights is never repeated again.

Hobbes: Um, what?

Utter nonsense, Hobbes, utter nonsense.

Not necessarily nonsense, more like poetry.

Naked power grabs can be an awesome thing to behold.

Awesome doesn't always mean good.

See you all on the trails!

Utter nonsense...poetry...power grabs...

Oh, I get it--Jabberwocky.

I was hoping to meet some of you on the trails, and still I am, I guess. I have permits in place for some walkabouts between 6/27 and 7/5, which I suspect is going to make June seem like forever the way that March did.

Stay sane.

I have been tempted to post a detailed response to Hobbes's pompous BS. All I will say, thank you Bobpickering, SteveC, SoCal Jim and everyone else who provided the voices of reason. It is nice to have you gentleman in this forum. Respect.

"All 57 states", you say? Was that a typo or just a matter of fingers racing ahead of the mind?

Please condense your tome into more digestible size for those of us of smaller intellects.

Please stay in The OC.

How about you stay in Tehachapi and I’ll stay in sunny San Diego. Deal?

Um, both the Moderna and Cansino vaccines have been shown to generate antibodies in amounts either similar to or greater than those found in recovered Covid patients. This may not be definitive proof that these vaccines work (these antibodies have not yet been shown to prevent disease). But things are not looking too bad here. And if neither of these efforts work, it is actually very unlikely that none of the MANY other efforts will be effective. Perhaps the biggest unknown at this time is whether a vaccine will be available in time to actually help with this pandemic. But that’s a whole different issue from a vaccine being impossible in the first place.

As for not having a cold vaccine, this has NOTHING to do with a coronavirus vaccine being impossible. The reason for no cold vaccine is that it is not practical. Unlike Covid-19, colds are caused by not one but MANY different viruses. And not JUST coronaviruses, but also rhinovoruses, adenoviruses, influenzaviruses, parainfluenzaviruses, and many others. In other words, it probably isn’t possible to protect someone against a significant fraction of colds without needing several vaccinations. Do you want to get 10 or more shots every year to try to keep from catching a cold or three over the course of the winter? Probably not. I mean, most people don’t even get a flu shot.

So what about SARS and MERS? Both of these are more serious than a mere cold. Yet neither of these has an available vaccine. Why not? SARS basically fizzled out. MERS is still around, but there are very few cases. Because of this, vaccine efforts for both diseases came to a grinding halt. Vaccine makers want to make money from their efforts. And without anyone to sell their vaccines to, it simply wasn’t worth their while to continue.