Corona outbreak has been linked and attributed to Joe Biden's last campaign rally in Minnesota ....
Coronavirus
2,004,663 Views |
19855 Replies |
Last: 53 min ago by Werewolf
Civilized said:DrummerboyWolf said:It doesn't. Everything I have heard him say, Trump has already done 6-7 months ago. He won't answer question about packing the court because "the voters don't deserve to know." Biden said that the Republicans confirming Amy Coney Barrett is "unconstitutional" just yesterday. It's not unconstitutional in any way. He wants to go back to Obamacare and try it again after it failed spectacularly. He has no policies that make any sense.Steve Williams said:
I keep hearing about the Joe Biden Covid plan. What is it exactly and how does it differ from anything that's been done so far?
You may say you don't like Biden's plan, or don't believe he can implement it.
But to say these are all things "Trump has already done 6-7 months ago" is obviously false. You either haven't actually taken the time to look at Biden's plan, or you just want to gloss over Trump's complete failure to conceive, communicate, and implement a coherent Covid strategy for America.
1. Stop the political theater and willful misinformation that has heightened confusion and discrimination.
2. Ensure that public health decisions are made by public health professionals and not politicians.
3. Immediately restore the White House National Security Council Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense.
4. Make Testing Widely Available and Free.
5. Ensure that every person who needs a test can get one and that testing for those who need it is free.
6. Establish at least ten mobile testing sites and drive-through facilities per state to speed testing and protect health care workers.
7. Provide a daily public White House report on how many tests have been done by the CDC, state and local health authorities, and private laboratories.
8. Expand CDC sentinel surveillance programs and other surveillance programs so that we can offer tests not only only to those who ask but also to those who may not know to ask, especially vulnerable populations like nursing home patients and people with underlying medical conditions. This must be done in collaboration with private sector health care entities.
9. Task the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to help establish a diagnosis code for COVID-19 on an emergency basis so that surveillance can be done using claims data.
10. Preparing to stand up multi-hundred-bed temporary hospitals in any city on short notice by deploying existing Federal Medical Stations in the strategic national stockpile and preemptively defining potential locations for their use as needed.
11. Directing the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to prepare for potential deployment of military resources, both the active and reserve components, and work with governors to prepare for potential deployment of National Guard resources, to provide medical facility capacity, logistical support, and additional medical personnel if necessary.
12. Instructing the CDC to establish real-time dashboards tracking (1) hospital admissions related to COVID-19, especially for ICUs and emergency departments, in concert with the American Hospital Association and large hospital chains, for which the HHS must ensure data is able to be shared, as needed; and (2) supply chain information including availability, allocation, and shipping for essential equipment and personal protective equipment, including in the various places where there may be federal reserves.
13. Ensuring that training, materials, and resources reach federally qualified health centers, rural health clinics, and safety-net hospitals, which are typically resource-poor and care disproportionately for vulnerable populations that will bear the brunt of COVID-19.
14. Surge tele-emergency room, tele-ICU care, and telemedicine through a concerted, coordinated effort by health care providers to enable staff to manage additional patients and save beds for the very sick. Leverage existing efforts like Project ECHO to ensure health professionals have tele-mentoring and other training resources they need to make informed decisions.
15. Support older adults, vulnerable individuals, and people with disabilities. Ensure essential home- and community-based services continue and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid works to provide the waivers necessary for those who rely on medication to have a sufficient supply.
...
And on, and on...
https://joebiden.com/covid-plan/
Is Trump's plan out there somewhere? Serious question. I'd like to compare the two, if so.
Honestly, as I was reading through that list I was thinking that we have already done most of that.
If Biden is elected the biggest change will be that the media won't blowing every single minor issue way out of proportion like they do now. In other words they will not be trying every way possible to make him look bad, like they ARE trying to make Trump look bad. Same thing they did with Obama... They will protect Biden.
Wait a second guys....what if the lamestream media is actually telling us the truth about this second coming of the black death?
Joined:
Nov 25, 2017
Posts:
12,564
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Noticed in Wake Forest they've taken one of those DOT yellow light signs that's usually used for traffic issues and are using it to blare "free covid tests, no waiting". So if you live in the area I suppose you can get a free test.
Stick a huge probe up my nose and swab part of my brain, all for some unreliable test that provides huge numbers of false "positives", for a supposed disease that has not even been isolated and which is no more deadly than the seasonal flu.Steve Williams said:
Noticed in Wake Forest they've taken one of those DOT yellow light signs that's usually used for traffic issues and are using it to blare "free covid tests, no waiting". So if you live in the area I suppose you can get a free test.
