Seems kind of silly to tell people who have been working at customer facing jobs this entire time that 8 hours at work is ok, but a few hours at dinner isn't. It's even more silly to blame working people for being unwilling to accept this contradiction rather than the government for being unwilling to pay people to stay home.
I got to spend a week making daily visits to a hospital this summer, and of course ended up spending a lot of time chatting with the care team about the pandemic. For context, the room we were in was next door to the space set aside for the COVID-19 isolation cohort, and the some folks were back and forth between both areas throughout the day. As far as customer-facing jobs go this year, having your customers be, not just anyone, but specifically people who are a known SARS-CoV-2 infection risk, seems like a pretty singular situation.
They all felt pretty safe, though, and, at least up to that point, hadn't had a single staff member test positive. They attributed this to everyone on the team being very scrupulous about masks and hand washing.
Somewhat similarly, and less anecdotally, my state recently released some information about their contact tracing efforts, and, while they didn't give any specific numbers, they indicated that workplaces did not seem to be a significant source of transmission as long as mask policies are being followed. The bulk of the transmission was from social gatherings, both in home and in public. There were some case studies of super-spreader events at public gatherings, and the general story is that, as long as the staff is sticking to the policy of wearing masks while at work, they are generally not getting caught up in these events.
So, I suspect it would be fine as long as everyone involved kept a mask on at all times.
The problem with getting together for a Thanksgiving dinner, then, is that you simply can't share a meal and (properly) wear a mask at the same time. Heck, you can't even offer your guests light refreshments and have them properly wear a mask at the same time.
Depending on where you live or work, you might be wearing a mask and other PPE during your working hours. You wouldn't be wearing a mask or PPE during dinner (and likely any other time during the visit).
Healthcare personnel get COVID as such higher rates than most other fields because of the rate of exposure. Being in a small room with someone with COVID for a few hours is far riskier than passing 100 people with COVID on the street or in a big box store over the course of eight hours, where your exposure would be measured in seconds or minutes.
Most jobs outside of transportation also limit exposure to a relatively small group of regulars like a neighborhood grocery store, so we're already in the range of acceptable consequences (since most people need to work to eat). Creating transmission links between disparate regions is outside the range of acceptable consequences (IMO, and for the first year at least)
Spending a small amount of time around an infected person where you're both wearing masks is much less likely to spread the disease than sharing an enclosed space for an extended period of time with no masks.
A gathering of many people from diverse areas in an inadequately ventilated home is a bad idea. If you imagine transmission rates as a punch of particles bumping around with a chance of infecting nearby nodes that haven't been previously infected, run the additional mental model where you decide to first randomize every node's position.
At work you might be in a large space, you probably don't have long contact with any one person (when contact tracing it seems they ask who you've been in contact with for >15 minutes, not sure if they're still doing that), and you're wearing a mask. None of that might be true for a family gathering.
It's not silly at all. At work, They are wearing masks, staying socially distant, have shields and blocks in many cases,and keeping the economy afloat.
Contrast that to crowding within 6 feet of 5+ family members unmasked for hours, traveling and spreading virus everywhere for a holiday that celebrates native americans giving food resources to ill prepared settlers?
What IS silly is that this is a holiday, it's a fun but nonessential day. Do you think Turkey day or Jesus's "birthday" (aka coopted Pagan winter solstice day) is worth the 1000s of deaths that they will certainly cause? The pandemic that has killed 250,000 Americans in just 8 months is far, far more important than a couple family meals.
Our society considers those people in “essential services” to be sacrificial animals. They really don’t matter as long as we keep benefiting from their work. It’s brutal but it’s always been like this, just less obvious.
This is caricatured thinking though. You need to work because you want $$$ for rent, and you need to go to the grocery store (or wherever) to eat so you don't die. That's a sunk cost every person generally must assume.
