[foofie]

> (...) and they still got it.

I don't see the point of your comment. You're presenting an anecdotal case where someone who took some precautions which are known for not being 100% effective against airborne diseases ended up contracting an airborne disease.

It makes as much sense as ranting about wearing seatbelts because you can put together an anecdotal case of someone who got hurt in a car accident in spite of wearing one.

What's the point of that sort of argument, really?

[zdragnar]

The point is that even with reasonable precautions, it is (and was) possible for the man in the iron lung to be exposed to COVID.

The actual precautions necessary to protect him from any exposure at all would have been significantly more stringent than what people tend to believe are reasonable, as GPs anecdote demonstrates.

[KerrAvon]

The problem here is what people believe are reasonable and what is actually reasonable are pretty far apart. COVID will cripple you for the rest of your life if you're unlucky. Chance of that happening increases greatly with each infection. It is not the flu! It's not a cold!

Certainly in any medical context, *everyone* should be wearing N95s (at minimum). This should in particular not be optional for anyone calling themselves a medical professional or working in a medical office. This should not be controversial; it's basic preventative care.

For particularly sensitive people like this gentleman was, more substantial protection should be employed. Facemasks. Superior air recirculation.