No thanks. I can survive a cold. I haven't bought into one iota of this madness.
NY Governor Cuomo Admits in Call with Jewish Leaders: Coronavirus "Initiatives Are Not Based on Science but Are Based Out of Fear" (AUDIO)
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/killer-cuomo-admits-call-jewish-leaders-coronavirus-initiatives-not-based-science-based-fear-audio/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/killer-cuomo-admits-call-jewish-leaders-coronavirus-initiatives-not-based-science-based-fear-audio/
You've been corrected on this before. Empathy is not your strong suit, much like shapes.GuerrillaPack said:Stick a huge probe up my nose and swab part of my brain, all for some unreliable test that provides huge numbers of false "positives", for a supposed disease that has not even been isolated and which is no more deadly than the seasonal flu.Steve Williams said:
Noticed in Wake Forest they've taken one of those DOT yellow light signs that's usually used for traffic issues and are using it to blare "free covid tests, no waiting". So if you live in the area I suppose you can get a free test.
No thanks. I can survive a cold. I haven't bought into one iota of this madness.
LOLOLOL
What, no infamous Raleigh snowstorm expert P. Nis?
What, no infamous Raleigh snowstorm expert P. Nis?
Daviewolf83 said:10/13/2020 Morning DHHS updateDaviewolf83 said:
I am sorry to have missed providing yesterday's update, but here are the updated numbers from todays NCDHHS updated:
10/12/2020 Morning DHHS update
NC Cases
232,747 (225,959 PCR + 6,788 Antigen)
NC Deaths
3,738 (PCR) + 35 (Anitgen) = 3,773 (+3 from yesterday)
Currently Hospitalized
1,109<- 96% reporting (was 1,046 at 95%)
Completed Tests
3,411,026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,970 Deaths are now Congregate (+0 from yesterday)
52% of Deaths are from Congregate setting (0% of deaths were Congregate today)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,232 positive cases over 29,520 new tests (DHHS reports 27,662). 4.2% positive rate. (DHHS reports 6.0%)
Dates of Death Reported 10/12:
10/10, 10/9(2) <== PCR Deaths
No Antigen tested Deaths Today
NC Cases
234,481 (227,496 PCR + 6,985 Antigen)
NC Deaths
3,774 (PCR) + 42 (Anitgen) = 3,816 (+43 from yesterday)
Currently Hospitalized
1,103<- 96% reporting (was 1,109 at 96%)
Completed Tests
3,437,598
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,996 Deaths are now Congregate (+26 from yesterday)
52% of Deaths are from Congregate setting (60% of deaths were Congregate today)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,537 positive cases over 26,572 new tests (DHHS reports 20,630). 5.8% positive rate. (DHHS reports 7.1%)
Dates of Death Reported 10/12:
10/12(3), 10/11(6), 10/10(8), 10/9(5), 10/8(5), 10/6(2), 10/5, 10/1, 9/30, 9/28, 9/23 <== PCR Deaths
10/10(3), 10/6, 10/5, 9/28, 9/10 <== Antigen tested Deaths
Of today's deaths, it is worth pointing out that 60% of the reported deaths were from Congregate facilities. Also, there was a large increase in Antigen tested deaths reported today, with an increase of 7 deaths (35 went to 42 deaths).
10/14/2020 Morning DHHS update
NC Cases
236407 (229115 PCR + 7292 Antigen)
NC Deaths
3813 (PCR) + 43 (Anitgen) = 3856 (+40 from yesterday)
Currently Hospitalized
1152<- 97% reporting (was 1103 at 96%)
Completed Tests
3,459,943
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2,011 Deaths are now Congregate (+15 from yesterday)
52% of Deaths are from Congregate setting (38% of deaths were Congregate today)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,619 positive cases over 22,345 new tests (DHHS reports 20,689). 7.2% positive rate. (DHHS reports 6.6%)
Dates of Death Reported 10/12:
10/13(2), 10/12(7), 10/11(8), 10/10, 10/9(2), 10/8(3), 10/7(2), 10/4, 10/2, 9/20, 9/2, 8/31, 8/30, 8/17 <== PCR Deaths
One death was removed from 7/9
10/10 <== Antigen tested Deaths
The date of death is missing today for 8 deaths.
