Cmon, science?! Yeah right! Maybe all the top scientists are saying wear a mask, but we know COVID affects “virtually nobody.”
Blues COVID email
- Thread starter Lulu22
- Start date
1. They didn’t in the past. They specifically said not to
2. There are still health officers in countries including the hard hit Low Countries that disagree. It’s a minority position but they are out there. Some including in the us reverse under political pressure because: a. The cost of the policy is minimal so why not if it might help and b. The politicians are under tremendous pressure to “do something”. It’s not science it’s politics
3. Even they can’t seem to wear them properly with health officers around the world being caught more than dozens of time wearing them improperly or removing them.
Sorry, that’s some real conspiratorial BS kook talk. So, what you’re saying is if Fauci is caught taking the mask off at a game—gotcha!—it negates the scientific consensus?! Maybe there’s a connection now for why we saw Asian citizens routinely wearing masks in recent years and why their populations have been comparatively unscathed by the virus.
To be fair, Fauci said this because he didn't want hoarding of PPEs/n95 masks for HCWs. I think his approach of reducing panic was apropos.
The science is pretty conclusive. There is absolute efficacy with n95 masks. Perhaps less impactful with other materials, but still worth wearing. Do they create complete barriers? No, but they slow the virus down. Do they have any meaningful impact outdoors?, probably not.
It's unfortunate that federal leadership has made wearing a mask political.
MSK357
GOLD
wow, so Fauci intentionally lied to the public putting people at risk of dying of COVID? When all he had to do was tell people to wear a scarf around their face like he did months later? seems like a pretty crappy expert that our leaders are expecting sound advice from.
Unscathed? The Phillipines has had one of the longest mask mandates yet was unable to contain its outbreaks. Japan was unable to avoid its spike. South Korea has had to use other measures because masks weren't enough. And Peru had a mask mandate yet had almost identical (slightly worse) results than Brazil. Now, you can argue that masks (particularly the N95s) might reduce those spikes...but there's no proof of that either way on a macro level. Here's my ultimate take on them, resulting from the behavior of the "experts" on the things. Masks may help if they are used in the ideal. But most cases of trasmission are in the home (where no one is going to use a mask properly all the time including in their sleep) or in institutional settings. The experts can't wear them all the time ideally, less so the public, which is why we don't have a huge impact. On top of that there's the recent airplane study showing that despite distancing and despite mask wearing transmission is occuring on airplanes, in business class. Could you argue yes that's because people sleep or eat?....of course but that's what happens in the home too. Could you argue they reduce the spread? Yup, think you ae probably right and they probably also reduce the viral loads. But they aren't the magic bullet people make it out to be.
What happened in Ventura County is illustrative. The health officer opposed a mask order. He said the science didn't support it, particularly the bandanas, scarfs and homemade masks which have now been shown to be of much less utility. He came under pressure from the supervisors to do "something" particularly as other counties adopted mask orders. He shifted to a recommended instructions. But then he caved when the governor's state wide order occurred. Science!
As I've said if I were in charge I'd do a limited mask order for indoors and on public transport, I'd roll out a mask program and say bandanas and others like it are not enough, and I'd exempt children 10 and under and the severely disabled.
At the time there was no science around the efficacy of "scarfs" and coronavirus. Plus, can you see how that would play out? Oh, you don't need N95 masks, scarfs should just work out fine. You think that wouldn't still trigger panic/hoarding?
Hoarding was already happening regardless:
A Hoarder’s Huge Stockpile of Masks and Gloves Will Now Go to Doctors and Nurses, F.B.I. Says (Published 2020)
The stockpile, slated for medical personnel in New York and New Jersey, includes 192,000 N95 respirators, 130,000 surgical masks and nearly 600,000 medical-grade gloves, the authorities said.
Fauci's primary concern was HCWs.
I noticed a lot of the background crowd behind t last night were wearing masks with MAGA printed on them.
