My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Widows sons, Sturgis and the lodge

jermy Bell

Registered User
Sturgis motorcycle week draws thousands of bikers from all over the country. With the current pandemic , and the reopening of lodges, how safe do you feel if you have members attending this large gathering and coming to lodge ??
 

TheThumbPuppy

Registered User
Nobody is an expert on this and I'm certainly not.

However I read some recent medical reports that indicate that the largest risks are in poorly aired premises. That is because the aerosols potentially carrying the virus stay there, especially with air-conditioners or in those buildings where air is recirculated. If this theory is correct, then the 5-foot distance doesn't necessarily help. The same reports say that the risk in open-air places is much less.

It very much depends on the person. I would imagine that some people going to these bikers events may be cautious, wear a mask, and observe a certain distance from each other. At the same time, I can also picture other people hugging their mates and singing in groups (wait, do bikers sing?) and that may involve a higher risk of infection. Not to talk about some other people still who may entertain themselves with other activities of the adult variety.

My anecdotal personal experience is that bikers, despite their looks, are often rather well-behaved at these events, but that's neither here nor there.

I was told this morning that even WHO has finally downgraded the severity of this pandemic to a lower mortality rate than initially thought, although I cannot find that article. However if I look at the data for Belgium, that has the highest number of deaths per million inhabitants, that is 852, with 9,879 deaths over 74,620 reported cases and that is a mortality rate of about 13%. The flu mortality rate is around 0.1% or 0.2%, I believe.

Unfortunately my message doesn't shed much light for your predicament. On a personal note, and I apologise for my possibly unpopular opinion, but if I was in your situation, I would take into account that the incubation period for the virus goes from a fortnight to even 8 weeks and I would skip at least the next two or three months' worth of meetings, biker event goers or not.
 

Thomas Stright

Premium Member
My personal opinion is this "pandemic" is a farce and a media caused distraction to the election this fall. Numbers are no where near the Bird flu we had years ago but the hype is over the top.

But like I said this is my opinion and the only place I wear a mask is in lodge due to the Grand Masters orders.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
My personal opinion is this "pandemic" is a farce and a media caused distraction to the election this fall. Numbers are no where near the Bird flu we had years ago but the hype is over the top.

But like I said this is my opinion and the only place I wear a mask is in lodge due to the Grand Masters orders.
I hesitate to move too far from the purpose of the group, but two points:

Fewer than 500 bird flu deaths have been reported to the World Health Organization since 1997, per the Mayo Clinic.

To what would you attribute the 200,000 additional deaths in the United States March to date this year, when compared to last year?
 

Bloke

Premium Member
There are people who politicize the pandemic, let's not do that here, and if means not speaking about it, then let's not speak about it. We're all going to have different views and we either need to accept that not treat it masoncially like religion and politics.

However, on a zoom call this week we have a senior nurse who spoke first hand about dealing with COVID patients and the story of how people seem to rally and die, is something he sees first hand. I know him well. He is a Freemason. I trust his account. Juxtaposed, we had two police officers taking about the social cost of people being locked away and the mental health and domestic violence issues it is augmenting. I likewise trust them. In this context, as societies, we need to find a way forward to co-exist with COVID - it is not about to go away, and despite an apparent approval in Russia for a "vaccine" anyone who knows science will know trials takes years, and the outcomes not known for decades. Me, I would not be rushing towards a COVID vaccine, but happily would take others of decades of age.

The Brother from my lodge who we had die last week of COVID has brought it closer to home, although he was of an age I had been expecting a similar call for a long time.

As to the OP, my issue would not be if such bros came to lodge, but more if such a large gathering should be held in the first place. Here in Australia, the Gov has decided to make such gatherings illegal. At the moment, the majority of the population is happily complying. But one does wonder how long that curtailment of freedom of association should last.

Given what I know and believe (and I do say believe about COVID, but cause there is a lot of mixed info out there, and frankly the science had not yet caught up to this novel disease) I would not attend such an event at the moment.
 

Luigi Visentin

Registered User
I'm a volunteer in an sanitary emergency rescue association in Italy. I personally have not operated directly on COVID patients but the team in which I'm did so many interventions to widely exceed the common routine, also considering that each intervention required the complete sanification of the ambulance and of all the tools used. The testimony that they brought in the de-briefing were truly dramatic and also from a young teammate (less then 30 years old) that has been hit pretty hard and luckily survived! There are also many Brothers that operate in another similar association that have done these interventions directly and their testimonies are the same.
The highest peak was in late March April and now the things are going better but there are too many persons that do not believe that the sanitary measures are necessary and the situation is worsening and there is a big risk of a "phase 2".
I can tell for sure that sanitary measure are necessary and must be followed always whichever is the opinion about them. If somebody is lucky the virus is ineffective but the persons that must be protected are those for who the virus is lethal and nobody knows who can be considered "safe" or "at risk". The virus has no opinion, neither ethical, moral, religious or political. In other words: use the mask, not only for your safety but also for others safety!
 

Brother JC

Moderating Staff
Staff Member
Veering back to the question; were the rally held in California there would be no lodge held. All Masonic gatherings are suspended. The festivities would be limited to outdoors, masks, and distancing.