I would suggest people focus more on hospitalizations and deaths, instead of cases. Cases are in some ways, directly related the amount of testing NC is currently conducting. The trend for testing is increasing, while at the same time, the percent positives are trending down slightly. The hospitalizations are more concerning at this point. It does appear that the severity of those being hospitalized is down slightly, if you look at the percentage in ICU. As a percentage, there are 28% of all patients in ICU and this is down a couple of percentage points from the averages over the past several weeks (average closer to 30%).
As far as deaths are concerned, it appears a lot of data mining took place today, with deaths reporting extending as far back as August (8/17).
Roy has to save those numbers for the debate tonight. They won't answer any questions from media that want the truth but only from those that are friendly to Der Fuhrer. Cooper is an idiot and a snake in the grass. He will do anything to defeat Trump and save his own sorry ass.Daviewolf83 said:
The date of death is missing today for 8 deaths.
I would suggest people focus more on hospitalizations and deaths, instead of cases. Cases are in some ways, directly related the amount of testing NC is currently conducting. The trend for testing is increasing, while at the same time, the percent positives are trending down slightly. The hospitalizations are more concerning at this point. It does appear that the severity of those being hospitalized is down slightly, if you look at the percentage in ICU. As a percentage, there are 28% of all patients in ICU and this is down a couple of percentage points from the averages over the past several weeks (average closer to 30%).
As far as deaths are concerned, it appears a lot of data mining took place today, with deaths reporting extending as far back as August (8/17).
Being an N. C. State fan builds great character!
Only if you believe what the Lamestream media and Gubbamint is telling you.ciscopack said:
Going up in every state in the nation.
.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
Do you just search the internet for articles that piss you off? That doesnt seem like a healthy habitciscopack said:
"Herd immunity is another word for mass murder," expert says
White House embraces Covid-19 herd immunity declaration from fake scientists, experts say 'this is mass murder'
Is Jim Jones in charge?
Saying "Herd immunity is another word for mass murder." is really saying "I am a moron."
^^
"...That doesn't seem like a healthy habit ."
Better mask up.
"...That doesn't seem like a healthy habit ."
Better mask up.
Like I said, if you cant get hyped for the Carolina game, why are you here?
-Earl Wolff-
-Earl Wolff-
Golfer Dustin Johnson has tested positive for the virus. He was supposed to be playing in the CJ Cup in Las Vegas but has withdrawn.
https://www.golfchannel.com/news/dustin-johnson-withdraws-cj-cup-after-testing-positive-covid-19
https://www.golfchannel.com/news/dustin-johnson-withdraws-cj-cup-after-testing-positive-covid-19
Being an N. C. State fan builds great character!
Technically speaking, herd immunity is how we eventually get out of the pandemic and return to normal. People think there is only one way to get to herd immunity and they concoct absurd numbers to accuse others of supporting the death of millions of people for encouraging head immunity.ciscopack said:
"Herd immunity is another word for mass murder," expert says
White House embraces Covid-19 herd immunity declaration from fake scientists, experts say 'this is mass murder'
Is Jim Jones in charge?
Herd immunity will come from:
1. Development of one or more vaccines - immunity is what comes from exposure to a vaccine
2. People's natural immunity that comes from becoming infected and recovering from the Covid-19 virus
If you can get enough people vaccinated and if enough people become infected and recover from the virus, we will get to herd immunity and return to normal. We will need both to happen.
Currently, the US is not attempting to reach herd immunity without the use of a vaccine and anyone who suggests this is the policy of the US government is spreading garbage and lies. The US government is spending millions of dollars on Operation Warp Speed to insure we have doses of the vaccine available as soon as the FDA grants approval, instead of having to wait to produce the vaccine after approval. If they US was just planning to get to herd immunity by letting everyone get infected, they would be wasting those millions of dollars.
As cases start to rise, people are starting to talk about lockdowns. While I do not believe we will see lockdowns like we did months ago, I thought it would be interesting to see how some countries that locked down hard the last time are doing now.
One way to measure lockdowns is to look at the Google Mobility Social Interaction scores for a country. Looking at this for four countries (France, Spain, Sweden, and the US), you can see that France and Spain clearly locked down harder than the US and definitely much more than Sweden.
Now, if you look at a graph of Daily New Cases (normalized for population), you can see what happened in those countries after the lockdowns and what is happening now with cases. As you can see from the graph below, the two countries that locked down the hardest are now seeing the highest number of daily new cases. The country that locked down the least, is seeing significantly fewer daily new cases than the other countries.
