Science! (Herd Immunity)
DaveSchmidt said:
jamie said:
Can you share the site you're getting the mask graphs from?
Thx
PVW said:
Thx
Don’t miss the New York City chart’s mandate label.
I checked the accuracy of the Kansas chart’s mandate label at random. The date is correct, but the chart fails to note that counties could opt out of the mandate. Of 105 counties, 81 opted out. Here’s what the CDC found about that.
DaveSchmidt said:
jamie said:
Can you share the site you're getting the mask graphs from?
Thanks, what an absolutely skewed selection of charts.
I also have to say that when a "news source" contributors merely link to twitter account - run away fast!
And from the founder of this site:
A reminder that COVID-19 is NOT like the flu in one important way... if it were:
- 1000 kids would now be dead
- 200 infants would be deceased
As it is - we have fewer than 20 deaths across those brackets.
And tonight he's hosting a 10 step plan to end the lockdowns:
https://rationalground.com/10-steps-to-end-the-lockdowns-a-rational-ground-webinar/
The thing I don't understand with the school rational is that teachers are not school age. If kids were teaching kids that would be one thing, but actual adults who are at a greater risk normally have to be there.
bikefixed said:
Speaking of cell phones, NJ has deployed an app that can anonymously monitor the possible spread of the virus and notify a person if they have been in contact with someone who is contagious with the COVID virus.
https://covid19.nj.gov/pages/apptoolkit
I encourage everyone I speak with to use it. It asks you to check in each day to report any symptoms or not. There are stats and information modules as well. From what I understand, if a person who is running the app has a positive test, they are given a code to enter into the app. Other phones running the app are able to sense when a phone carrying such a notification code is near enough for enough time to warrant a close contact.
My husband and I both have this on our phones. Neither of us have ever received an alert. For me i can understand, but my husband treats and transports multiple Covid patients every day. You’d think at least ONE of them would have triggered an alert, but so far, nothing. Either the app doesn’t work, or none of the positive cases are signed up.
I really wanted it to work, but if almost no one is using it then it is next to useless.
spontaneous said:
bikefixed said:
Speaking of cell phones, NJ has deployed an app that can anonymously monitor the possible spread of the virus and notify a person if they have been in contact with someone who is contagious with the COVID virus.
https://covid19.nj.gov/pages/apptoolkit
I encourage everyone I speak with to use it. It asks you to check in each day to report any symptoms or not. There are stats and information modules as well. From what I understand, if a person who is running the app has a positive test, they are given a code to enter into the app. Other phones running the app are able to sense when a phone carrying such a notification code is near enough for enough time to warrant a close contact.My husband and I both have this on our phones. Neither of us have ever received an alert. For me i can understand, but my husband treats and transports multiple Covid patients every day. You’d think at least ONE of them would have triggered an alert, but so far, nothing. Either the app doesn’t work, or none of the positive cases are signed up.
I really wanted it to work, but if almost no one is using it then it is next to useless.
On the app right now, it say 14,109 check-ins today, and 432,456 app users since launch. That's not very many.
jamie said:
Thanks, what an absolutely skewed selection of charts.
If masks don't mitigate at least some amount of pathogen spread, why on earth do health care workers in operating rooms wear them?
DaveSchmidt said:
PVW said:
Thx
Don’t miss the New York City chart’s mandate label.
Ha!
I checked the accuracy of the Kansas chart’s mandate label at random. The date is correct, but the chart fails to note that counties could opt of the mandate. Of 105 counties, 81 opted out. Here’s what the CDC found about that.
Worth following that link given the questions around effectiveness of mandates.
Summary
What is already known about this this topic?
Wearing face masks in public spaces reduces the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
What is added by this report?
The governor of Kansas issued an executive order requiring wearing masks in public spaces, effective July 3, 2020, which was subject to county authority to opt out. After July 3, COVID-19 incidence decreased in 24 counties with mask mandates but continued to increase in 81 counties without mask mandates.
What are the implications for public health practice?
