Dealing with visitors in this time of COVID

[HenryWhiting]

I recently had a visit from a person, who I had invited from Boise, the current hotspot in Idaho. When I went out to the gate to greet him (my gate which I nearly always keep closed is opaque, to help with privacy on my small, remote property), he stepped up and immediately grasped my hand. It took me so much by surprise that didn't react quickly enough to step back. Later, despite being asked, he repeatedly infringed on my 'social distancing' space. I cut the visit short. In reflection this event upset me so much that I will be closing Teater's Knoll to visitors (especially unannounced strangers) in the foreseeable future.

I am wondering what other private homeowners are doing with similar situations, where someone shows up at your door, unannounced, wanting a tour. Do you let them in? Do you require that they wear a mask? Do you discuss 'social distancing' beforehand? Do you even invite people in these times? (we all receive written requests) Public buildings necessarily have requirements and standards for these situations, but what about private homeowners?

[SDR]

That's a disturbing episode. We do have people defying widely-available data---and common sense---to "claim their rights" or "defend liberty" during this pandemic (which has just demonstrated the predicted ability of the virus to persevere, taking advantage of "covid fatigue" to claim new victims).

Perhaps a note placed at the gate would take the place of other forms of communication---including face to face contact---to explain your wishes in the current circumstance ?

S

[Roderick Grant]

If you receive a written request that includes a self-addressed envelope, politely decline with or without explanation.
If you choose to accept the visit, state what behavior you insist upon in detail.
If someone shows up unannounced, refuse entry. If inclined to answer the door, perhaps wear a mask to send the message.
You don't owe anyone a tour.

[SDR]

Sounds right to me . . .

S

[jay]

I'm very troubled by any indoor visiting at this point. The discussion about "aerosol" transmission is only beginning to come forward, but it appears Covid is airborne and the virus loves the indoor environment:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/06/heal ... ogin=email
Outdoors seems to be a different equation. They think the dilution of the virus in outdoor air, with its unlimited volume, is significant. And also the UV rays from the sun kill the virus quickly.
https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/do ... 34/5856149
If this stuff is correct, the virus is "active" in indoor air for two hours, (as opposed to 6 to 20 minutes in the sun), and the less ventilation given, the more the virus just sits in the air (like cigarette smoke in the diners of my youth).
Additionally, there's also the issue of people using bathrooms in public, which is an incidental aspect of "being out"... Shared toilets also thought to be a spreading component:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... -flushing/

All is to say my family hasn't allowed a single person into our home since this began. And we've avoided all indoor places where people gather. Some states are no longer allowing indoor dining (NY, NJ, CA) and I believe this "aerosol" science is the reason why.

If I were a Wright homeowner, I might allow a visitor to stroll around the outside of my home, but I absolutely would not allow them inside.

[Paul Ringstrom]

The virus will not "go away" until herd immunity is reached no matter how long you stay in your basement. About 70% of a given population needs to be infected. The more young people "get it" the better it is for us old people (as long as the two groups don't mix) since most of them will be asymptomatic.

[SDR]

Yup. The fantasy that this will be over soon is only making things worse, as it gives people a false optimism that leads to the worst behavior in the long run: premature renormalization.

This pandemic syndrome has played out repeatedly through history. Too bad we're no longer interested in learning from the past ?

When Covid 19 struck, the San Francisco paper reminded its readers of what happened here in 1918---and likely occurred to varying degrees everywhere the "Spanish Flu" hit: the public enthusiastically (well, willingly) wore face masks (yes---those weren't invented this year !) for the first wave. After too short a time---four weeks---the pandemic was declared to be fading, and bars and businesses reopened. The inevitable second wave ensued, and this time public sentiment was far less tolerant of the restrictions, thus prolonging the problem.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/art ... 191518.php

This time, it's the "Chinese Virus." (Always blame someone else, if you can !) Where it started is irrelevant; what matters is that this bug is much craftier than an influenza: it remains undetected in many, so they can unwittingly spread it to others.

What is needed in a situation like this, every time, is a firm voice from those with the microphone, consistently guiding and encouraging with a single accurate and useful message. Remember the Fireside Chats during the Great Depression and WWII ? They worked, encouraging the American public to persevere through a sustained difficult period in the collective life of the nation. Today ? Good luck with that . . .

S

[Roderick Grant]

"Chinese," "Spanish," "Ebola." they are all place names identifying origin, correctly or not. Corona DID begin in China; Spanish Flu did NOT originate in Spain; Ebola is the river in DRC where the disease originated. They are just a handy identifiers. In the case of COVID-19, China played a significant part in the spread of a disease it could have isolated much earlier, and possibly have avoided if they could have stopped the habit of its population dining on cooked bats.

The Santayana epigram is glib, simplistic, and wrong. Whatever similarities one event has with another in the past, each has more differences. Coronavirus is not a replay of the Spanish Flu.

FDR's fireside chats, aired over the radio, had only a psychological impact on the Great Depression; people don't listen to the radio for news anymore, TV broadcasts are losing their grip on their audience, and the internet is a poor replacement. The New Deal "Alphabet Soup" of programs was a temporary salve - like the $1200 checks the Fed sent out - not a solution. The depression was solved by Lend Lease in March, 1941. There has been only one orator - Ronald Reagan - who compares favorably with FDR. All the presidents since Eisenhower have been polarizing. This hasn't been a happy country for 60 years.