A key advisor to the WHO is now saying countries should use lockdowns as a last resort to control the virus and the graphs above should help to provide some validity to this approach.
One way to measure lockdowns is to look at the Google Mobility Social Interaction scores for a country. Looking at this for four countries (France, Spain, Sweden, and the US), you can see that France and Spain clearly locked down harder than the US and definitely much more than Sweden.
Now, if you look at a graph of Daily New Cases (normalized for population), you can see what happened in those countries after the lockdowns and what is happening now with cases. As you can see from the graph below, the two countries that locked down the hardest are now seeing the highest number of daily new cases. The country that locked down the least, is seeing significantly fewer daily new cases than the other countries.
A key advisor to the WHO is now saying countries should use lockdowns as a last resort to control the virus and the graphs above should help to provide some validity to this approach.
Are masks really helpful in slowing and stopping the spread of Covid-19. Dr. S. Stanley Young, PhD, a scientist with a PhD in Applied Statistics and a current member of the EPA's Scientific Advisory Board has looked at the data and concluded they are NOT effective.
I debated posting this article, since I do believe there is some benefit to wearing a mask. I have had doubts about certain types of masks (neck gaiters as an example) and how well masks work when worn improperly (ie., they likely don't work when worn below the nose), but I have always thought a physical barrier should provide some protection by catching airborne viral particles and not allowing them to pass to my nose and mouth. The article posted below looks at the data from randomized clinical trials (studies involving influenza) and applies meta-analysis to them to determine the statistical impact of mask wearing.
The opinion of the statistician was sent to Dr. Cohen and her staff and after a lot of prodding, they supplied their own meta-analysis study to him. As he points out in the article, the study they provided had the following conclusion:
"Medical masks were not effective, and cloth masks even less effective." They also noted that "...respirators, if worn continually during a shift, were effective but not if worn intermittently."
You can read an article Dr. Young wrote on this topic at the link below. It is focused primarily on North Carolina and it's current mask mandate. Please read this with an open mind and consider what he has to say. It is based on science and data. I am sure there are other meta-analysis studies with different outcomes and if people have access to them, I would love for you to post them, so we can read about them as well.
COVID-19 Are masks really helpful?
I debated posting this article, since I do believe there is some benefit to wearing a mask. I have had doubts about certain types of masks (neck gaiters as an example) and how well masks work when worn improperly (ie., they likely don't work when worn below the nose), but I have always thought a physical barrier should provide some protection by catching airborne viral particles and not allowing them to pass to my nose and mouth. The article posted below looks at the data from randomized clinical trials (studies involving influenza) and applies meta-analysis to them to determine the statistical impact of mask wearing.
The opinion of the statistician was sent to Dr. Cohen and her staff and after a lot of prodding, they supplied their own meta-analysis study to him. As he points out in the article, the study they provided had the following conclusion:
"Medical masks were not effective, and cloth masks even less effective." They also noted that "...respirators, if worn continually during a shift, were effective but not if worn intermittently."
You can read an article Dr. Young wrote on this topic at the link below. It is focused primarily on North Carolina and it's current mask mandate. Please read this with an open mind and consider what he has to say. It is based on science and data. I am sure there are other meta-analysis studies with different outcomes and if people have access to them, I would love for you to post them, so we can read about them as well.
COVID-19 Are masks really helpful?
I read a study this morning, I think from the cdc, saying something similar. It was a singular study with a much smaller sample size so I didn't share it as I knew what the retorts would be. I think this analysis uses a lot more data to form their positions.
Thanks for the info.
Thanks for the info.
Omg, how dare you question whether a bandana or rag that is not sealed against your face (leaving huge openings to the outside air) is actually protecting you from this uber deadly cold virus!! Don't you know that it is heresy to question anything that the government orders us to do? That makes you a "conspiracy theorist", the lowest of all people. We must do any and everything that Dur Furher Cooper dictates! Science people!!
I believe you are talking about the CDC study that uses self-reported data on mask wearing and transmission. When dealing with self-reported data, you do have to recognize that it will typically contain bias and unless additional questions were asked to eliminate some of this bias, it can be a problem when trying to draw conclusions. I did not include references to this study, due to my bias concerns. Here is a link to the CDC study if people are interested: Community and Close Contact Exposures Associated with COVID-19packgrad said:
I read a study this morning, I think from the cdc, saying something similar. It was a singular study with a much smaller sample size so I didn't share it as I knew what the retorts would be. I think this analysis uses a lot more data to form their positions.
