Covid-19 #15 : It Ain't Over Until It's Over

[rotting sea cow]

Just now, Gorn said:

The problem with WHO is that a scientific organization shouldn't make emphatic, unconditional statements such as "don't wear masks, they're useless" without firm science to back them up. That kind of statement tends to embed itself in public's consciousness, and it's really difficult to backtrack or reverse them.

Their thinking has been the opposite.

- There is no evidence that masks prevent the infections, so we don't recommend them.

- There is no evidence of human-to-human transmission, so there is no need to worry.

- There is no evidence of asymptomatic spread, so quick checks at the airports are enough and stricter controls or border closures are unwarranted.

Etc.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

French healthcare workers given big pay rise on the back of the work they have been doing, good for the French.  Wonder if anyone else gets shamed into recognising what their healthworkers have been through.

I've argued that front line healthcare workers should just get a tax holiday for 2020, and all workers that were deemed "essential" should get a federal tax holiday. 

[Which Tyler]

42 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Yeah, but everyone insisted I was wrong. Everyone insisted that because I am not a health professional, or an expert in communicable disease, wearing a mask was a waste of time because I wouldn't know how to use it properly.

Whilst attempting to defend myself, I was threatened with a ban, even though I never called anyone a wanker or anything like that (unlike some posters here, who appear to be able to do precisely that with zero consequences).

My memory of the "don't know how to fit it properly" discussion was that it was a discussion, not an attack. For that matter, my memory of the whole thing was that it was a discussion, not an attack. A lack of disciplinary action seems to bear that out.
The criticisms were mostly valid btw - even if you yourself knew how to fit it properly. Equally, as an un-nuanced statement that "front line health care workers treating COVID patients have a greater need for masks than Joe Bloggs of the public" is also correct - however justified Joe Bloggs may feel.

27 minutes ago, rotting sea cow said:

Their thinking has been the opposite.

- There is no evidence that masks prevent the infections, so we don't recommend them.

- There is no evidence of human-to-human transmission, so there is no need to worry.

- There is no evidence of asymptomatic spread, so quick checks at the airports are enough and stricter controls or border closures are unwarranted.

Etc.

Welcome to the world of science - where you don't make recommendations without evidence.

[Spockydog]

7 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

My memory of the "don't know how to fit it properly" discussion was that it was a discussion, not an attack. For that matter, my memory of the whole thing was that it was a discussion, not an attack. A lack of disciplinary action seems to bear that out.
The criticisms were mostly valid btw - even if you yourself knew how to fit it properly. Equally, as an un-nuanced statement that "front line health care workers treating COVID patients have a greater need for masks than Joe Bloggs of the public" is also correct - however justified Joe Bloggs may feel.

Welcome to the world of science - where you don't make recommendations without evidence.

Well, whatever. There was a bit of a pile on, you accused me of mansplaining, and I received a snotty message from one of the mods threatening me with a ban. I've read through my posts that day, and I'm still bewildered why that happened.

Based on the discussions here recently, it appears that the consensus on masks has changed somewhat. Apparently not wearing a mask is now bad. 

Anyway, glad to see that I was right all along.

 

 

[rotting sea cow]

8 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

Welcome to the world of science - where you don't make recommendations without evidence.

Sorry, I'm a scientist myself and rarely the science in emerging subjects is strong enough to gather enough evidence in one way or another. In fact, I'm part of an interdisciplinary debate about these particular issues. How to make science in time critical situations?  Because, clearly the recommendations based on available "evidence" have been wrong and a lot of pain (and deaths) could have been avoided if a "just in case" approach would have been taken. As many countries did.

 

[Pebble thats Stubby]

10 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Well, whatever. There was a bit of a pile on, you accused me of mansplaining, and I received a snotty message from one of the mods threatening me with a ban. I've read through my posts that day, and I'm still bewildered why that happened.

Based on the discussions here recently, it appears that the consensus on masks has changed somewhat. Apparently not wearing a mask is now bad. 

Anyway, glad to see that I was right all along.

 

 

I think the consensus is   Not wearing any kind of mask is bad. 

If you don't need a high level N95 mask you should not go out and buy one of those, save them for those that really really need them.   An ordinary face covering  (ie cloth rag) is enough for 99% of the population.

If everyone wears a face covering of some kind then most people won't need the extra protection.

 

Health workers are in the group that need the high level protection masks.   and no-one will object to those at high risk also wearing them, especially if they already have them so don't need to buy more and create a shortage.  

 

Most of the pile on you where seeing was people talking about the average person not currently wearing a mask or needing a high level mask going out to buy high level masks, which if I remember correctly you took to be criticism of you, which to be clear was never what was meant  Since you have your masks already and have a higher risk than most people.  The criticisms where not directed at you.

[Spockydog]

NVM

[Gorn]

20 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

Welcome to the world of science - where you don't make recommendations without evidence.

But that's exactly what WHO did. They didn't just say "the effectiveness of masks hasn't been proven at this time" (which would have been fine). They said "we recommend that you don't wear them, because they're not only useless, but actively harmful".

[Pebble thats Stubby]

1 minute ago, Spockydog said:

Some very much were.

 

It sure felt like you thought my posts on the subject was directed at you, when they were not.  Maybe others where too.

Anyway this is probably not a helpful discussion for Board harmony.

[Spockydog]

2 minutes ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

It sure felt like you thought my posts on the subject was directed at you, when they were not.  Maybe others where too.

Anyway this is probably not a helpful discussion for Board harmony.

Yes, you're probably right, but that's how it felt at the time. I'm sure Lockdown Fever didn't help.