Countywide mask mandates appear to have contributed to the mitigation of COVID-19 transmission in mandated counties. Community-level mitigation strategies emphasizing use of masks, physical distancing, staying at home when ill, and enhanced hygiene practices can help reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
spontaneous said:
My husband and I both have this on our phones. Neither of us have ever received an alert. For me i can understand, but my husband treats and transports multiple Covid patients every day. You’d think at least ONE of them would have triggered an alert, but so far, nothing. Either the app doesn’t work, or none of the positive cases are signed up.
I really wanted it to work, but if almost no one is using it then it is next to useless.
From what I understand, positive cases that are documented are given a code to enter into their app if those people have yet to be entered as cases into the system, there's a disconnect.
It isn't getting as much use as we'd hoped but it is at least something.
terp said:
jamie said:
terp said:
Have you read what they wrote? There is a lot there about tradeoffs. If anything our government has avoided talking about the costs of these policies. We have been monomaniacal on this issue. This only makes sense from a political perspective. Politicians are going to want to dissuade people from looking at alternatives to their policies.
What is your solution - Liberate New Jersey and remove the mask mandate? Also - post videos, but watch what you're writing - a pretty offensive comment was removed.. This is a covid discussion as I've said - not politics.
Watch what I write? Don't bring up politics? Pretty offensive?
Note that where you censored me was a reply to this that included a video of the speaker.
people are hurting because the solution is two pronged, but we have a gutless and destructive death cult of a Republican party that doesn't want to provide financial help.
Surely you see this. It's not like they're trying to hide it.The problem with conversing with people like you is that you are so biased you can't even see it. You are fine with someone saying roughly half Americand subscribe to "death cult". Nothing political or offensive there. When it is pointed out that this supposed death cult had a $1.8 Trillion package on the table but the speaker refused for seemingly political reasons, that's where the Rubicon is. Sure.
again, you have some facts wrong.
We can discuss whether they constitute a death cult somewhere else. I have many receipts.
The 1.8 tr dollar package did not come from Republican leadership. It came from Mnuchin, one of the more reasonable people in the administration. There was exactly zero chance that McConnell would allow a vote on it, so why should Pelosi compromise her position for something that was going nowhere?
Or do you think that's smart politics?
Wrt to the term "death cult" I have to point out that it's pretty much a literal description.
What else would we call this -- in the middle of a deadly pandemic a charismatic leader insists that people going to his rallies flout public health guidelines. And his followers do so enthusiastically. Packing venues with no social distancing and no masks.
Death cult.
jamie said:
terp said:
The problem with conversing with people like you is that you are so biased you can't even see it. You are fine with someone saying roughly half Americand subscribe to "death cult". Nothing political or offensive there. When it is pointed out that this supposed death cult had a $1.8 Trillion package on the table but the speaker refused for seemingly political reasons, that's where the Rubicon is. Sure.
I take it you won't be sharing the source for your images? And thanks for actually bringing ideas to the table. Usually a science topic would do this. Why are we spiking - and also demonstrate the scientists who are disputing the need for masks.
When did I use the phrase "death cult"?
I should have censored the line and not the video. Feel free to post the video again.
Looks like Dave Schmidt took care of the image sources. You didn't use the term "death cult". Drummerboy uses it in reference to Republicans in the post I was responding to.
That is twice on this thread I have been warned of bringing up politics where I have been responding to a political post. I'm curious as to why I am the only poster you take issue with on the politics. Second, my off color remark was a joke and if you think about it for just a second does not even approach the offensive nature of calling a party that represents roughly half the country as a death cult.
BTW: This is after you edited the thread title with a mischaracterization of the point I was making. Read sacs last post about hers immunity.
ml1 said:
Wrt to the term "death cult" I have to point out that it's pretty much a literal description.
What else would we call this -- in the middle of a deadly pandemic a charismatic leader insists that people going to his rallies flout public health guidelines. And his followers do so enthusiastically. Packing venues with no social distancing and no masks.
Death cult.