Were it held today it would likely be evacuating the area.
 

TheThumbPuppy

Registered User
I would like to report on an interesting video that I saw yesterday.

The first fact that was presented is that current tests for covid give about 1% of false positives. Apparently that has to do with other bits of RNA being mistaken for covid RNA. I don't know the details of this phenomenon, but apparently the end result is that 1% of tests come out as positive even though those people are not infected.

The second fact was that in Germany at least the number of tests per week that are currently performed has recently more than doubled.

By combining those two facts together, we can deduce that if 100,000 tests a week are performed and 1,000 new cases are reported, then that number is within the margin of false positives, that is 1%.

Furthermore, since the number of tests that are performed in Germany now is more than twice the number of tests that were performed at the peak of the infection, the number of false positives has more than doubled.

The bottom line is that if a measurement error margin is bigger than the measurement itself, then that measurement is inconclusive. Using the example above, if in a certain region you perform 100,000 tests in a given week, and the number of false positives for that test kit is +1%, and you report 1,000 new cases, then the floor of the actual number of new cases is probably 1,000 - 1% * 100,000 = 0.

This extra level of analysis shows that the number of new cases that we are fed every day is meaningless unless we also know how many tests are performed every day with what test kit, and the margin of false positive for that test kit.

One thing for sure is that there are many more tests per week performed in Europe and the US during the last month than at the peak of the infection.

I'm not saying that covid doesn't exist, or it's all a big conspiracy. However the numbers that are presented on the news are incomplete to the point that they could depict a skewed scenario, since the number of daily tests is much higher than before, that is the number of false positives is much higher than before.
 

Bloke

Premium Member
I would like to report on an interesting video that I saw yesterday.

The first fact that was presented is that current tests for covid give about 1% of false positives. Apparently that has to do with other bits of RNA being mistaken for covid RNA. I don't know the details of this phenomenon, but apparently the end result is that 1% of tests come out as positive even though those people are not infected.

The second fact was that in Germany at least the number of tests per week that are currently performed has recently more than doubled.

By combining those two facts together, we can deduce that if 100,000 tests a week are performed and 1,000 new cases are reported, then that number is within the margin of false positives, that is 1%.

Furthermore, since the number of tests that are performed in Germany now is more than twice the number of tests that were performed at the peak of the infection, the number of false positives has more than doubled.

The bottom line is that if a measurement error margin is bigger than the measurement itself, then that measurement is inconclusive. Using the example above, if in a certain region you perform 100,000 tests in a given week, and the number of false positives for that test kit is +1%, and you report 1,000 new cases, then the floor of the actual number of new cases is probably 1,000 - 1% * 100,000 = 0.

This extra level of analysis shows that the number of new cases that we are fed every day is meaningless unless we also know how many tests are performed every day with what test kit, and the margin of false positive for that test kit.

One thing for sure is that there are many more tests per week performed in Europe and the US during the last month than at the peak of the infection.

I'm not saying that covid doesn't exist, or it's all a big conspiracy. However the numbers that are presented on the news are incomplete to the point that they could depict a skewed scenario, since the number of daily tests is much higher than before, that is the number of false positives is much higher than before.
I agree that the stats and tests themselves are flawed.

But think on this, something which has been around for decades
"How accurate are home pregnancy tests?



Many home pregnancy tests claim to be 99 percent accurate. However, home pregnancy tests differ in the ability to diagnose pregnancy in women who have recently missed a period. If you have a negative test but think you might be pregnant, repeat the test one week after your missed period or talk to your health care provider."


Source https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-...nt/in-depth/home-pregnancy-tests/art-20047940

So, it would actually be surprising to me that the false results are only 1% with a swab test. But even if you get generous and knock out 10%, the numbers are still high. I think as we progress in this, the numbers which will matter are how many are in ICU and if you can develop maths to work out, given incubation, and known cases in ICU, where we will be in 2-4 weeks, and if that's not the measure we before we take steps like shutting down businesses.. but that's why the reproduction number is so important. And the reality is, if more than 1, then COVID-19 cases will grow. And that growth is exponential. That's a key driver of many reactions to COVID, exponential growth.

(and oh man ! That search on the accuracy of pregnancy tests lead me down a rabbit hole to 20 minutes of reading lol... )

But here is another thing.. when I was right into reading all about COVID, I remember reading of a test group of pregnant women who were tested in New York, in the theory that they would be social distancing and taking special care. They were not swab tested, they were blood tested, and 15 % had had COVID. They had been asymptomatic. That's a big issue and consider further, I am a causal employee (or someone without sick leave) and I have a tickle in the throat. I have a choice, ignore it and keep working or get a test and it is positive, and I cannot earn an income to pay my bills and support my children ? What do I do ? I would say many would ignore it and just keep working and in doing so infecting others.

There are so many problems with COVID-19 stats, 1% error rate on testing would be the smallest factor in trying to analyze stats..
 

TheThumbPuppy

Registered User
I agree that the stats and tests themselves are flawed.

But think on this, something which has been around for decades
"How accurate are home pregnancy tests?



