Highest Rated Comments

ufexplore624 karma

Great question. There are many different products on the market, some better than others. The best choice would be an N95 face mask. But the mask should be one that fits properly. If you can get a "fit test' for an N95 mask, that would be great. Also important are proper don and doff of the mask. Some people put themselves at risk when they remove a mask, for example, by sticking ungloved fingers at the bridge of their nose and pushing those fingers downwards as they remove their mask, and that places potentially contaminated fingers close to the nose. This creates a situation where one could deposit fomites or other virus-contaminated particles close to the nose, and these might be inhaled. Stay away from flimsy face masks, especially those that look like a gauze or net, as they will not be protective. The better face masks, even if they are not N95 masks, will offer some protection from contaminated droplets. But don't forget: consider wearing goggles also! many respiratory viruses can infect you through contact with the surfaces of your eyes.

ufexplore336 karma

this is a good question. It is true that there is a yearly fire cycle in Amazonia. this year fall within historical variability of the yearly fire count, but it is the worst since 2010, which suffered a very serious drought. So, there is cause for concern on those grounds, namely that the fires are very bad even though this year has not been a bad drought year (there was a mild El Nino that ended in July).

Something else to consider is the historical timing of the fires. A number like this would have had little consequence in the early 1980s, when much of the forest was intact. But now, with 20 percent gone, the effect of fire is to bring us ever closer to the environmental catastrophe of a "tipping point," the loss of the entire forest via conversion to fire-adapted scrub savanna.

ufexplore302 karma

we would have a tragic loss of biodiversity and indigenous cultures. agriculture in South America and into central North America would be harmed. poverty, disruption of hydro-ecological systems.

ufexplore282 karma

Dan is a fine scientist. I believe I would make his points as follows: the fires of today are a serious problem, yes, but they fall within historic variability, as there have been years with more, given fire is an agricultural technology used by ranchers and farmers alike in resource frontiers such as Amazonia. That said, today's fires are the worst since 2010, which occurred during a period of intense drought. So....the bottom line: fires have been a problem in the Amazon since its opening. They are more worrisome today given how much forest has been lost, and the prospects of an environmental catastrophe in the form of a "tipping point" disaster with the conversion of the entire biome into a fire-adapted scrub savanna. The new is not BS. It does lack context, however.

it's hard to know where to go for the info. the best place is to the researchers who work in the region, Dan Nepstad being one of them. I'm glad to be here today to offer my own impressions. I am glad you're asking this particular question which may be the most important: how do we really know what's going on here.

ufexplore279 karma

To start, there are many different types of influenza viruses and the symptoms can vary depending on the virus and how healthy the person is. Therefore, it's not really possible to distinguish coronavirus from influenza virus symptoms in many cases if at all. What's exceptionally important is to confirm through laboratory tests. The symptoms of coronavirus infections also differ according to age and overall health.