Mega-Thread: Coronavirus Pandemic

[Edge-]

It's not like the information is hidden:
https://www.who.int/emergencies/dise...d-19-and-masks







But, of course, some people will say that they know more - and bash WHO as usual.

What? The only thing there that supports the post is that people may get a false sense of security and be dumb. Nothing beyond that supports it, and everything still encourages face coverings as part of a comprehensive strategy, specifically non-fabric ones that provide a better barrier.

- - - Updated - - -

citation needed for what? it wouldn't be surprising a lot of people just go with what is easiest so i wouldn't be surprised if like my parents and sister they go days without washing their cloth masks or just keep reusing the old disposable ones especially the lower income people.

Which still affords more protection to those around you than not wearing one at all. That people may have their grubby fingers everywhere isn't a fault of the mask, but the person.

Don't get me wrong, folks should be washing/replacing masks. But wearing a mask for a few days and being vigilant about not touching your face and then other surfaces without sanitizing your hands is preferable to wearing no mask at all.

[szechuan]

[Edge-]

She really needs to stick to dissuading people from sex with demons to protect themselves from cancer.

[Granyala]

What? The only thing there that supports the post is that people may get a false sense of security and be dumb

At the present time, the widespread use of masks everywhere is not supported by high-quality scientific evidence.

I think this is the real kicker for many anti-mask people.

[szechuan]

At the present time, the widespread use of masks everywhere is not supported by high-quality scientific evidence.

Bull.
High Quality Scientific Evidence shows differently.


https://files.fast.ai/papers/masks_lit_review.pdf

[Edge-]

At the present time, the widespread use of masks everywhere is not supported by high-quality scientific evidence.

I think this is the real kicker for many anti-mask people.

Because "high-quality scientific evidence" is a high bar that a new virus that's less than a year old hasn't had enough time to generate. Why people are so hung up on, "WELL THEY AREN'T 100% SURE SO WE WON'T BELIEVE THEM!" nonsense when all the available studies and evidence overwhelmingly reinforces the effectiveness of wearing a mask has benefits for the wearer and those around them as long as they're following other best-practices.

Not like having "high-quality scientific evidence" would matter to the not insignificant number of people reject the science wholesale to begin with.

[Granyala]

Because "high-quality scientific evidence" is a high bar that a new virus that's less than a year old hasn't had enough time to generate.

Not like having "high-quality scientific evidence" would matter to the not insignificant number of people reject the science wholesale to begin with.

It's been half a year, honestly I think the data should be here by now.
Sure, back in March it was like "we don't know but heck, it isn't difficult to implement, so lets do it anyway".

Aye on that last sentence.

[Edge-]

It's been half a year, honestly I think the data should be here by now.

Science doesn't move that fast. Studies take time. Replicating those studies takes more time. Learning about new virus also takes a HUGE amount of time because there are known unknowns and unknown unknowns. We gotta figure out those unknown unknowns, you know?

Same reason why the vaccine is taking time.

Sure, back in March it was like "we don't know but heck, it isn't difficult to implement, so lets do it anyway".

In March we knew far less than we do now. We now have 6 more months of research, studies, and data to help inform our understanding of the virus.

Aye on that last sentence.

Which makes me want to fuckin die. I mean, these are the people that would bring their car into the shop if it was having problems, call an electrician if they needed wiring help, a plumber if their sewage pipe backed up etc. etc. all experts, but when it comes to "science" experts, suddenly there's some kind of nonsense global conspiracy and those evil experts can't be trusted. SMH

[Forogil]

What? The only thing there that supports the post is that people may get a false sense of security and be dumb.

And that there isn't high quality scientific evidence to support its use.

Nothing beyond that supports it, and everything still encourages face coverings as part of a comprehensive strategy, specifically non-fabric ones that provide a better barrier.

Well, it also says

Non-medical, fabric masks are being used by many people in public areas, but there has been limited evidence on their effectiveness and WHO does not recommend their widespread use among the public for control of COVID-19.

So, the point of "comprehensive strategy and masks" isn't that the strategy must include using masks, and especially not using masks everywhere, but that if you use masks it shouldn't be done in isolation, but as part of a comprehensive strategy.

There's a reason WHO staff doesn't wear masks at work and during press conferences - they are using other measures - like physical distancing (with proper distances), one-way corridors, and possibly more. They are not too stupid to wear them, and if the local government mandates masks in public transports they obviously comply with that.

- - - Updated - - -

In March we knew far less than we do now. We now have 6 more months of research, studies, and data to help inform our understanding of the virus.

And WHO have updated their guidelines recently, and still find the evidence lacking.

[szechuan]

And that there isn't high quality scientific evidence to support its use.

Wrong.

https://files.fast.ai/papers/masks_lit_review.pdf

[Granyala]

Bull.
High Quality Scientific Evidence shows differently.

Thank you. Interesting stuff.

I'm a sucker for graphical representations.


So if I interpret that correctly, their model states that if the mask is 60% effective and 60% of the population wear them, R0 would already be clobbered down to a harmless 1.
Add contact tracing to that and C19 should pose no further significant threat.
Interesting tidbit: it's pretty useless to make a fuss about a few folks who cannot wear masks due to medical reasons. according to this model: they would not impact the efficacy of a mask mandate in any meaningful way, since they are a small part of the population.

- - - Updated - - -

but when it comes to "science" experts, suddenly there's some kind of nonsense global conspiracy and those evil experts can't be trusted. SMH

Probably because people fear what they do not understand.
We, who look at such scientific data and can make sense of it (at least in parts, I am not an expert either) are a minority.