Many home pregnancy tests claim to be 99 percent accurate. However, home pregnancy tests differ in the ability to diagnose pregnancy in women who have recently missed a period. If you have a negative test but think you might be pregnant, repeat the test one week after your missed period or talk to your health care provider."


Source https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-...nt/in-depth/home-pregnancy-tests/art-20047940

So, it would actually be surprising to me that the false results are only 1% with a swab test. But even if you get generous and knock out 10%, the numbers are still high. I think as we progress in this, the numbers which will matter are how many are in ICU and if you can develop maths to work out, given incubation, and known cases in ICU, where we will be in 2-4 weeks, and if that's not the measure we before we take steps like shutting down businesses.. but that's why the reproduction number is so important. And the reality is, if more than 1, then COVID-19 cases will grow. And that growth is exponential. That's a key driver of many reactions to COVID, exponential growth.

(and oh man ! That search on the accuracy of pregnancy tests lead me down a rabbit hole to 20 minutes of reading lol... )

But here is another thing.. when I was right into reading all about COVID, I remember reading of a test group of pregnant women who were tested in New York, in the theory that they would be social distancing and taking special care. They were not swab tested, they were blood tested, and 15 % had had COVID. They had been asymptomatic. That's a big issue and consider further, I am a causal employee (or someone without sick leave) and I have a tickle in the throat. I have a choice, ignore it and keep working or get a test and it is positive, and I cannot earn an income to pay my bills and support my children ? What do I do ? I would say many would ignore it and just keep working and in doing so infecting others.

There are so many problems with COVID-19 stats, 1% error rate on testing would be the smallest factor in trying to analyze stats..


You make quite a few good points.

I also worked with my own company and I understand the logic that if you don't show up you don't get paid. It's a big conundrum if you get sick.

Over here there seem to be quite a few people who just don't care of their own and other people's safety.

I would like to go back to the 1% false positives subject however and I'll try to make some example to show to what extent it matters.

I'll make 3 examples that contain yesterday's figures from worldometers.info/coronavirus and assume that the rate of false positives is 1%, although as you pointed out it may be higher than that.

INDIA:
tests = 609,917
new cases = 59,696
1% false positive = 6,099
=> In this case the number of false positive is only 10% of new cases

2020082502IN.jpg


ITALY:
tests = 45,914
new cases = 953
1% false positive = 459
=> In this case the number of false positive is 48% of new cases, that is about half of them

2020082502IT.jpg


AUSTRALIA:
tests = 51,095
new cases = 104
1% false positive = 511
=> In this case the number of false positive about 511% the number of new cases, that is 5 times larger. The margin of error is larger than the measurement.

2020082502AU.jpg



This is what I meant by saying that perhaps we're getting a skewed view by only looking at the reported number of new cases without considering the total number of tests, the rate of false positives, and the consequent number of likely false positive.

Said that, keep safe and take care of yourself and your near and dear.
 
Last edited:

Bloke

Premium Member
You make quite a few good points.

I also worked with my own company and I understand the logic that if you don't show up you don't get paid. It's a big conundrum if you get sick.

Over here there seem to be quite a few people who just don't care of their own and other people's safety.

I would like to go back to the 1% false positives subject however and I'll try to make some example to show to what extent it matters.

I'll make 3 examples that contain yesterday's figures from worldometers.info/coronavirus and assume that the rate of false positives is 1%, although as you pointed out it may be higher than that.

INDIA:
tests = 609,917
new cases = 59,696
1% false positive = 6,099
=> In this case the number of false positive is only 10% of new cases

2020082502IN.jpg


ITALY:
tests = 45,914
new cases = 953
1% false positive = 459
=> In this case the number of false positive is 48% of new cases, that is about half of them

2020082502IT.jpg


AUSTRALIA:
tests = 51,095
new cases = 104
1% false positive = 511
=> In this case the number of false positive about 511% the number of new cases, that is 5 times larger. The margin of error is larger than the measurement.

2020082502AU.jpg



This is what I meant by saying that perhaps we're getting a skewed view by only looking at the reported number of new cases without considering the total number of tests, the rate of false positives, and the consequent number of likely false positive.

Said that, keep safe and take care of yourself and your near and dear.
Thanks - interesting comments. Discussion on this has almost become akin to the same passion of extreme ideologies, but really, what's at work is math and the mysteries of nature and science unfolding. People seem to forget that its the scientific method which needs to be applied, not spin... but on the other hand, the down side of not taking action like shutdowns, masks and social distancing is death, the down side of taking action is economic and psychological (which would also play in the first.).. and people will use spin and argument to move people to the path they want them to follow. But be that as it may or may not be, the real problem is fear of the unknown and the reality is we are working in a space unknown to the modern first world.

Let's hope we all get through this as quickly, painlessly and healthily as we can.

Thank you for your well wishes Brother, I return them !
 

TheThumbPuppy

Registered User
We live in a strange world, where science is (mis)used, manipulated, shunned or worse by different political factions depending on whether it would assist or obstruct their retention and increase of power.

Sadly, not that dissimilar from pope Paul V and Galileo.
 
Top