Mostly healthy
terp said:
Mostly healthy
not relevant. The willingness to die is what's important, not actually dying.
bub said:
Terp, perhaps you missed my comments about how no one on my first aid squad has contracted a single case of Covid from treating and transporting people who are by definition the sickest Covid patients (coughing, labored breathing etc.) in contrast to the experience of the President and his mask-mocking circle. If the difference is not explained by masks, please give me an alternative explanation. I'm all for reasoned debate and against the worship of sacred cows but the continued attack on mask-wearing is strictly for the loony.
Sure. There are a lot of posts directed or somewhat directed at me. Apologies if I don't address all of them. And BTW, I have looked through this thread and can't seem to find the original post.
First, I'm glad to hear that no one on your squad has gotten sick. What kind of masks does your squad wear? Do they change/sanitize them regularly? My understanding is that compliance with mask wearing is really high in this country. I believe it approaches 90%. But there is a lot of inconsistency of mask quality, how they are worn, etc.
And to be clear, I wear a mask when I go to stores etc. I mostly do it to make people around me comfortable. I do not think it is nearly as important outside. I brought my dog to the reservation and was walking her through the trails in the woods. A few people gave me the hairy eyeball because I wasn't wearing a mask. One family and their dog actually walked off the trail and into the woods to avoid me. Now where is the science to back that up?
And really, the burden of proof should be on those who impose these rules on others. If a business requires a mask that is one thing. When the government starts imposing it's quite another. First it's the masks, then its travel. They even try to tell you how to celebrate the holidays in your own home. Of course, these rules apply to you and me but not for them.. Are the governors of this great nation in a death cult? ;-)
It seems we are taking a sledge hammer to this problem. The Great Barrington Declaration was not saying that we should try to achieve herd immunity. They were saying that this was an eventuality no matter what. Their point was that we should take a more surgical approach rather than the current sledge hammer approach that is resulting in increases in heart disease, fewer cancer screenings, more global poverty and hunger, more depression, etc. The goal of a more surgical approach is to protect the vulnerable yet minimize the damage of these policies. To me, that makes perfect sense. Dr Gupta's opinion piece was simply expressing shock at the reaction. People lashed out at them like they were Terp on a MOL Trump thread. While I am used to that shabby treatment, it seems Dr Gupta was expecting a more reasoned response.
PVW said:
terp said:
Have you read what they wrote? There is a lot there about tradeoffs.
I've tried to read what you've posted from them. I haven't seen how many deaths, serious injuries, and long-term health issues they expect with their approach. If I've missed this, I'd be grateful if you showed me where they do go into this.
And the science is far from clear. If masks and mask mandates were as effective as claimed, we would expect to see cases dip after mandates are put in place. However, that is not what we see. Would you please point out the pattern in the below charts?
So first I'd like to go back to my distinction between science and politics. The effectiveness of masks is in the realm of science. Mask mandates, otoh, are about politics. Are mask mandates effective in increasing mask usage? What various kinds of mandates are there -- eg some carry fines, some don't, some are more restrictive, some less. I haven't done any deep reading on this, but there's bound to be quite a variation in types of mandates and actual behavior. If you're sincerely interested in getting into this, I'm happy to dive in and learn more along with you. But the general point is that places where people actually do where masks and social distancing experience lower rates of infection.
As for the charts you posted, a few of those charts there are from the LA area, which has been hit pretty hard, and if you look at the scale the peak looks to be around 280 or so per 1m. Compare to that to your chart of Mississippi though, where the peak looks just shy of 400 per 1m. And compare either of those to France, where people are more consistently practicing social distancing and mask wearing, and which in your chart has a steep rise at the end, going towards 160 per 1m..I have to say, though, it's a bit difficult to compare in this format. Not all your charts are the same time scale, some are cities whereas others are countries, and at least one confusingly has a different y axis on the left than on the right. So apples-to-apples comparisons are tricky. It would be helpful if you posted the source for these (and in general, it's good practice to always provide the source for data).
Here's a site where it's easier to make some comparisons: https://covidtracking.com/data/charts/cases-per-million-by-state. Compare CA or NJ with, for instance, SD and ND.
