Coronavirus prep

Options
1256257259261262484

Replies

  • SModa61
    SModa61 Posts: 3,441 Member
    SModa61 wrote: »
    Here in Australia, people coming from overseas are put into hotel supervised quarantine for 2 weeks.
    People travelling from some states into other states - self isolation at home for 2 weeks.
    Police can and do randomly check that you are doing so.

    anyone getting tested - self isolation at home until test result (usually next day results)

    anyone positive - self isolation at home for 2 weeks. (unless hospitalised, of course - then complete the 2 weeks after discharge)

    Self isolation means you stay at home and do not mix with other people masked or not. You stay in your own home, you do not go out in cars or public promotions and nobody visits you.

    What Trump is doing post discharge would certainly not be allowed here.

    No political statement - just facts about Covid rules.

    Not that I am from australia, but from a story about a woman there, even state to state requires the hotel isolation as one end is likely not your second home. And the two week hotel cost is on the individual's dime. The story that I read was about a women who was supposed to fly to her boyfriend and hotel quarantine first and then instead skipped the flight where should could be tracked and hitch hiked directly to her boyfriend and avoid the quarentine and its cost. Or at least, that was the spin in the article.


    The international incomers quarantining for 2 weeks in supervised hotels is national across Australia; the state rules about interstate incomers vary between states, that is true
    As the Covid situation itself varies greatly between states.

    The hotel accomodation was initially paid for by the govt and all overseas citizens had until x date to return and have accomodation paid for.

    anyone returning after that date, must pay for their hotel accommodation themselves.

    Have not heard of case you mention so cant comment on that.

    There have, as in all countries, I suppose, been a few stupid people breaking the travel restriction rules.

    Nice that your government was paying for their overseas citizens' returns. As for the crazy woman, this is not the article I originally saw, but another covering the same story that I found. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-53903498
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,055 Member
    edited October 2020
    kushiel1 wrote: »
    Can we not talk about Trump anymore? It's very hard to discuss him without it becoming at least somewhat political and quite frankly this is not the place for politics (regardless of your views).

    This is obviously one of the biggest current US impacts of Corona. I think it's working well so far -- people who feel like they can't discuss this without getting obviously political are clearly restraining themselves (or just commenting other places online). I think it's okay to MENTION that the leader of our country has been diagnosed with this illness and it isn't necessarily going to get political beyond that.

    That Trump and many members of his inner circle have now been diagnosed is going to influence how people approach this for the fall and winter, probably both for better and worse. Urging others to ignore the basic facts of the situation for the sake of "avoiding politics" is, in and of itself, a blatantly political choice.

    Speaking of the inner circle, from what I consider to be a fairly centrist source:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/10/06/trump-adviser-stephen-miller-tests-positive-for-covid-19/#1e0cbba01d60

    Trump Adviser Stephen Miller Tests Positive For Covid-19

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2020/10/06/joint-chiefs-of-staff-quarantining-after-top-coast-guard-official-tests-positive-for-covid-19/#6efd3ecf30fa

    The country’s top military leader, Gen. Mark Milley, and other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are quarantining after the Coast Guard’s second-in-command tested positive for Covid-19 amid a worsening outbreak on Capitol Hill.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 37,008 Member
    Here in Australia, people coming from overseas are put into hotel supervised quarantine for 2 weeks.
    People travelling from some states into other states - self isolation at home for 2 weeks.
    Police can and do randomly check that you are doing so.

    anyone getting tested - self isolation at home until test result (usually next day results)

    anyone positive - self isolation at home for 2 weeks. (unless hospitalised, of course - then complete the 2 weeks after discharge)

    Self isolation means you stay at home and do not mix with other people masked or not. You stay in your own home, you do not go out in cars or public promotions and nobody visits you.

    What Trump is doing post discharge would certainly not be allowed here.

    No political statement - just facts about Covid rules.

