oldmanfan Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 55 minutes ago, Bakin said: Wait - you just said they changed their positions on masks because they were lying about it to the public the first time. You know - to flatten the curve? As a scientist myself, I find that to be odd. not to mention the good handful of studies that show masks don’t do diddley dick. They were not lying. At the beginning of the pandemic the concern was being sure health care workers had masks, and they did not have the data as to routes of transmission. As the curve flattened and as the science showed that spread is by droplets and aerosols the CDC and others then recommended mask usage to limit spread. You’re a scientist, you know theories and recommendations change as more data and evidence is gained. And if you go to any good scientific literature data base like PubMed and search for masks and Covid you will find a plethora of studies showing that masks are beneficial in mitigating spread. The data is very solid.
daz28 Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: They were not lying. At the beginning of the pandemic the concern was being sure health care workers had masks, and they did not have the data as to routes of transmission. As the curve flattened and as the science showed that spread is by droplets and aerosols the CDC and others then recommended mask usage to limit spread. You’re a scientist, you know theories and recommendations change as more data and evidence is gained. And if you go to any good scientific literature data base like PubMed and search for masks and Covid you will find a plethora of studies showing that masks are beneficial in mitigating spread. The data is very solid. Or you could just pull out the old book of common sense that says when you sneeze into your elbow instead of into someone else's mouth, they're less likely to catch the flu from you. 1
Warcodered Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 https://www.wsj.com/articles/more-than-1-000-current-and-former-cdc-officers-condemn-u-s-covid-19-response-11602884265?mod=hp_lead_pos4 https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/more-than-1-000-current-and-former-cdc-officers-condemn-u-s-covid-19-response/ar-BB1a6Bks?ocid=msedgntp
Bakin Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 3 hours ago, daz28 said: If your 75 years old, you're 220x more likely to die than someone ages 18-29, so they may feel it's pretty darn serious. If you read a little more closely, you'll see I never said Coronavirus=Ebola. Not even close From a scientific standpoint that's difficult, because you have to be able to definitively categorize what "early" means, especially because the virus reacts differently with different people Right but you said that a 70 year old might fear it like Ebola. Well that’s an irrational fear. if you are 75 you are much more likely to die than a 18-29 year old from virtually anything, including the very fact that tomorrow is another day closer to your death.
Bakin Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 3 hours ago, oldmanfan said: They were not lying. At the beginning of the pandemic the concern was being sure health care workers had masks, and they did not have the data as to routes of transmission. As the curve flattened and as the science showed that spread is by droplets and aerosols the CDC and others then recommended mask usage to limit spread. You’re a scientist, you know theories and recommendations change as more data and evidence is gained. And if you go to any good scientific literature data base like PubMed and search for masks and Covid you will find a plethora of studies showing that masks are beneficial in mitigating spread. The data is very solid. Incorrect. First they lied and said ‘no masks because they aren’t necessary’ then they said ‘no masks because hoarding’ then they said ‘masks because ‘asymptomatic transmission’’ (no direct transmission information) then they said ‘asymptomatic transmission was very rare’ then they said ‘we don’t know to what extent it asymptomatic transmission happens’. This is baaaaad science and even worse public policy ... all around.
oldmanfan Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bakin said: Incorrect. First they lied and said ‘no masks because they aren’t necessary’ then they said ‘no masks because hoarding’ then they said ‘masks because ‘asymptomatic transmission’’ (no direct transmission information) then they said ‘asymptomatic transmission was very rare’ then they said ‘we don’t know to what extent it asymptomatic transmission happens’. This is baaaaad science and even worse public policy ... all around. All these are inaccurate and reflect how scientific investigations take place, especially in a situation like Covid. Many are working and studying the virus, data comes in and as that happens recommendations change as well. Edited October 17, 2020 by oldmanfan 2
daz28 Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 20 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: All these are inaccurate and reflect how scientific investigations take place, especially in a situation like Covid. Many are working and studying the virus, data comes in and as that happens recommendations change as well. The problem now is that Trump sent 2 people to the CDC who have zero medical backgrounds to filter the information that comes out. You can have 10 bushels of data and studies, but no one to get it out.
Warcodered Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 1 hour ago, oldmanfan said: All these are inaccurate and reflect how scientific investigations take place, especially in a situation like Covid. Many are working and studying the virus, data comes in and as that happens recommendations change as well. I mean at a certain point in history people believed the Earth was flat and probably said things like "The Earth is flat." then eventually it became known that it wasn't. That doesn't mean the people who had originally said it was flat were lying it means they were wrong. And I suppose you can use that they were wrong about masks against them, but I'm still going to put my faith in the evolving opinions of the experts in the field over random people on the internet.