But the point isn't that people have some risk, so adding more is OK. No — the goal is to not take unnecessary risk when avoiable. Eating turkey with family is something that you can postpone or even do over a video call if you have the means and still want some level of connection.
In my observation it's much easier to maintain a certain level of carefulness around strangers than it is around family. It's as if we were biologically wired to trust family more (we might actually be). On paper, Covid precautions are supposed to be as much to protect the other as to protect the self, but much of the relevant behaviour is so little controlled by rational though that we can only control it by tapping into self preservation instincts. And those simply don't fire as reliable with family as they do with strangers. I claim that if they have the same risk of being infected, n hours with m strangers is less dangerous than n hours with m family members.
It sure looks a bit weird to ask this of people who don't work in isolation, but on the other hand it's not worse for them than for the WFH crowd. It could even be argued that it's worse for the WFH because the customer facing at least still get to interact with humans on a regular basis.
For many people (especially those who travel), Thanksgiving isn't "a few hours at dinner" but "stay with relatives at least overnight and maybe an entire long weekend".
I don't understand why. If one works with customers there are two possibilities. One, their company has strict protocols that keeps them safe and so they should still be worried about getting it from guests. Two, their company is lax on protocols and so they are the ones risking the lives of their guests.
Either way, I am surprised to see this comment on HN, I would expect people here to not look at it at the individual level, and think in terms of probabilities.
It's not tho. Families won't be wearing masks or social distancing because of familiarity and alcohol (and probably some weed). Also they'll be eating and talking loudly without a mask which also spraying just tons and tons of germs into the air, often in a relatively small dining room or living room with most likely very limited ventilation. It's a perfect recipe for spreading the disease.
I imagine the difference is at those customer facing jobs they are wearing masks all day, where is at dinner everyone will have their masks off (at least while eating/drinking but in reality most will probably end up leaving them off after eating or even before eating because unlike at work where they maybe surrounded by strangers at home they will feel more comfortable maskless around extended family).
I think the obvious response is that working customer-facing jobs isn't safe, but is necessary for many people to pay for important things like food and shelter.
This criticism seems similar to the common one of "why are grocery stores okay but not concert venues: surely the virus doesn't know the difference?" Of course not, but buying food is, at least in the short term, more vital.
I find family to be far more dangerous than strangers. With family people let their guard down and hug and take off their masks in doors. Family are where 70% of infections come from.
I feel like anyone who would actually care enough to heed this was already planning not to travel for Thanksgiving, but I suppose it would at least give _some_ support to their case when other relatives complain about them not attending/hosting Thanksgiving this year (whether or not it satisfies those relatives).
One would think the fact that cases in the US are rising faster than they ever have would be deterrent enough.
I see where you’re coming from with that. Especially if someone has already booked flights that may be non-refundable, they are likely to go anyway.
But people feel intense pressure to follow the norm. In the absence of clear messaging from some third-party authority, that norm is generally “what we’ve always done.”
Messaging like this can change the perceived norm to “it’s okay to stay home this year.”
We were on the fence. Up until recently our local area has been only lightly affected by covid. It wasn't the decree from the governor that made us decide not to go, however, it was the big surge in cases. No need to be part of that mess, thanksgiving will still be here next year. And this year we're going to use a Zoom call to get everyone together while we eat :)
> but I suppose it would at least give _some_ support to their case when other relatives complain about them not attending/hosting Thanksgiving this year (whether or not it satisfies those relatives).
Messaging is important. It irritates me to no end that newscasters aren't wearing masks--for example. There are a lot of people who are "Oh, the lady on TV is wearing a mask--so I guess it's bad enough that I should, too."
I wonder if there would be any implications for travel insurance? I know you aren't covered if you travel to a country against the advice of your country (ie. travel to a place with ongoing war or conflict), would that extend to travelling within your own country against the advice of CDC?
I really think this is the aspect people are missing.
This helps a lot with people who already wanted to cancel plans, but didn't have "permission" to.