    Out of curiosity, @paperpudding, about the bolded: If someone gets a test for other reasons than symptoms or exposure, are they still required to isolate until results arrive? (For example, I had a test recently because it was required before my scheduled colonoscopy - I hadn't been in contact with anyone with Covid that anyone knew of, no symptoms, hadn't traveled, etc. - pure precaution.) Or is it that testing isn't done there unless symptomatic or exposed or something that those that would cause worry?
  • Copper_Boom
    Copper_Boom Posts: 85 Member
    SModa61 wrote: »
    on holidays,

    -Halloween, i am making goodie bags 2 weeks in advance and quarantining them in boxes. then hopefully the weather is kind and I am going to set up a table at the end go the driveway. I am going to have hand sanitizing supplies setup and available, and I have skeleton salad tongs to dole out the bags. If no one comes, I will have confessions coming in my MFP diary afterwards. :P last year we had 76 kids. No COVID but also not a Saturday.

    I like your idea about Halloween. It is more effort into being safe than I expect most will put in. My neighborhood Facebook page indicates many will be taking their children trick-or-treating as usual this year, and see masks as sufficient. I made the mistake of remarking that trick or treating may not be prudent this year and no one agreed (at least publicly). I would rather turn off my porch light and just be the neighborhood grinch, but maybe putting a bowl of candy out on the porch is a lower effort compromise to appease the self-appointed Guardians of a Normal Halloween.
  • ReenieHJ
    ReenieHJ Posts: 9,723 Member
    Everybody's talking about testing but call me skeptical. Exactly how reliable are the tests?? I hear so much about false positives/negatives or where they test negative this day but positive the next or vice versa. :( I guess I'm not putting all my faith in every test of positive/negative that I hear about. :(
  • SModa61
    SModa61 Posts: 3,441 Member
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    Everybody's talking about testing but call me skeptical. Exactly how reliable are the tests?? I hear so much about false positives/negatives or where they test negative this day but positive the next or vice versa. :( I guess I'm not putting all my faith in every test of positive/negative that I hear about. :(

    I totally agree. I was shocking by the info I had stumbled on like a week and a half ago and the level of accuracy or inaccuracy. I was looking due to approaching holidays and potential travels to our florida condo, trying to see if tests could broaden our options. We decided that we will likely stay with the quarentine route.
  • missysippy930
    missysippy930 Posts: 2,577 Member
    SModa61 wrote: »
    Massachusetts Governor Baker announced that he is not canceling Halloween this year, and this is what he said. “And the reason we’re not canceling Halloween is because that would have turned into thousands of indoor Halloween parties, which would have been a heck of a lot worse for public safety and for the spread of the virus than outdoor, organized, and supervised trick-or-treating.”

    He’s probably right, but if I had a child that age, I’d probably arrange some kind of virtual trick or treating event. Let them dress up, get treats they want, and hope for back to normal next year. Make it a special day and avoid possible exposure to other people you have no idea whether or not they’ve been exposed. It’s sad, but so many people have had to lose out on special events this year. With all the holidays coming up, a lot of occasions are going to be very different for many of us. 😷
  • SModa61
    SModa61 Posts: 3,441 Member
    SModa61 wrote: »
    Massachusetts Governor Baker announced that he is not canceling Halloween this year, and this is what he said. “And the reason we’re not canceling Halloween is because that would have turned into thousands of indoor Halloween parties, which would have been a heck of a lot worse for public safety and for the spread of the virus than outdoor, organized, and supervised trick-or-treating.”

    He’s probably right, but if I had a child that age, I’d probably arrange some kind of virtual trick or treating event. Let them dress up, get treats they want, and hope for back to normal next year. Make it a special day and avoid possible exposure to other people you have no idea whether or not they’ve been exposed. It’s sad, but so many people have had to lose out on special events this year. With all the holidays coming up, a lot of occasions are going to be very different for many of us. 😷

    In my neighborhood, houses are on a minimum of a acre of land. I am going to set up at the end of the driveway, with large table, pre-quarentined treat bags and sanitizing stations. Hopefully parents with be responsible for monitoring their kids the rest of the time. Hoping for no rain!
  • rheddmobile
    rheddmobile Posts: 6,840 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    ahoy_m8 wrote: »
    To steer the Rose Garden scenario towards a "prep" discussion.... DH and I are thinking of creating an outdoor living room in our carport. While it is really nice spending time outside now, we are thinking about December-January when our 2 college students will be living at home.