SDS Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 8 minutes ago, Warcodered said: I mean at a certain point in history people believed the Earth was flat and probably said things like "The Earth is flat." then eventually it became known that it wasn't. That doesn't mean the people who had originally said it was flat were lying it means they were wrong. And I suppose you can use that they were wrong about masks against them, but I'm still going to put my faith in the evolving opinions of the experts in the field over random people on the internet. Better science > science
Bakin Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 (edited) 6 hours ago, oldmanfan said: All these are inaccurate and reflect how scientific investigations take place, especially in a situation like Covid. Many are working and studying the virus, data comes in and as that happens recommendations change as well. Disagree. All these reflected a ridiculously poor investigation and policy, bordering on a psyop meant to confuse and irritate. The very best way to have gone about it (in hindsight, though I was saying it from the beginning) would be Sweden plus protect the vulnerable. Which means no masks for virtually everyone, live as normal, reduce large gatherings... but none of this back and forth nonsense. That’s not science. Oh do this...oh don’t do this...oh change that. That’s just madness. I mean the Director of the CDC was on TV just last month saying that a paper mask could offer him more protection than a COVID vaccine. Then a few weeks later the CDC comes out and basically says masks are pretty useless for the wearers. “CDC guidance on masks has clearly stated that wearing a mask is intended to protect other people in case the mask wearer is infected. At no time has CDC guidance suggested that masks were intended to protect the wearers.” WHAT????? Though not the point of this study, 85% in this study who caught The Ro wore their masks always or nearly always.https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf It’s just a bad flu bro Edited October 17, 2020 by Bakin 1
oldmanfan Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 31 minutes ago, Bakin said: Disagree. All these reflected a ridiculously poor investigation and policy, bordering on a psyop meant to confuse and irritate. The very best way to have gone about it (in hindsight, though I was saying it from the beginning) would be Sweden plus protect the vulnerable. Which means no masks for virtually everyone, live as normal, reduce large gatherings... but none of this back and forth nonsense. That’s not science. Oh do this...oh don’t do this...oh change that. That’s just madness. I mean the Director of the CDC was on TV just last month saying that a paper mask could offer him more protection than a COVID vaccine. Then a few weeks later the CDC comes out and basically says masks are pretty useless for the wearers. “CDC guidance on masks has clearly stated that wearing a mask is intended to protect other people in case the mask wearer is infected. At no time has CDC guidance suggested that masks were intended to protect the wearers.” WHAT????? Though not the point of this study, 85% in this study who caught The Ro wore their masks always or nearly always.https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf It’s just a bad flu bro It is not just a bad flu. The mortality rate is 5-10 times higher, there is no vaccine, and it can be spread by asymptomatic infected persons. Sweden’s trial is proving to be mistaken; their per capita mortality rate is much higher than other European countries. I’ve already addressed your misconceptions about the study you cite. The idea of masks is to hold down spread of droplets by the wearer. That has always been a consistent position. What the CDC Director is saying is that if we ALL wear masks right now it would be more effective than a vaccine. Yoyr approach would kill a lot of people. How many American citizens do you think are expendable? Give me a number. Or maybe the thing to do, since the elderly are more affected, is to pick an age and anyone over that age should just be humanely sacrificed now. What age would you select?
fansince88 Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 45 minutes ago, Bakin said: Disagree. All these reflected a ridiculously poor investigation and policy, bordering on a psyop meant to confuse and irritate. The very best way to have gone about it (in hindsight, though I was saying it from the beginning) would be Sweden plus protect the vulnerable. Which means no masks for virtually everyone, live as normal, reduce large gatherings... but none of this back and forth nonsense. That’s not science. Oh do this...oh don’t do this...oh change that. That’s just madness. I mean the Director of the CDC was on TV just last month saying that a paper mask could offer him more protection than a COVID vaccine. Then a few weeks later the CDC comes out and basically says masks are pretty useless for the wearers. “CDC guidance on masks has clearly stated that wearing a mask is intended to protect other people in case the mask wearer is infected. At no time has CDC guidance suggested that masks were intended to protect the wearers.” WHAT????? Though not the point of this study, 85% in this study who caught The Ro wore their masks always or nearly always.https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf It’s just a bad flu bro 7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: It is not just a bad flu. The mortality rate is 5-10 times higher, there is no vaccine, and it can be spread by asymptomatic infected persons. Sweden’s trial is proving to be mistaken; their per capita mortality rate is much higher than other European countries. I’ve already addressed your misconceptions about the study you cite. The idea of masks is to hold down spread of droplets by the wearer. That has always been a consistent position. What the CDC Director is saying is that if we ALL wear masks right now it would be more effective than a vaccine. Yoyr approach would kill a lot of people. How many American citizens do you think are expendable? Give me a number. Or maybe the thing to do, since the elderly are more affected, is to pick an age and anyone over that age should just be humanely sacrificed now. What age would you select? Truth is we have no clue. CDC is making this stuff up as it goes and we eat it all up and tear each other up when they don't listen or even enforce it. We are a two sided system built by a two sided party built by two opinions. The question really is which puppeteer is controlling you and I?