Thanks for the info.
I felt more confident about the article I did link, given the background/qualifications of the writer and the analysis he did of the data. At this point, until the study mentioned in the article I linked can be peer reviewed, I will advise people to consider it, but recognize there could be errors in the study that need to be examined. This is why I asked to have links to other relevant studies, so we could have some balance in the discussion.
I posted the article, since it was more directly related to North Carolina and the policies of Cooper's administration. He is fond of saying he is following the science with his policies, but as I have mentioned in the past, some of his policies (initial restrictions on fans attending outdoor football games as an example) were not based on science at all.
As to mask wearing, I personally plan to continue wearing a mask and will do so until I see additional data that compels me to do otherwise. I will also continue to encourage others to wear a mask, since I still think there is a chance it provides some protection. I do not believe a mask will provide a 100% guarantee of avoiding infection and people who wear a mask regularly can still become infected while wearing the mask. This is why you must maintain social distance, while wearing a mask.
I think the biggest problem with requiring masks, and I've said this multiple times in this thread, is the false sense of security given to the wearer, particularly when you have people in charge saying that a mask is better than a vaccine or that the virus will go away if everyone wears a mask. Is there anything wrong with everyone wearing a mask? No, not inherently, we probably should all do it every cold and flu season. However, thinking that wearing a little bit of fabric over your mouth is going to keep you from getting the virus, or completely stop you from spreading it, is fallacy.
As more and more evidence and studies come out, I still stand by my thought from a hundred pages ago that the measures that we have taken have been, by in large, ineffective at best. The majority of those who have died in this state from the virus have been in congregate facilities, as Wayland and Davie show us daily, and the lockdown and mask mandate haven't been able to stop that at all. If everyone were wearing respirators, and there weren't any essential jobs and everyone didn't leave their house for months, maybe. But the reality is, as long as some portion of the population is out and about, the virus will continue to do what it does. By all means, continue to cover your face where required, wash your hands, social distance, be careful around those who are at risk, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't question the effectiveness, and selective enforcement of, these measures.
As more and more evidence and studies come out, I still stand by my thought from a hundred pages ago that the measures that we have taken have been, by in large, ineffective at best. The majority of those who have died in this state from the virus have been in congregate facilities, as Wayland and Davie show us daily, and the lockdown and mask mandate haven't been able to stop that at all. If everyone were wearing respirators, and there weren't any essential jobs and everyone didn't leave their house for months, maybe. But the reality is, as long as some portion of the population is out and about, the virus will continue to do what it does. By all means, continue to cover your face where required, wash your hands, social distance, be careful around those who are at risk, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't question the effectiveness, and selective enforcement of, these measures.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
Speaking of deaths in Congregate facilities, here is a graph of the current data, starting in early June. I applied a 7-day moving average trend line, since the data has quite a bit of lag in the reporting. The average percentage over the period I show is 47%, but the average from the time the data has been reported by DHHS is 52%.wilmwolf80 said:
I think the biggest problem with requiring masks, and I've said this multiple times in this thread, is the false sense of security given to the wearer, particularly when you have people in charge saying that a mask is better than a vaccine or that the virus will go away if everyone wears a mask. Is there anything wrong with everyone wearing a mask? No, not inherently, we probably should all do it every cold and flu season. However, thinking that wearing a little bit of fabric over your mouth is going to keep you from getting the virus, or completely stop you from spreading it, is fallacy.
As more and more evidence and studies come out, I still stand by my thought from a hundred pages ago that the measures that we have taken have been, by in large, ineffective at best. The majority of those who have died in this state from the virus have been in congregate facilities, as Wayland and Davie show us daily, and the lockdown and mask mandate haven't been able to stop that at all. If everyone were wearing respirators, and there weren't any essential jobs and everyone didn't leave their house for months, maybe. But the reality is, as long as some portion of the population is out and about, the virus will continue to do what it does. By all means, continue to cover your face where required, wash your hands, social distance, be careful around those who are at risk, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't question the effectiveness, and selective enforcement of, these measures.
The recent trend is the data is heading in the right direction, but it needs to continue to come down even more. As I have said many times, this is the area where the most testing and preventative resources should be devoted. These facilities contain the population that is most highly at risk from the virus and as such, it should be the one getting the most attention.