 

[BigFatCoward]

11 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Yes, you're probably right, but that's how it felt at the time. I'm sure Lockdown Fever didn't help.

 

I think 75% of my board and irl arguments would have been less intense this time last year. 

And my life didn't even change that much compared to most. 

[rotting sea cow]

For those WHO said that there was no evidence that masks are not helpful against respiratory diseases, here is a list of 70 papers as old as 2003 describing their effectiveness against influenza, SARS, MERS and other diseases.

https://threader.app/thread/1279144399897866248

 

 

[DaveSumm]

2 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Anyway, glad to see that I was right all along.

Well, kinda. The argument was that masks are better kept for people who need them, I don’t think that was ever a mystery. Sometimes governments / organisations have to take the least worst option and not recommend them, if they were honest and said “they work but don’t all go out and get one please” it would have been carnage. Now that threat has passed, they’re switching to recommending them.

To be clear, I think you were entirely right to wear one (I recall you had a more pressing need than the average person?), but from the government’s perspective it’s better to not recommend them and let the Spockydogs of the world just get them anyway.

[Heartofice]

What I recall of the conversation you had taken personally a number of comments that were clearly made in a general manner. But oh well. Water under the bridge.

From what I’ve read though, the advice doesn’t seem ‘that’ different. Masks are still more effective at blocking transmission from infected people than they are at preventing spread to healthy people.
There was an association with better results from populations and countries that wear masks so I guess that is why they are now being recommended, maybe the data wasn’t there before. Are the better results due to the masks or other factors which cause people to behave more cautiously.

It still seems that the major factor in preventing the spread is social distancing though, advice is still at least one meter, more would be better.

[JoannaL]

We had our own "hamster" experiment with masks (I posted already about it):

 

 There is a study about the one German city (Jena) which introduced face masks (in public transport and shopping) 2 weeks earlier than the rest of the country. By comparing the development of their numbers with the development of comparable cities (avarage, "synthetic control group")  they got the result:

" Comparing the daily growth rate in the synthetic control group with the observed daily growth rate in Jena, the latter shrinks by around 60% due to the introduction of face masks."

full study: http://ftp.iza.org/dp13319.pdf

We are all part of a big science experiment here, it is great when it sometimes gets such clear results...

 

[Fez]

6 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

That one happens in the UK civil service as well (which I never knew until my niece worked there) they have an "equivalent rank" - and it's so that the military know what level of authority and clearance they have without any rigamarole. As far as I'm aware it's only used when interfacving with the military though, and seems to be capped at "colonel" - or at least, that was her last rank before being promoted out of having an equivalent rank.

It's like someone with a phD insisting on being called 'Doctor', only assholes do it. I heard secondhand the story of a CBO analyst who went to a military base as part of an earlier round of BRAC, and didn't fully understand the questions being asked of him prior to going to the base. He accidentally requested the full flag officer visit treatment for his arrival; which the base gave him since he was technically a Lt. General.

He told his friend (who was a professor of mine telling me) that it was the most embarrassed he'd ever been in his life.

[Ormond]

Sadly I suppose no one should be surprised, but scammers are now posing as Covid-19 contact tracers to get personal information from victims or take over their computers:

 

https://www.omaha.com/news/local/bbb-warns-of-scammers-posing-as-covid-19-contact-tracers/article_7ed85df7-b3e1-54ca-8e1a-88b42fe08d00.html#1

[Mudguard]

3 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

Welcome to the world of science - where you don't make recommendations without evidence.

There was plenty of evidence that supported the use of masks by the general population.  It was just disregarded in favor of a couple lousy small lousy studies, at least one of which was retracted, that suggested otherwise and were cherry picked to support the mind-bogglingly stupid recommendation against facial coverings for the general population.  

Social distancing and mask wearing by the general public was used in the 1918 influenza pandemic to help slow the spread.  In the over 100 years since there have been plenty of studies and evidence that supports mask/facial coverage usage.  We've known for over 100 years how to suppress the spread of this disease.  

Much of the worlds response, particularly the US, has been reactive rather than proactive.  Instead of mandating social distancing and facial coverings before widespread outbreaks to prevent the outbreaks from occurring, we only do so afterwards.  We are 7 months into this pandemic and there is still strong resistance in the US to something so simple and low cost as wearing a facial covering.  Massive failure in leadership.

[Zorral]

6 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Everyone

Please, not everyone.  Since a buncha people here, including myself, did everything they could from the gitgo in March to find and / or construct masks.  I haven't left our apartment without wearing a mask since about March 9th or 10th, and that includes going down 12 steps to the mailbox,  with the single exception of last week during Tropical Storm Fay drenching us and high winds blowing us, and nobody was on the street except us.  Wore mask out of the apartment and into the street.  Put it back on before re-entering the building.

 

[DireWolfSpirit]

10 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Please, not everyone.  Since a buncha people here, including myself, did everything they could from the gitgo in March to find and / or construct masks.  I haven't left our apartment without wearing a mask since about March 9th or 10th, and that includes going down 12 steps to the mailbox,  with the single exception of last week during Tropical Storm Fay drenching us and high winds blowing us, and nobody was on the street except us.  Wore mask out of the apartment and into the street.  Put it back on before re-entering the building.

 

So true, I also use masks in public and have been since March. Imo anyone in public that isn't or hasn't been using a mask is frankly an idiot.

Also this interestingly, terrifyingly, Italian Physicians are warning the World that the virus is not merely a respiratory infection but something much worse that systemically attacks and degrades multiple organs, motor function and neurological function!

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-warning-from-italy-effects-of-covid-19-could-be-worse-than-first-thought-12027348