    Disease vector considerations:
    - short term: Both girls have excellent access to Covid testing and will test before returning home. They will isolate and retest, but that won't happen by Thanksgiving so we will be celebrating that outside. I think it will be nice. Different, but ok.
    - longer term: The 3rd sister will be teaching 7th graders up until Xmas eve practically, and the 3 will gather over the months everyone is in town. I learned from the first shelter in place that I just cannot keep them apart. They need each other more than ever with reduced social outlets. So they need a place to do that safely in more inclement weather.

    Air flow considerations:
    - The carport is open on one side (3-car) with walls on the other 3 sides. The walls alternate brick (load bearing) and wood panels with 2 foot gaps at ceiling and floor.

    In light of the Rose Garden, I'm seriously doubting that this space will provide enough air flow. Of course, experts speculate transmission was more likely during the subsequent indoor reception, but still, I wonder if it is enough and if the effort is worthwhile. Is anyone else doing anything similar?

    Restaurants around here are trying to come up with some sort of tent like option that might be similar.

    Here, for my own back yard, I just think it will be too cold for anything useable that's largely outdoors. I'm pretty worried about how this is going to be when it gets cold again.
    Changing the subject... twice recently I have run past playgrounds, at two different locations, which are now open and full of children from different households playing together, sharing slides and climbing tubes, hugging and wrestling, no masks, no distancing. Since schools are now open I guess parents figure they might as well throw caution to the winds? Since yesterday we had 115 new cases in the county, it’s making me a little angry that our governor and others are pretending this is over when it’s not.

    Public schools aren't open for in person schooling here yet, but there are various sports going on, and so I see groups of kids reasonably often. Some parents are doing pods where a smaller group of kids are getting together, but otherwise socially distancing, so perhaps (thinking positively) it's something like that?
    My mom, meanwhile, is desperate to get a flu shot, but the problem is she can’t get one without doing something much more risky than she has done previously - going to a building full of sick people and waiting for half an hour, then being within arm’s reach of a probably infected health care worker giving the shot. Since she’s completely isolated and isolation will prevent flu transmission as well as Covid, it is much less risky for her NOT to get a flu shot, but she’s hearing the news saying everyone should get one this year.

    Is there not the "make an appt at Walgreens" option there?

    Or drive through flu-shot events, as there are here?

    If you make an appointment at a Walgreens here you will be lucky if you only wait half an hour in the waiting area. It doesn’t mean they will keep your appointment in a timely fashion. We have searched in vain for a drive-through event.
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    SModa61 wrote: »
    Massachusetts Governor Baker announced that he is not canceling Halloween this year, and this is what he said. “And the reason we’re not canceling Halloween is because that would have turned into thousands of indoor Halloween parties, which would have been a heck of a lot worse for public safety and for the spread of the virus than outdoor, organized, and supervised trick-or-treating.”

    That makes sense.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,887 Member
    edited October 2020
    SModa61 wrote: »
    Massachusetts Governor Baker announced that he is not canceling Halloween this year, and this is what he said. “And the reason we’re not canceling Halloween is because that would have turned into thousands of indoor Halloween parties, which would have been a heck of a lot worse for public safety and for the spread of the virus than outdoor, organized, and supervised trick-or-treating.”

    Chicago isn't canceling either -- just trying to avoid traditional haunted houses (and parties too, I'm sure) and big groups. The focus is on keeping people in small, family groups, social distancing (not sure exactly how that works if one is actually handing out candy at the door, as 6 ft apart isn't realistic then), and masks. I think the risk is pretty low, really, but haven't decided yet if I'll put a light on and participate. I could just put some candy out on the porch and keep an eye on it so I can refill.
  • oocdc2
    oocdc2 Posts: 1,361 Member
    SModa61 wrote: »
    Massachusetts Governor Baker announced that he is not canceling Halloween this year, and this is what he said. “And the reason we’re not canceling Halloween is because that would have turned into thousands of indoor Halloween parties, which would have been a heck of a lot worse for public safety and for the spread of the virus than outdoor, organized, and supervised trick-or-treating.”

