Cdog923 Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 On 10/12/2020 at 12:10 PM, ScarletRevival said: That's pretty vague, do you have an actual name of this person? 13 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said: Not black and white. Not one person. Pretty much all available evidence from professionals with no axe to grind suggests mask wearing can reduce coronavirus infections by 75%. That 25% will still kill people, but if the conversation is about opening the economy and moving things forward, it starts with mask wearing. Or more to the point, not treating masks like a badge of political resistance. Also, almost every spike in positive tests is linked to large gatherings of folks not wearing masks. So it's not black and white, but it's still pretty simple. You satisfied, @ScarletRevival? 2 Quote Link to comment
ScarletRevival Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 On 10/13/2020 at 12:12 PM, Guy Chamberlin said: Not black and white. Not one person. Pretty much all available evidence from professionals with no axe to grind suggests mask wearing can reduce coronavirus infections by 75%. That 25% will still kill people, but if the conversation is about opening the economy and moving things forward, it starts with mask wearing. Or more to the point, not treating masks like a badge of political resistance. Also, almost every spike in positive tests is linked to large gatherings of folks not wearing masks. So it's not black and white, but it's still pretty simple. I've heard and watched a number of interviews with medical professionals, some who want to effectively treat this virus and say that masks aren't at all effective, some with an axe to grind are in favor of mask mandates, lockdowns, etc. A new study by the CDC https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf says that over 70% of Covid patients regularly or always wear masks. We all have to listen to and follow the science. 2 Quote Link to comment
ScarletRevival Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 On 10/13/2020 at 12:26 PM, Cdog923 said: You satisfied, @ScarletRevival? No, I'm concerned that in the US we don't have the "world's leading immunologist" to rely on. 1 Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 2 hours ago, ScarletRevival said: I've heard and watched a number of interviews with medical professionals, some who want to effectively treat this virus and say that masks aren't at all effective, some with an axe to grind are in favor of mask mandates, lockdowns, etc. A new study by the CDC https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf says that over 70% of Covid patients regularly or always wear masks. We all have to listen to and follow the science. This is a misleading interpretation of the study and that particular data point. You have to take the context of the study into consideration; therefore, referencing the 'summary' is a far more accurate and sincere method of contributing to this conversation. The study is not purporting what you are claiming. Quote What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19. What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results. What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities. 4 1 Quote Link to comment
FrantzHardySwag Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 2 hours ago, ScarletRevival said: A new study by the CDC https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf says that over 70% of Covid patients regularly or always wear masks. 70% of the 154 Covid + patients from the article self reported they always wear a mask. 74% of the 160 COVID - patients self reported they always wear a mask. Self reported data kinda sucks, and this isn't a big sample. Anyways their big takeaway from this study is "Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities" Do with that info what you wish. 4 Quote Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 2 hours ago, ScarletRevival said: I've heard and watched a number of interviews with medical professionals, some who want to effectively treat this virus and say that masks aren't at all effective, some with an axe to grind are in favor of mask mandates, lockdowns, etc. A new study by the CDC https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf says that over 70% of Covid patients regularly or always wear masks. We all have to listen to and follow the science. I have also seen the interviews with medical professionals claiming masks aren't effective, but there are very few of them and the "professionals" have typically been discredited by all available evidence. Some, of course, are paid shills, with a paid axe to grind. I'm not sure you actually read the cdc link you provided. The medical community has always been pretty unanimous about this -- including their early mistake. The only reason to insist masks aren't useful or needed is because you are balls deep in partisan conspiracy theory. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8 3 Quote Link to comment
Rochelobe Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 On 10/13/2020 at 10:12 AM, Guy Chamberlin said: Not black and white. Not one person. Pretty much all available evidence from professionals with no axe to grind suggests mask wearing can reduce coronavirus infections by 75%. That 25% will still kill people, but if the conversation is about opening the economy and moving things forward, it starts with mask wearing. Or more to the point, not treating masks like a badge of political resistance. Also, almost every spike in positive tests is linked to large gatherings of folks not wearing masks. So it's not black and white, but it's still pretty simple. Yes, the evidence seems to be building up: 1. Anecdotally (increased number of non-masking politicians from one party suddenly testing positive - seemingly from a single event vs none/very few from other party with generally higher masking use) 2. Daily positive counts where we are now seeing a surge in states that have been more relaxed (or even antagonistic) about masking requirements (e.g.: South Dakota). Several of these states are more rural than those that suffered the initial Mar/Apr/May outbreak. Many scientists said earlier this year those rural states would have a coronavirus increase later in the year, unless they were diligent about enforcing masking, no large events, etc. At the end of the day, I chalk up mask resistance to a form of risk analysis failure. Typically we see it the other way around - people that undervalue significant risks since they tend to view things only anecdotally. If it hasn't happened to them (or someone they personally know) then it must not happen to anyone. Mask use is even more difficult to convince doubters on, since the primary purpose is to protect others