Yep. That was the one, and that was the reason I did not post it.
I hate it for these families with people in nursing homes. It must be so frustrating knowing there is nothing they can personally do to help protect loved ones who are so vulnerable. I don't have any relatives in this scenario myself but I sure feel for them.Daviewolf83 said:Speaking of deaths in Congregate facilities, here is a graph of the current data, starting in early June. I applied a 7-day moving average trend line, since the data has quite a bit of lag in the reporting. The average percentage over the period I show is 47%, but the average from the time the data has been reported by DHHS is 52%.wilmwolf80 said:
I think the biggest problem with requiring masks, and I've said this multiple times in this thread, is the false sense of security given to the wearer, particularly when you have people in charge saying that a mask is better than a vaccine or that the virus will go away if everyone wears a mask. Is there anything wrong with everyone wearing a mask? No, not inherently, we probably should all do it every cold and flu season. However, thinking that wearing a little bit of fabric over your mouth is going to keep you from getting the virus, or completely stop you from spreading it, is fallacy.
As more and more evidence and studies come out, I still stand by my thought from a hundred pages ago that the measures that we have taken have been, by in large, ineffective at best. The majority of those who have died in this state from the virus have been in congregate facilities, as Wayland and Davie show us daily, and the lockdown and mask mandate haven't been able to stop that at all. If everyone were wearing respirators, and there weren't any essential jobs and everyone didn't leave their house for months, maybe. But the reality is, as long as some portion of the population is out and about, the virus will continue to do what it does. By all means, continue to cover your face where required, wash your hands, social distance, be careful around those who are at risk, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't question the effectiveness, and selective enforcement of, these measures.
The recent trend is the data is heading in the right direction, but it needs to continue to come down even more. As I have said many times, this is the area where the most testing and preventative resources should be devoted. These facilities contain the population that is most highly at risk from the virus and as such, it should be the one getting the most attention.
The general data sure points to a man in his 40's like me just needs to keep on keeping on.
Thanks for posting that, Davie. Something to keep in mind, but i share your sentiment about masking.
Most of this I've said before, but I'll share again because i think it's hugely important. Most of what I'm going to say is, to me, extremely common sensical and not political or even overly medical. But this is how i try to think about it as we navigate this pandemic.
1. I appreciate Dr. Young's effort to inform us, but keep in mind he's a statistician, not a medical doctor who's interpreting studies and performing a meta-analysis without knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the studies, probably no experience with critically reviewing such individual studies, and no medical background. But still good stuff to know.
2. The infectious disease docs here are wearing mask and imploring us to do so. They have forgotten more about how viruses virus than you and i will ever know.
3. The article states what percentage of exposed people became infected, but doesn't mention severity of infection or outcomes.
4. Severity of infection is what's really important, don't you think? Who cares if everybody gets infected if they don't get sick? Variolation to get herd immunity?
5. Again i say: sneeze in your mask. Take the mask off. Feel it. Is it wet? If it is and you have the Rona, do those droplets contain virus? Are those virus-laden droplets ones that could have been airborn if not for the mask? Is innoculum size important in infectious potential and, more importantly, in severity of disease? If those virus filled droplets are in the mask instead of your buddy's face, is the innoculum lower? Exits from the mask are mostly at the edges, and not so much straight ahead. Where was your buddy standing?
6. Sure masks aren't the magical answer that prevents spread completely and ends the pandemic, and so you can still infect others or get infected even if you wear them often and correctly. But, i remain quite confident based on my answers to myself in number 5 that masks reduce innoculum load and therefore, in many cases, severity of disease even if disease rate is the same. And if a virus is gonna virus, then at least do something to increase the chance it'll be mild when i get it.
And, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that exactly what we're seeing? Disease rate is fairly stable to slightly decreased, but severity of disease, avg age, hospitalizations, deaths, icu use all declining? To me, the assumptions that can be made and my knowledge of the importance of viral load are stronger than any study seen to date.
How does one even do a good RCT here? Where are the volunteers to randomize into the arm that takes a sneeze to the face from a sick person without masks? Them peeps cray.
Most of this I've said before, but I'll share again because i think it's hugely important. Most of what I'm going to say is, to me, extremely common sensical and not political or even overly medical. But this is how i try to think about it as we navigate this pandemic.