ETA -- thx to DavidSchmidt for finding the source. One of the sources is the covid tracking project, which I linked to in the paragraph right above this. It'd recommend just going to that source for comparisons rather than relying on the confusing presentation at Rational Ground.
I ran some of the charts in covidtracking. And I don't see how rational ground is misrepresenting anything. While the chart was scaled a bit differently it seemed pretty much the same.
Dont worry about comparing 1 place with another. The question is where is the correlation between the mask mandates and the number of cases. It is impossible to find. If masks were truly effective you would expect to see dips with some regularity. I just don't see that. Wouldn't we expect to see a pattern if masks limited transmission as much as is claimed?
You would think these things must make us invincible considering the distasteful manner some speak about those who are against wearing them.
drummerboy said:
terp said:
jamie said:
terp said:
Have you read what they wrote? There is a lot there about tradeoffs. If anything our government has avoided talking about the costs of these policies. We have been monomaniacal on this issue. This only makes sense from a political perspective. Politicians are going to want to dissuade people from looking at alternatives to their policies.
What is your solution - Liberate New Jersey and remove the mask mandate? Also - post videos, but watch what you're writing - a pretty offensive comment was removed.. This is a covid discussion as I've said - not politics.
Watch what I write? Don't bring up politics? Pretty offensive?
Note that where you censored me was a reply to this that included a video of the speaker.
people are hurting because the solution is two pronged, but we have a gutless and destructive death cult of a Republican party that doesn't want to provide financial help.
Surely you see this. It's not like they're trying to hide it.The problem with conversing with people like you is that you are so biased you can't even see it. You are fine with someone saying roughly half Americand subscribe to "death cult". Nothing political or offensive there. When it is pointed out that this supposed death cult had a $1.8 Trillion package on the table but the speaker refused for seemingly political reasons, that's where the Rubicon is. Sure.
again, you have some facts wrong.
We can discuss whether they constitute a death cult somewhere else. I have many receipts.
The 1.8 tr dollar package did not come from Republican leadership. It came from Mnuchin, one of the more reasonable people in the administration. There was exactly zero chance that McConnell would allow a vote on it, so why should Pelosi compromise her position for something that was going nowhere?
Or do you think that's smart politics?
Humm. Can't be sure.
We don’t agree with Speaker Pelosi that “nothing” is better than “something” for workers.
— Leader McConnell (@senatemajldr) October 13, 2020
Senators will vote on more relief next week, including more PPP money to stop layoffs. We’ll be able to pass it before we turn to Judge Barrett's nomination unless Democrats block it again. pic.twitter.com/paJFhx5HcI
terp said:
PVW said:
susan1014 said:
nohero said:
terp said:
Dr Sunetra Gupta pens opinion piece on the reaction to the Great Barrington Declaration.
I expected debate and disagreement about our ideas, published as the Great Barrington Declaration
...My goodness. Dr. Gupta discovered that there was a negative consequence (one could even say it was "viral") as a result of the group's "don't worry about people getting infected" argument. It's better than the alternative of actually following that advice.
What a silly, disappointing article. Instead of addressing any of the rather serious critiques of the Declaration (non lethal long-term risks, how to handle intergenerational households, the likely extra half million US deaths, etc.), she simply complains about how she has been treated. Kind of shows where her priorities are. Not an impressive outing — insisting we should be talking facts while responding to none of the criticisms or questions about her plan.
The constructive response to complaints that people focus on politics over substance would be to... focus on substance over politics. I certainly won't dispute that our public discourse is often shallow and overly politicized, but there are serious substantive questions on the proposal Gupta put forth that she's declined to address.
How did she decline to address anything? I think it's rather shallow to assume that she hasn't addressed any questions on her positions. What research have you done to back this assertion?
She didn’t address any of the questions in her article, and made no reference to doing so anywhere else. If you’ve found a completely different set of writings from her that explains rather than victim-whines, then please do share.