Also, keep in mind there are scientists who provide opposing views as well, further confusing the masses. On top of that, sadly, there are political and financial interests involved and bad scientists/greedy corporate people used situations like this before.

I can scarcely imagine how frightening the world must be w/o scientific understanding. How vulnerable one is to be mislead.

[szechuan]

it's pretty useless to make a fuss about a few folks who cannot wear masks due to medical reasons.

since they are a small part of the population.

2020

[Forogil]

https://files.fast.ai/papers/masks_lit_review.pdf

WHO has obviously read that article, and still reached that conclusion.

It's not odd that they reached that conclusion as it literally says that the study was under-powered, with n=4; and the relevant part is speculation if that is replicated.

WHAT IS MORE IS THAT THE FREAKING ARTICLE IS RETRACTED

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32251511/

We had not fully recognized the concept of limit of detection (LOD) of the in-house reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction used in the study (2.63 log copies/mL), and we regret our failure to express the values below LOD as “<LOD (value).” The LOD is a statistical measure of the lowest quantity of the analyte that can be distinguished from the absence of that analyte. Therefore, values below the LOD are unreliable and our findings are uninterpretable. Reader comments raised this issue after publication. We proposed correcting the reported data with new experimental data from additional patients, but the editors requested retraction.

[Granyala]

2020

Ah... well if you consider Trump fanboyism as a medical reason I can see why you'd have a problem.

Here I am often the only one in the bus that doesn't wear a mask. I do stay away from others and do not cough or talk though.

[Forogil]

Ah... well if you consider Trump fanboyism as a medical reason I can see why you'd have a problem.

Primarily they are way too many and way too densely packed.

But you can see that they are "pro-life" and that the pale Black-haired woman has sign with "Black Voices for Trump".

[szechuan]

WHAT IS MORE IS THAT THE FREAKING ARTICLE IS RETRACTED

The Studies may not provide Empirical Evidence, but there's more then enough Observational Evidence that the WHO recommends mask wearing.

Fair enough, however this one isn't.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10...aff.2020.00818

And neither is this.
There are too many Statistics to post just look at the link yourself,


it's not formally peer reviewed but it was published in good faith, by the British Academy, there's much more evidence that says Masks are Useful, even the WHO recommends them now.
https://royalsociety.org/-/media/pol...D93BBCBFC2BB24

And neither is this

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...e_June_15_2020

[breadisfunny]

What? The only thing there that supports the post is that people may get a false sense of security and be dumb. Nothing beyond that supports it, and everything still encourages face coverings as part of a comprehensive strategy, specifically non-fabric ones that provide a better barrier.

- - - Updated - - -



Which still affords more protection to those around you than not wearing one at all. That people may have their grubby fingers everywhere isn't a fault of the mask, but the person.

Don't get me wrong, folks should be washing/replacing masks. But wearing a mask for a few days and being vigilant about not touching your face and then other surfaces without sanitizing your hands is preferable to wearing no mask at all.

my point is he's not wrong that people are lazy when it comes to replacing/washing masks.

[Edge-]

my point is he's not wrong that people are lazy when it comes to replacing/washing masks.

Sure, but that's not a fault of the mask but a fault of the user.

[Forogil]

Fair enough, however this one isn't.

I lost which of the ones you posted first, but:

Note that the first two authors are eye-doctors, so it doesn't seem to be their speciality.

Consider these two statements based on the study:
High-mortality countries have higher GDP than low-mortality countries.
High-mortality countries did more tests per capita than low-mortality countries (1 in 81 vs 1 in 575).

The first can be explained by a number of other reasons, including that many poor countries don't count all the dead. (Or as they write "One limitation of our study is that the ultimate source of mortality data is often from governments which may not have the resources to provide a full accounting of their public health crises, or an interest in doing so." )

The second can partially be explained in the same way and partially that you need more tests if you have higher rates of infections; there's no reason to test if there are no infections; i.e. correlation is not causation.

Additionally countries where people follow what the government says for masks may also have people follow other things the government says.

And I'm sure that WHO has read them. (And an English study complaining that WHO gives inconsistent advice is laughable at best.)

https://royalsociety.org/-/media/pol...D93BBCBFC2BB24

That study from the end of June indicated that people in the UK were skeptical of masks, and didn't wear them - and repeatedly contrasted that with Spain and Italy where people were less skeptical and wore them; where Spain and Italy were similar.

We have now seen that Spain and the UK have had outbreaks, but not Italy to a similar extent. That indicates that their focus on mask-wearing missed something important.

[szechuan]

Additionally countries where people follow what the government says for masks may also have people follow other things the government says.

You didn't seem to look at the entire study from the Health Economics Professor with a PHD.

And I'm sure that WHO has read them. (And an English study complaining that WHO gives inconsistent advice is laughable at best.)

The WHO has given some inconsistent messaging on Mask wearing, The British Academy is still a good source for Scientific Studies.

The second can partially be explained in the same way and partially that you need more tests if you have higher rates of infections; there's no reason to test if there are no infections; i.e. correlation is not causation.

-You seem like you're grasping straws, The Studies Provided have already Factored Testing into their Studies.

-Plenty of independent Peer Reviewed Scientific Studies from respective countries that have done studies on Masks also show the effectiveness of wearing them.

-There is also just a basic common scientific understanding (which you seem to ignoring) that the method of infection of the Virus is through droplets and Masks have shown to block them, it's not hard to prove or replicate these studies.