Sorry, but the tape on your fingers is a bad idea. The adhesive from tape attracts germs, and far more than just having bare skin.

Wear gloves instead, to avoid touching your face.

It was just an idea. You're right that it may have adverse effects.

Yet I wonder: Viruses live longer on a "clean-looking" doorknob than they do in a towel, for example. This was very counter-intuitive to me. So when it comes to a virus, would they live longer on skin or on a bandage or piece of tape?

Thank you for acknowledging this. I really appreciate it.

The issue is that the adhesive from tape is a form of glue. It attracts and keeps hold of germs. Plus, it is extremely hard to get fully off in terms of disinfection purposes.

I had a central line (dialysis catheter) in my chest for 4 months for a procedure called plasma exchange. You cannot take a shower with an exposed central line. A single drop of water on your line, or even the moisture/condensation from the shower can literally cause sepsis, as water has a lot of bacteria in it. This happens no matter how well the line is cleaned.

Anyways, I tried taking a shower by covering the line with a Ziploc bag and putting tape around it. I also cut the fingers off of gloves and /sealed the fingers of the glove onto the line with tape/. I literally put glue on the central line, which runs straight to my heart.

I never ended up with sepsis, due to the line only being in me shortly (4 months), but I did get chewed out by the sterility nurse.

Trust me, it is not a good idea.

You got very lucky. Lottery level winning lucky.

Basic lottery is 1 in 14 million winning. I guess "citation needed", having that exact winner on hn is pretty low probability. This is an irrational comment in an irrational subthread. I'm not sure adhesive tape doesn't have high germs density but i'm pretty sure there is little correlation between your finger sticking to a material and a germ sticking to that same material. This message has no positive outcome besides making feel good while i press "reply", it's not intended for you to read it, it's intended for me to re-read it while thinking of this moment.

It does attract bacteria plus other pathogens, plus makes them hard to remove.

For example, in the 90s, roll tape (versus now: single use sterile IV tape) was sometimes used to secure IV lines. Here is a study on IV lines (not central lines):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1496597/

I was phenomenally stupid and also phenomenally lucky not to go in to sepsis for this move.

I do know. Even though I am currently in pharmaceutical remission, I have cheated death a few times as an adult, and I am more aware of medical risks. You would be surprised to know that I am doing well and prospering, especially if you knew my health situation.

> You would be surprised to know that I am doing well and prospering, especially if you knew my health situation

As someone who is in the midst of a difficult medical situation right now (and who cheated death myself 2 years ago during the episode that sent me to ICU and gifted me with yet another chronic condition), I'm very happy for you and hope I can join you in your wellness in the coming months.

Some 15 years ago, I almost fully recovered from a serious medical condition that left me partially paralyzed, in severe pain, and out of work for many months. This time around it's a lot harder, and is taking years instead of months.

Aging sucks.

This complete internet stranger just wants to say he's happy to hear you're doing well and prospering, and wishes you the best in the circumstances you're in!

Thank you for understanding this.

2-3 weeks ago people on here were advocating stocking up on masks and selling at a high profit.

In Italy it's illegal, you cannot hoard or speculate on basic necessities (as the masks are being considered during the epidemic).

https://www.repubblica.it/economia/2020/02/26/news/coronavir...

Perfect way to guarantee shortages. Let the price float and there is an incentive for businesses to figure out how to increase the supply quickly, thus causing the price to drop.

The economic theory on this is rock-solid and yet it seems impossible to educate the general public or government officials regarding the consequences of price controls.

It's not as clear cut as you say.

For example, the large increase in price creates perverse incentives to reduce the available supply and make it available at a higher price (eg. buying all the masks at $n and reselling them at a price greater than n).

A higher price also encourages counterfeiting; making fake masks that sell for $1 isn't that profitable, but if they sell for $50, there's definitely more of an incentive to do so.

The problem of low-quality or defective merchandise exists at any price point. Adding price controls doesn't prevent that problem and in fact would encourage black markets where defective merchandise is less likely to be detected by consumers or regulators.

You suppose that you only have one "hoarder" (or speculator) in the market.

Once you have many, and if they don't talk together (which would be forbidden), masks would sell lower than what you think

In cases of extremely skewed demand/supply the price never actually goes down, and all the buyers get hosed. See: concert tickets.

Not the situation we are talking about but even in that situation a government control on the price of the concert tickets could easily create a shortage. An entertainer would just choose to have concerts in a different jurisdiction that didn't limit the prices leading to 0 seats in the location with price controls.

The entertainer makes zero money on the added price of tickets from trading dynamics we are talking about, it’s all middlemen.

Doesn't change the analysis re: supply and demand. Just changes to a discussion of the middlemen as a supplier.

It invalidates what you mentioned re. the entertainer avoiding a certain location due to price control. And btw, price control in this case means “no resale above ticket price” or something similar, not the government controlling the pricing itself. The supply is fixed so there can’t be a shortage (except when it’s caused by price gouging performed by middlemen).

You could also try directly killing people for money if that's your thing.

what is profitable for the individual may not be profitable for the group.

I agree strongly that we shouldn't overstock on masks.

That said, I'd urge everyone to get a few P95 [1] masks for themselves and their family members, in the event that you have to accompany them to a hospital, or even to wear in public if you live in an urban environment.

1. P95 have same filtering capacity as N95, but last for much longer.

Considering the fact that even alcohol-based hand-sanitizer is already sold out at 8 confirmed cases over here, masks seem extremely difficult to get a hold of...

Home Depot has been out of masks and respirators here for weeks now.

And what use is of mask with a valve for a sick person? They are already sick and valve will let contaminated air straight out? Can healthy people at least buy these?

I think that not recommending masks for everyone is very myopic considering that the virus tends to spread asymptotically.

Even if asymptomatic people transmit the virus "asymptomatic transmission likely plays a minor role in the epidemic overall, WHO says. People who cough or sneeze are more likely to spread the virus, the agency wrote"[1]

[1] - https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomati...

WHO can say what they want but considering how the virus popped up in Italy tells a different story. Something has been overlooked.

I agree. It's probably aliens. Or reptilians.

Naturally argumentum ad hominem is always the best strategy.

I think that's a fallacy fallacy right there, but I also think fallacies can be fun responses to stupidity. Fallacy is a strange word. Fallacy.