[DRN]

We have seen an increase in traffic of slow drivers in the parking lot in front of our house: some stop, still others get out of the car for a pic at the curb. Tired of staying at home I guess. None have approached me when I’m in the garden or yard as yet.

I did have to confront someone last month who walked around back and was taking pictures through the living room window wall at a distance of 10’...he said he thought it was open to the public.....that was a first.

We are politely declining requests until the pandemic subsides.

[SDR]

If it's published, it's public ? Hmm; sorry to hear that.

Radio is a great source for up-to-date facts, and extended stories of subjects of interest (interviews with newly-published authors on current topics, for instance). You just have to know where on the dial to look . . . for listener-supported and non-commercial content.

S

[jay]

The more young people "get it" the better it is for us old people...since most of them will be asymptomatic.

This statement is factual, but I'm not sure it's ethical. Younger people are dying, too, some of respiratory arrest, others from strokes due to the blood clotting nature of Covid. Reports out of NYC showed some young children having bad reactions to Covid as well. Why, exactly, would we accept death and harm, even if its percentage is lower?

We really don't know what the long term effects of the disease are, either. Which is to say, I don't understand why this country feels the need to rush to "open up" every last aspect of 'normal' daily life. These aren't normal times. Give science time to figure things out....like the more recent discovery of steroid treatments which supposedly cut deaths down by 33%. (My friend's father who died in April, I sure wish they'd have known about dexamethasone then...) Is it so horrible to just spend a year reading books and cooking food and relaxing at home? Maybe there's a vaccine by then, maybe not. But I like the ethics much more when we give science ample time to experiment and make discoveries on this virus....

I mean, what we're doing as a country is just insane. We're currently seeing a total outbreak in the South while one half of the nation's politicians say now is a fabulous time to send all our kids to school...

What is needed in a situation like this, every time, is a firm voice from those with the microphone, consistently guiding and encouraging with a single accurate and useful message. Remember the Fireside Chats during the Great Depression and WWII ? They worked, encouraging the American public to persevere through a sustained difficult period in the collective life of the nation. Today ? Good luck with that . . .

Couldn't agree more. I watched Queen Elizabeth address her nation some months ago and it hit me how large the void is for compassionate leadership in America.

This hasn't been a happy country for 60 years.

60 years ago was 1960.... In 1960 schools were segregated... 3% of black people graduated college in 1960.
In 1960, the median salary for a full-time male worker was $34,000...and a full-time female was $20,600. (figures adjusted for inflation)
And before the 1970's, there was just one state (IL) in our country that didn't arrest people for being g-a-y.

So, who precisely was so happy 60 years ago?
Hmmm.....

[Roderick Grant]

Jay, it is true that outwaiting COVID-19 may save lives, but it isn't the only thing that can kill in this situation. Poverty kills as well, perhaps more so and for a longer period of time. Allowing the economy to tank is not even an option. It is highly likely there will not be any cure, and the virus will run its course no matter what we do. Forestalling may just make it take longer.

Waiting for a vaccine is pointless. 15% of all common colds are coronaviruses for which no vaccine has ever been found. Nor have MERS or SARS been solved by vaccines. To assume that this time a vaccine will be found is like "doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results."

Since I am old enough to recall the 40s and 50s ... not to mention the 60s... I believe I have a better handle on what life was like back then. You cannot get far in evaluating past eras by relying exclusively on statistics. As Benjamin Disraeli said, "There are lies, damnable lies and statistics."

I'm fortunate, in that I am retired. I have been self-isolating for nearly 14 years. Nor has my income been affected. I can sit back and wait out anything. People who are employed are the ones in a dicey situation. This is hurting them, many perhaps permanently. Whatever way is determined to be best, least lethal, the economy has to get back up on its feet.

[jay]

To be clear, I'm not suggesting the country should remain in a permanent lockdown. "Low-risk" businesses and activities should be opened. As I wrote in my earlier response to Mr. Whiting, the science is now pointing to crowded indoor areas like restaurants, bars, and schools as being very risky, due to growing evidence of airborne virus (called "aerosols")... It is my belief that our country needs to strictly identify high-risk from low-risk, not in terms of demographic groups (which is an imperfect categorization anyway), but in terms of activities, which would rule out the aforementioned high-risk activities..... For any Wright homeowner thinking of letting strangers into their house, I provided reasons why that would appear to be high-risk.

Roderick, nobody knows what science will uncover about this virus in the future... I don't know why you've convinced yourself there will be no vaccine, but I don't care either... Every disease, over the course of time, benefits from science figuring out treatments, management, and/or prevention.

Surely, concerns about how the pandemic is affecting people living in poverty is valid. And I'll add that pushing these people into exposure of the pandemic is "insult to injury".... Honestly, I am ashamed of my country for this type of thinking. And I am just plain disturbed by anyone who suggests that other people should go be exposed to a deadly virus.

But hey, I'm relieved to learn that all the women, black people, and gay people were happy in 1960. How silly they all have been––over these past 60 years––for demanding to be equals in our society! I now see that all along they were perfectly happy being unequal!

[SDR]

This year has been a big wake-up call, in at least three areas of public life---hasn't it . . .

Like it or not, this is the America we're living in today: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 ... trump.html

S

[jay]

Ethics aside, another problem with 'Let all the young healthy people get sick and we'll get herd immunity'=

https://www.vox.com/2020/7/12/21321653/ ... d-immunity