Now, people can say: "Oh, I really really wish I could attend, but I'm following the CDC guidance. I'll really miss you, and I'll definitely be back next year."
We're planning on skipping Thanksgiving, but for Christmas my parents, my sister, and I are all going to quarantine very strictly (separately) for 2-3 weeks beforehand and then get together. We may also get tested at some point, and none of us will have to travel by plane. I'm hoping that with the precautions and the small-ish group it will be safe enough.
I've seen lots of sites[1] that show the risk at someone will end up being covid-positive during a large gathering (like Thanksgiving). This data is, as far as I can tell based on an estimate of how many people in a given population are likely to have an infection.
Does anyone know of any sites/data that offer the same risk analysis, but can take into account people who receive negative covid tests? For example, how would you estimate the risk of a 15 person Thanksgiving gathering if all 15 people receive negative covid tests prior to gathering?
When it comes to family deep rooted historical cultural traditions, I'm sensing that an advisory is not going to make much of a dent upon impact. Maybe better to advise how to have thanksgiving safely - pre isolate prior to meetup - whole scale of what you can do and outline the risk reductions each one has. Give people an educated choice in the risk as like crossing the road - we all make educated risk choices each day and they won't stop the holiday, but can manage it better with better advice/approach I feel.
When cases were down this summer (Ontario, Canada) I briefly considered having an outdoor 'x-mas in august' for the family. Seeing the trajectory we're on now, really regretting not doing that.
Remember that this whole mess started (or at least got a lot worse) because the Chinese travelled a lot for the Lunar New Year. Back then there was a lot of people blaming everything on the Chinese for not staying where they were and spreading the virus.
Anecdotally, covid tests in the bay area seem to be all booked up until Thanksgiving, with walk ins being very busy. I hope all those tested people are only traveling to each other though; it won't help them much if they fly with untested folks to gather with untested people.
[+] [-] qntty|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mumblemumble|5 years ago|reply
I got to spend a week making daily visits to a hospital this summer, and of course ended up spending a lot of time chatting with the care team about the pandemic. For context, the room we were in was next door to the space set aside for the COVID-19 isolation cohort, and the some folks were back and forth between both areas throughout the day. As far as customer-facing jobs go this year, having your customers be, not just anyone, but specifically people who are a known SARS-CoV-2 infection risk, seems like a pretty singular situation.
They all felt pretty safe, though, and, at least up to that point, hadn't had a single staff member test positive. They attributed this to everyone on the team being very scrupulous about masks and hand washing.
Somewhat similarly, and less anecdotally, my state recently released some information about their contact tracing efforts, and, while they didn't give any specific numbers, they indicated that workplaces did not seem to be a significant source of transmission as long as mask policies are being followed. The bulk of the transmission was from social gatherings, both in home and in public. There were some case studies of super-spreader events at public gatherings, and the general story is that, as long as the staff is sticking to the policy of wearing masks while at work, they are generally not getting caught up in these events.
So, I suspect it would be fine as long as everyone involved kept a mask on at all times.
The problem with getting together for a Thanksgiving dinner, then, is that you simply can't share a meal and (properly) wear a mask at the same time. Heck, you can't even offer your guests light refreshments and have them properly wear a mask at the same time.
[+] [-] giarc|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reb|5 years ago|reply
It's a horrible position to be in, but I don't think it's silly.
[+] [-] vmception|5 years ago|reply
Not silly at all.
[+] [-] akiselev|5 years ago|reply
Most jobs outside of transportation also limit exposure to a relatively small group of regulars like a neighborhood grocery store, so we're already in the range of acceptable consequences (since most people need to work to eat). Creating transmission links between disparate regions is outside the range of acceptable consequences (IMO, and for the first year at least)
[+] [-] sp332|5 years ago|reply
Edit: source https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7362827/
[+] [-] JohnTHaller|5 years ago|reply
vs
Thanksgiving aka the exact opposite of all of the above
[+] [-] jczhang|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] klmadfejno|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bhandziuk|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Dumblydorr|5 years ago|reply
Contrast that to crowding within 6 feet of 5+ family members unmasked for hours, traveling and spreading virus everywhere for a holiday that celebrates native americans giving food resources to ill prepared settlers?