There is no doubt that the coronavirus is transmitted through the air. Isn't it simple common sense then that keeping distance and covering our noses and mouths should mitigate its transmission?
jamie said:
And from the founder of this site:
A reminder that COVID-19 is NOT like the flu in one important way... if it were:
- 1000 kids would now be dead
- 200 infants would be deceased
As it is - we have fewer than 20 deaths across those brackets.And tonight he's hosting a 10 step plan to end the lockdowns:
https://rationalground.com/10-steps-to-end-the-lockdowns-a-rational-ground-webinar/
The thing I don't understand with the school rational is that teachers are not school age. If kids were teaching kids that would be one thing, but actual adults who are at a greater risk normally have to be there.
I'm guessing you think Fauci is a kook too. Fauci says close the bars and keep the schools open
"If you mitigate the things that you know are causing spread in a very, very profound way, in a robust way, if you bring that down, you will then indirectly and ultimately protect the children in the school because the community level is determined how things go across the board," he said. "If you look at the data, the spread among children and from children is not really very big at all, not like one would have suspected."
susan1014 said:
terp said:
PVW said:
susan1014 said:
nohero said:
terp said:
Dr Sunetra Gupta pens opinion piece on the reaction to the Great Barrington Declaration.
I expected debate and disagreement about our ideas, published as the Great Barrington Declaration
...My goodness. Dr. Gupta discovered that there was a negative consequence (one could even say it was "viral") as a result of the group's "don't worry about people getting infected" argument. It's better than the alternative of actually following that advice.
What a silly, disappointing article. Instead of addressing any of the rather serious critiques of the Declaration (non lethal long-term risks, how to handle intergenerational households, the likely extra half million US deaths, etc.), she simply complains about how she has been treated. Kind of shows where her priorities are. Not an impressive outing — insisting we should be talking facts while responding to none of the criticisms or questions about her plan.
The constructive response to complaints that people focus on politics over substance would be to... focus on substance over politics. I certainly won't dispute that our public discourse is often shallow and overly politicized, but there are serious substantive questions on the proposal Gupta put forth that she's declined to address.
How did she decline to address anything? I think it's rather shallow to assume that she hasn't addressed any questions on her positions. What research have you done to back this assertion?
She didn’t address any of the questions in her article, and made no reference to doing so anywhere else. If you’ve found a completely different set of writings from her that explains rather than victim-whines, then please do share.
There are venues other than that 1 op ed. The fact is that nobody was interested in discussing the particulars. Google relegated the declaration to page 5 of its search results after pages of articles smearing, reddit scrubbed it, and Dr Gupta was told not to bring it up just prior to a BBC interview.
Her plea was to actually have the discussion. What is so hard to understand?
ml1 said:
There is no doubt that the coronavirus is transmitted through the air. Isn't it simple common sense then that keeping distance and covering our noses and mouths should mitigate its transmission?
You love the motte and bailey fallacy, don't you.
terp said:
You love the motte and bailey fallacy, don't you.
that's non-responsive.
Regardless, my profession has been to look at data and make recommendations. But when you don't have good data, you use your common sense. And you weigh cost/benefit. What's the cost of wearing a mask? Virtually NOTHING. What's the possible benefit? Slowing the spread of a pandemic.
No brainer.
Terp - if you were governor and all hospitals were full - what measures would you advise?
ml1 said:
terp said:
You love the motte and bailey fallacy, don't you.
that's non-responsive.
Regardless, my profession has been to look at data and make recommendations. But when you don't have good data, you use your common sense. And you weigh cost/benefit. What's the cost of wearing a mask? Virtually NOTHING. What's the possible benefit? Slowing the spread of a pandemic.
No brainer.
The motte!
terp said:
The motte!
I have to admit that after arguing with you over the years, my initial impression of you was totally wrong.
ml1 said:
terp said:
The motte!
I have to admit that after arguing with you over the years, my initial impression of you was totally wrong.
Very mysterious. Of course, the bailey is that those who don't comply with your "common sense" as you see fit are inferior and members of a "death cult"
For Sale
-
REVO luggage $100
More info -
2007 Honda Fit $4,400
More info
https://rationalground.com/mask-charts/
https://rationalground.com/more-mask-charts/