MSK357
GOLD
you just said the reason Fauci told the public that they didnt need masks was because he didnt want people hoarding PPE/mask for HCWs. That means he intentionally deceived americans to protect HCWs. Covering your mouth when you have a cough or someone else is coughing around you is common sense. so to say there was no science around the efficacy of any sort of face covering is stupid. I say that as a person that thinks this whole situation is blown way out of proportion.At the time there was no science around the efficacy of "scarfs" and coronavirus. Plus, can you see how that would play out? Oh, you don't need N95 masks, scarfs should just work out fine. You think that wouldn't still trigger panic/hoarding?
Hoarding was already happening regardless:
A Hoarder’s Huge Stockpile of Masks and Gloves Will Now Go to Doctors and Nurses, F.B.I. Says (Published 2020)
The stockpile, slated for medical personnel in New York and New Jersey, includes 192,000 N95 respirators, 130,000 surgical masks and nearly 600,000 medical-grade gloves, the authorities said.www.nytimes.com
Fauci's primary concern was HCWs.
The bottom line is despite what trump says in public, He has always sided with his experts in terms of actions, i.e. restricting flights from countries hit hard by the virus, starting a coronavirus taskforce in january while mainstream media/pelosi/deblasio were saying it was safe, etc. its up to local governments to set any mitigations to protect their state. Its ridiculous if you think South Dakota needs the same restrictions that California has, so setting something at the federal level would be wrong.
What is your number of acceptable deaths with Covid? The emotional false choice when you can only see thing through the eyes of Covid.
In California, a study showed that 55% of the excess deaths during a two month period of the pandemic are from other causes other than Covid. In Texas 64% of excess deaths are non-Covid. Nationwide the estimate is 65% Covid 35% non-Covid although 14 states had a higher percentage of non-Covid deaths. Mental health, lack of treatment, starvation and even still births are just a few of the negative impacts. The deaths from these causes due to the lockdowns are not only happening now, but will continue in the long term, far outlasting the virus. So it wouldn't be surprising to see non-Covid deaths from the lockdown surpass deaths with Covid.
Should we ignore Covid and rip the band-aid off? No, we should still protect the vulnerable without exposing the entire population to the non-Covid risks which are far greater than the Covid risks. We've flattened the Covid curve, know its time to flatten the non-Covid curve.
jamanetwork.com
academic.oup.com
www.rollcall.com
www.spectator.co.uk
www.nature.com
Please bring on the critique of these links, because other than the emotional argument, that's all you got.
In California, a study showed that 55% of the excess deaths during a two month period of the pandemic are from other causes other than Covid. In Texas 64% of excess deaths are non-Covid. Nationwide the estimate is 65% Covid 35% non-Covid although 14 states had a higher percentage of non-Covid deaths. Mental health, lack of treatment, starvation and even still births are just a few of the negative impacts. The deaths from these causes due to the lockdowns are not only happening now, but will continue in the long term, far outlasting the virus. So it wouldn't be surprising to see non-Covid deaths from the lockdown surpass deaths with Covid.
Should we ignore Covid and rip the band-aid off? No, we should still protect the vulnerable without exposing the entire population to the non-Covid risks which are far greater than the Covid risks. We've flattened the Covid curve, know its time to flatten the non-Covid curve.
Excess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes, March-April 2020
This study uses data from the National Center for Health Statistics to estimate excess deaths (ie, the difference between observed and expected deaths) in the US and the District of Columbia in the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic.
jamanetwork.com
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates
Summary. Multiple lines of evidence indicate that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has profound psychological and social effects. The psych
academic.oup.com
Pandemic’s effect on already rising suicide rates heightens worry - Roll Call
Economic and social pressures this year have heightened the risks, feeding consternation among experts, health officials and lawmakers.
What is behind the increase of non-Covid related deaths?
The latest data on weekly deaths in England and Wales, published today by the Office of National Statistics, show what could be the beginning of a disturbing trend. From mid-June to mid-July, the number of excess deaths has been running at below the five-year average. But for the second week...
www.spectator.co.uk
Stillbirth rate rises dramatically during pandemic
Researchers stress need for antenatal care, as emerging data link disrupted pregnancy services to increase in stillbirths.
www.nature.com
Please bring on the critique of these links, because other than the emotional argument, that's all you got.