1. I appreciate Dr. Young's effort to inform us, but keep in mind he's a statistician, not a medical doctor who's interpreting studies and performing a meta-analysis without knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the studies, probably no experience with critically reviewing such individual studies, and no medical background. But still good stuff to know.
2. The infectious disease docs here are wearing mask and imploring us to do so. They have forgotten more about how viruses virus than you and i will ever know.
3. The article states what percentage of exposed people became infected, but doesn't mention severity of infection or outcomes.
4. Severity of infection is what's really important, don't you think? Who cares if everybody gets infected if they don't get sick? Variolation to get herd immunity?
5. Again i say: sneeze in your mask. Take the mask off. Feel it. Is it wet? If it is and you have the Rona, do those droplets contain virus? Are those virus-laden droplets ones that could have been airborn if not for the mask? Is innoculum size important in infectious potential and, more importantly, in severity of disease? If those virus filled droplets are in the mask instead of your buddy's face, is the innoculum lower? Exits from the mask are mostly at the edges, and not so much straight ahead. Where was your buddy standing?
6. Sure masks aren't the magical answer that prevents spread completely and ends the pandemic, and so you can still infect others or get infected even if you wear them often and correctly. But, i remain quite confident based on my answers to myself in number 5 that masks reduce innoculum load and therefore, in many cases, severity of disease even if disease rate is the same. And if a virus is gonna virus, then at least do something to increase the chance it'll be mild when i get it.
And, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that exactly what we're seeing? Disease rate is fairly stable to slightly decreased, but severity of disease, avg age, hospitalizations, deaths, icu use all declining? To me, the assumptions that can be made and my knowledge of the importance of viral load are stronger than any study seen to date.
How does one even do a good RCT here? Where are the volunteers to randomize into the arm that takes a sneeze to the face from a sick person without masks? Them peeps cray.
Recent study shows that 85% of those "contracting covid" either "always" or "often" wore a mask:
CDC Admits "At No Time Has CDC Guidance Suggested that Masks Were Intended to Protect the Wearers"
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/wth-cdc-admits-no-time-cdc-guidance-suggested-masks-intended-protect-wearers-video/
CDC Admits "At No Time Has CDC Guidance Suggested that Masks Were Intended to Protect the Wearers"
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/wth-cdc-admits-no-time-cdc-guidance-suggested-masks-intended-protect-wearers-video/
GuerrillaPack said:
Recent study shows that 85% of those "contracting covid" either "always" or "often" wore a mask:
CDC Admits "At No Time Has CDC Guidance Suggested that Masks Were Intended to Protect the Wearers"
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/wth-cdc-admits-no-time-cdc-guidance-suggested-masks-intended-protect-wearers-video/
I could hear you cheering loudly for that segment all the way over here in my corner of the earth.
This was from the same CDC study mentioned above and you can read the whole thing here:GuerrillaPack said:
Recent study shows that 85% of those "contracting covid" either "always" or "often" wore a mask:
CDC Admits "At No Time Has CDC Guidance Suggested that Masks Were Intended to Protect the Wearers"
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/wth-cdc-admits-no-time-cdc-guidance-suggested-masks-intended-protect-wearers-video/
Community and Close Contact Exposures Associated with COVID-19
As I pointed out earlier, the study contains some bias and flaws that need to be considered. Chief among these flaws are the fact the data about wearing masks is self-reported and as such, is subject to be biased to over-report mask wearing. The study actually identifies five limitations that make it difficult to draw broad assumptions about mask wearing. This is part of the problem with the media trying to report on Covid issues and statistical studies. They only report one aspect while ignoring the limitations.
Also, Tucker and some others in the media are not reporting on other aspects in the study that would not fit their view on how we should be treating Covid policies. For example, the study mentions the much higher likelihood of contracting Covid while eating and drinking in restaurants and bars. In the summary at the top of the page, the study clearly says the following:
"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."
This means people should avoid eating in restaurants, since they are approximately twice as likely to test positive. This lends credence to the idea that we should restrict occupancy in restaurants and continue to get take-out instead.
Featured Stories
See All
COMMIT ALERT: Louisville Guard Mike James Picks NC State
by James Henderson
IPS IN 5: The Evolution Of The Guard Position
by James Henderson
IPS TAKE: Dontrez Styles Transfer Decision
by James Henderson
IPS INTEL: Transfer Portal Guard On Campus
by James Henderson
IPS LIVE: Spring Football Recap Podcast
by IPS Staff