What IS silly is that this is a holiday, it's a fun but nonessential day. Do you think Turkey day or Jesus's "birthday" (aka coopted Pagan winter solstice day) is worth the 1000s of deaths that they will certainly cause? The pandemic that has killed 250,000 Americans in just 8 months is far, far more important than a couple family meals.
[+] [-] gentleman11|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] spandrew|5 years ago|reply
But the point isn't that people have some risk, so adding more is OK. No — the goal is to not take unnecessary risk when avoiable. Eating turkey with family is something that you can postpone or even do over a video call if you have the means and still want some level of connection.
[+] [-] usrusr|5 years ago|reply
It sure looks a bit weird to ask this of people who don't work in isolation, but on the other hand it's not worse for them than for the WFH crowd. It could even be argued that it's worse for the WFH because the customer facing at least still get to interact with humans on a regular basis.
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] NicoJuicy|5 years ago|reply
To this day, it amazes me that some people don't get that a nationwide travel and dine with a lot of people, could exponentially spread the virus.
We are almost 1 year later... And I think most people are here are well educated.
This saddens me deeply.
[+] [-] jcranmer|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yalogin|5 years ago|reply
Either way, I am surprised to see this comment on HN, I would expect people here to not look at it at the individual level, and think in terms of probabilities.
[+] [-] stjohnswarts|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] heavymark|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tshaddox|5 years ago|reply
This criticism seems similar to the common one of "why are grocery stores okay but not concert venues: surely the virus doesn't know the difference?" Of course not, but buying food is, at least in the short term, more vital.
[+] [-] thelean12|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ebg13|5 years ago|reply
Large, well-ventilated space vs close poorly-ventilated space.
Not sharing food vs sharing food.
Not yelling at each other vs yelling at each other.
Everyone wearing a mask vs not wearing masks.
There are some important differences between workplaces and dinner tables.
[+] [-] d6e|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _nothing|5 years ago|reply
One would think the fact that cases in the US are rising faster than they ever have would be deterrent enough.
[+] [-] tobyjsullivan|5 years ago|reply
But people feel intense pressure to follow the norm. In the absence of clear messaging from some third-party authority, that norm is generally “what we’ve always done.”
Messaging like this can change the perceived norm to “it’s okay to stay home this year.”
[+] [-] ISL|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rootusrootus|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bsder|5 years ago|reply
Messaging is important. It irritates me to no end that newscasters aren't wearing masks--for example. There are a lot of people who are "Oh, the lady on TV is wearing a mask--so I guess it's bad enough that I should, too."
[+] [-] giarc|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] werber|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ncallaway|5 years ago|reply
This helps a lot with people who already wanted to cancel plans, but didn't have "permission" to.
Now, people can say: "Oh, I really really wish I could attend, but I'm following the CDC guidance. I'll really miss you, and I'll definitely be back next year."
[+] [-] brundolf|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eminence32|5 years ago|reply
Does anyone know of any sites/data that offer the same risk analysis, but can take into account people who receive negative covid tests? For example, how would you estimate the risk of a 15 person Thanksgiving gathering if all 15 people receive negative covid tests prior to gathering?
[1] https://covid19risk.biosci.gatech.edu/
[+] [-] Zenst|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Reedx|5 years ago|reply
Then people could just test themselves before traveling or going to indoor gatherings. They could also be used at airports, etc.
[+] [-] yabones|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yread|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mattnewton|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jeffbee|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] h2odragon|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway4good|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Acrobatic_Road|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] cratermoon|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] renewiltord|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] warlord1|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] symlinkk|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] just-juan-post|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]