So, I'm an American before I'm part of any political party. I get the vibe here that you care more about protecting the actions of a specific political party versus understanding if masks work or not. I don't care what political party you're from, but to give federal leadership a pass on its mistakes is about as un-American as it gets. There's absolutely a distinction between how our President presented the situation versus Fauci. This is simply undeniable. I say the same thing about actions taken by some Democratic leaders. There have been some significant missteps from the entire political ideological spectrum. Our politicians are accountable to us, all of them. The sooner we all realize this and get out of this partisan BS, the sooner we can have real positive impact on everyone's lives. Or, I guess, we could all go back and watch some Wally George re-runs.
MSK357
GOLD
If you were expecting scientific/medical expertise from any politician that isnt a scientist or doctor i think that says more about you then anyone else. I expect our leading epidemiologist advising our president to tell the truth, or at the very least protect americans. He did neither by tricking the public into not buying masks. Like i said before, covering your mouth with anything is better than nothing is the latest reasoning we got for wearing scarves or DIY cloth masks. He could have said that from the beginning. Anybody with common sense already knows covering your mouth helps to stop spread any germs or virus. I dont know which political party Fauci is, but his poor advice is why there is little trust in the handling of the virus. Fauci was the one that said masks dont work, then said only N95 masks work, then said scarves were good enough. Any President in any party getting advice from that "expert" would look like a fool.
Four people carpooling, no masks, all become infected from one other person, one person dies.
Four people having a discussion about the setup of the mfg of a part, inside, all have masks on, one person gets it. No one dies.
Outside party, 40-50 people spread out, mostly masked, but once alcohol flows some stop wearing. No one gets it.
Four weeks of practice with 14 girls, no mask once they start practicing, decent distancing. No cases.
These are all my personal experiences. No mask and inside is a disaster. Mask inside but in close proximity, helps but not perfect. Outside with mask great, without mask but some distance, great.
Try not to play the blame game. People are fallible, they make mistakes. Learn from them. Look at actions more than words. Understand science isn't exact. Oh, and all politicians suck.
Four people having a discussion about the setup of the mfg of a part, inside, all have masks on, one person gets it. No one dies.
Outside party, 40-50 people spread out, mostly masked, but once alcohol flows some stop wearing. No one gets it.
Four weeks of practice with 14 girls, no mask once they start practicing, decent distancing. No cases.
These are all my personal experiences. No mask and inside is a disaster. Mask inside but in close proximity, helps but not perfect. Outside with mask great, without mask but some distance, great.
Try not to play the blame game. People are fallible, they make mistakes. Learn from them. Look at actions more than words. Understand science isn't exact. Oh, and all politicians suck.
Wally Wally Wally!!! Channel 56 in OC baby. I watched that guy late at night and he was a funny and weird dude and his studio audience was full of young crazy ass teenagers from the OC!!! Talk about Hot Seat with Wally!!!
Desert Hound
DA
That study is not conclusive by the way.
As they point out:
"The testing here did not account for real-world scenarios where the leakage around the edges of the face cover may significantly impact the actual effectiveness of these coverings."
They assume perfectly fitted masks with no leakages.
"We reiterate that these filtration efficiencies are only applicable if there is no leakage in the seals of the masks, as loose-fitting devices such as these coverings and medical masks do not have any gasket or tight-fitting mechanism to ensure a proper seal."
In other words the study has no bearing on the masks everyone is wearing. They point out most people (professionals) cant even get their masks on right.
Further
"The general public should be aware of the risks of self-contamination during removal and reuse of cloth face coverings."
So no the study has no bearing on masks we are using and how the general public uses them.
EJ, did you change your screen name again? You gotta send a memo...
Where have you been? Go to Cactus Kickoff for update on new avatar. I learned I was doing third person too much and that pissed some dads off so I'm just going to go with Crush the dad from Orange County, who is on his last year and half before his kid goes to college. Footy gave me the idea and my wife said, "100%." Not trying to deceive anyone or trick anyone like some do on here.
I never talk to myself and tell myself how great my take was either. I told Dom to delete all other avatar names. No more third person Grace. It's the real me I promise and I see where I made myself look odd at the minimum. I will do better with my promises and look to stay in my lane, which is soccer. I have a crush on soccer and I don't know why. Stay safe and I truly do pray for your boys and youAnd after he promised not to and said Dom should delete his other accounts.