from your aerosols. Its a mutual protection plan, where you as an individual actually need others to follow the rules to help reduce your risk. It also requires large scale compliance consistency (see the White House Rose Garden event as a counter example, or the recent outbreak from a Sweet 16 party on Long Island). I'd like to think use of the Swiss Cheese Model for accident causation (used heavily in things like aircraft safety design) applied to virus protection would help them understand, but I think they've decided to let emotion rule their thoughts - "politician I believe says masks are bad, so masks are bad". No analysis, no evidence, just opinion. Masks alone are not a 100% solution either, as we know. However: Social Distancing as much as possible + Masks + short exposure when distancing not possible + outdoors where possible + hand washing + ... will keep reducing the risks. The idea is to have multiple weapons simultaneously deployed against the threat. Masks are one of the important weapons in this fight. If people get complacent on one or more of these approaches then the result can be an increase in positivity rates (as we are seeing presently, for example, in several places in Nebraska, South Dakota, etc.) 2 Quote Link to comment
Cdog923 Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 5 hours ago, ScarletRevival said: No, I'm concerned that in the US we don't have the "world's leading immunologist" to rely on. Luckily enough for you, we do! 5 hours ago, GBRFAN said: .... or world leading president We haven't had one of those in almost 4 years. 3 Quote Link to comment
teachercd Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 10 hours ago, Rochelobe said: Yes, the evidence seems to be building up: 1. Anecdotally (increased number of non-masking politicians from one party suddenly testing positive - seemingly from a single event vs none/very few from other party with generally higher masking use) 2. Daily positive counts where we are now seeing a surge in states that have been more relaxed (or even antagonistic) about masking requirements (e.g.: South Dakota). Several of these states are more rural than those that suffered the initial Mar/Apr/May outbreak. Many scientists said earlier this year those rural states would have a coronavirus increase later in the year, unless they were diligent about enforcing masking, no large events, etc. At the end of the day, I chalk up mask resistance to a form of risk analysis failure. Typically we see it the other way around - people that undervalue significant risks since they tend to view things only anecdotally. If it hasn't happened to them (or someone they personally know) then it must not happen to anyone. Mask use is even more difficult to convince doubters on, since the primary purpose is to protect others from your aerosols. Its a mutual protection plan, where you as an individual actually need others to follow the rules to help reduce your risk. It also requires large scale compliance consistency (see the White House Rose Garden event as a counter example, or the recent outbreak from a Sweet 16 party on Long Island). I'd like to think use of the Swiss Cheese Model for accident causation (used heavily in things like aircraft safety design) applied to virus protection would help them understand, but I think they've decided to let emotion rule their thoughts - "politician I believe says masks are bad, so masks are bad". No analysis, no evidence, just opinion. Masks alone are not a 100% solution either, as we know. However: Social Distancing as much as possible + Masks + short exposure when distancing not possible + outdoors where possible + hand washing + ... will keep reducing the risks. The idea is to have multiple weapons simultaneously deployed against the threat. Masks are one of the important weapons in this fight. If people get complacent on one or more of these approaches then the result can be an increase in positivity rates (as we are seeing presently, for example, in several places in Nebraska, South Dakota, etc.) Seeing it with students, I think covid-fatigue is setting in, fast. Quote Link to comment
Ulty Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 the "medical professionals" who say masks aren't effective are like the "scientists" who deny climate change. They are few and far between, they are utter quacks, and the right wing will cling to their nonsense because it fits their agenda. 4 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 3 minutes ago, Ulty said: the "medical professionals" who say masks aren't effective are like the "scientists" who deny climate change. They are few and far between, they are utter quacks, and the right wing will cling to their nonsense because it fits their agenda. I can find "scientists" who believe the Earth is flat. That doesn't mean I should pay attention to what those scientists say. 3 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 Great company we're in. 2 1 Quote Link to comment
Rochelobe Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 10 hours ago, teachercd said: Seeing it with students, I think covid-fatigue is setting in, fast. I think that fatigue is understandable. This whole thing has to be hard on kids - particularly ~K-6 or so that are just trying to figure out how to learn, and then we have to layer socially distant/masked school or zoom school on them. I could see older kids having a little more patience, but after 2 months of this directly following on the end of a turbulent spring semester, they are probably really frustrated. I'm not sure what the answer is. Distance education just doesn't seem viable as the primary educational paradigm. Using it to cover the occasional snow day, etc. is probably ok, but I would think the vast majority of K-12 students will struggle with distance learning. Having them do in person with all the COVID restrictions probably also saps any enthusiasm. While some children have died due to COVID, that part is a much lower risk for them, however we are starting to see data that shows they are quite able to catch it at high rates, and spread it to their parents/grandparents/etc just as effectively as adults transfer it. For schools it is difficult to win - if they say come to school and relax the rules and a kid dies/suffers debilitating effects, the school district get sued, probably successfully. It is just a tough situation all around. I don't envy those of you having to try and teach younger kids in that environment. I do some part time teaching for a community college, and there the expectations are a little different - students aren't required to be in college. So saying (nicely) "suck it up and put in the effort" is more supported by the college administration. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.