    In my neighborhood, kids pretty much social distance in their "pods" when trick-or-treating, anyway. I'm prepackaging my handfuls of treats; I haven't come up with a way to deliver remotely, though.
  • spiriteagle99
    spiriteagle99 Posts: 3,816 Member
    In my neighborhood, the parents usually drive the kids door to door at Halloween. Only a few walk the 50 feet or so between houses. (They also drive them 50 yards from the bus stop after school.) The last few years, there have been few kids going door to door because there were a lot of alternate "trunk or treat" events in town at churches and schools. Those would be much more crowded than going door to door - hundreds of people in one place over the two hours or so that they last - so this year may be different. OTOH, not many people in my area take Covid seriously, based on the number I see without masks or with masks worn badly.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    Everybody's talking about testing but call me skeptical. Exactly how reliable are the tests?? I hear so much about false positives/negatives or where they test negative this day but positive the next or vice versa. :( I guess I'm not putting all my faith in every test of positive/negative that I hear about. :(

    Depends on the test. False negatives are actually very rare...false positives are more common. Testing negative one day and positive another doesn't necessarily indicate the test was faulty. Look at the NFL....they test every single day...negative, negative, negative...positive...just the nature of viruses.

    The quick tests are the least accurate and definitely require a follow up confirmation...kinda like a pregnancy test. I would imagine at some point these types of tests will be available in drug stores which would actually go a long way and containment, even if they aren't as accurate as other tests...and again, you're far more likely to get a false positive than a false negative.

    The nasal swab has a pretty high degree of accuracy as do the mouth swabs...

    Also, be careful of "hearing stories"...at this point, there is so much urban myth floating around on social media by deniers that it's pitiful. I know several people in the healthcare field as well as a few that work for DOH and they pretty much roll their eyes at many of these stories...you will note, they are always "I know someone" or "a friend told me", etc.

    If there were huge issues with testing it would be reported on by more than just a bunch of Facebook spreaders.

    Agreed. I also think it's useful not to think of testing's value as a rigid thing, i.e., that they're either perfect or valueless.

    There are false positives and negatives, but odds are that a positive test means one has the virus, and that isolating will reduce spread. A few people may isolate unnecessarily. There may be some false negatives, so some people who shouldn't be out exposing others, but overall more testing shifts the odds toward fewer contagious people wandering around.

    Reducing the number of spreaders walking around in the world has benefits at the population level - reduces the extent of future exposure and spread. It can also change the odds for one's immediate associates, even if there are some false positives/negatives.

    QFT!
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,887 Member
    If the weather's fine I'm just going to bring a card table out to the front of the driveway, lysol wipe it down real good, dump a box or two of candy onto it and sit back 10 feet or so and read a book.

    That's a good idea, although like you said, dependent on the weather. Last year we had fewer kids than usual because it snowed, so it wouldn't have worked.

    I have a bench on my front porch so could sit there and have the candy in a bowl on the stairs to the porch, which would be plenty far away. Or as mentioned before, I could trust the honor system and just have a bowl on the porch and a sign. I'm curious how many kids will actually show up. (Reminds me I should put my decorations out, such as they are, tonight.)
  • SModa61
    SModa61 Posts: 3,441 Member
    oocdc2 wrote: »
    SModa61 wrote: »
    Massachusetts Governor Baker announced that he is not canceling Halloween this year, and this is what he said. “And the reason we’re not canceling Halloween is because that would have turned into thousands of indoor Halloween parties, which would have been a heck of a lot worse for public safety and for the spread of the virus than outdoor, organized, and supervised trick-or-treating.”

    In my neighborhood, kids pretty much social distance in their "pods" when trick-or-treating, anyway. I'm prepackaging my handfuls of treats; I haven't come up with a way to deliver remotely, though.

    @oocdc2 I bought these (I see that only 2 are left) https://www.ebay.com/itm/Halloween-Skeleton-hand-dinner-salad-server-tongs-gray/380268811624?hash=item5889c99568:g:b5UAAOSwKtZZkIk2