oldmanfan Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, fansince88 said: Truth is we have no clue. CDC is making this stuff up as it goes and we eat it all up and tear each other up when they don't listen or even enforce it. We are a two sided system built by a two sided party built by two opinions. The question really is which puppeteer is controlling you and I? I believe the data tells us if we wear masks, all of us, and wear them correctly it will significantly decrease infections.
fansince88 Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I believe the data tells us if we wear masks, all of us, and wear them correctly it will significantly decrease infections. Yet the data shows nearly 80% of infected wore masks. and early data in NY were 65% of infected stayed home. of course those numbers too are always changing Edited October 17, 2020 by fansince88
SoCal Deek Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 14 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I believe the data tells us if we wear masks, all of us, and wear them correctly it will significantly decrease infections.m It only slows down the rate of infection and prolongs the problem.
oldmanfan Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, fansince88 said: Yet the data shows nearly 80% of infected wore masks. and early data in NY were 65% of infected stayed home. of course those numbers too are always changing That study with the 80% is being misconstrued. What it really showed is those in restaurants and bars/coffee shops where you have to take your mask off had higher infection rates. I agree on the NYS data; that has always been puzzling. Just now, SoCal Deek said: It only slows down the rate of infection and prolongs the problem. No. Absolutely no. If what you are saying is to forego masks the infection and mortality rates would skyrocket. You don’t really want that, do you?
SoCal Deek Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 1 minute ago, oldmanfan said: That study with the 80% is being misconstrued. What it really showed is those in restaurants and bars/coffee shops where you have to take your mask off had higher infection rates. I agree on the NYS data; that has always been puzzling. What is it that you’re hoping for? There isn’t a SINGLE STATE anywhere in America that’s currently inundated by Covid 19. Not one! Our treatment methods have gotten much better. Our supply chain has been reinforced. We weathered the initial storm in the NY metro area. We even weathered the summer influx across the sunbelt. The sole focus now should be on a vaccine. 1
fansince88 Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 14 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: That study with the 80% is being misconstrued. What it really showed is those in restaurants and bars/coffee shops where you have to take your mask off had higher infection rates. I agree on the NYS data; that has always been puzzling. No. Absolutely no. If what you are saying is to forego masks the infection and mortality rates would skyrocket. You don’t really want that, do you? I say open up and infect away. If you are afraid for any reason whatsoever stay home. My co-workers father, 82yo and his sister, 55 and his nephew 25 all got it two weeks ago. Sister was deathly sick for about 2 days and still not feeling well but he says she complains about everything so hard to say. His nephew had a bad headache and lost his taste. His 82yo father said it was like a bad cold and put in two cord of firewood and changed 3 basement windows. He is glad he got it and has the antibodies. I think I had it in February.
spartacus Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 17 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: No. Absolutely no. If what you are saying is to forego masks the infection and mortality rates would skyrocket. You don’t really want that, do you? even in current "hotspots" around the world- the mortality rates are not skyrocketing they are in fact still dropping 95% of those testing positive do not have symptoms and are not sick of those that get sick, 99.7% successfully recover use treatments the the media continually tries to sabotage take zinc - which boosts your immune system to stop the replication of the virus the proper plan would be to spread it as quickly as possible to use up the remaining hosts masks are a joke because it is a physical impossibility for a mask to stop a .27 micron virus particle 1
oldmanfan Posted October 17, 2020 Posted October 17, 2020 (edited) 24 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: What is it that you’re hoping for? There isn’t a SINGLE STATE anywhere in America that’s currently inundated by Covid 19. Not one! Our treatment methods have gotten much better. Our supply chain has been reinforced. We weathered the initial storm in the NY metro area. We even weathered the summer influx across the sunbelt. The sole focus now should be on a vaccine. The focus should on a vaccine. Not arguing that. But developing successful vaccines against corona viruses have nerve been very successful. Hope this time it is, but we should also focus on developing treatment strategies and on keeping the virus from spreading. I increasingly think Covid may wind up like HIV, where through strategies to prevent spread and treatments have rendered it more of a chronic condition if you get it. Look at what you’re saying though. You talk about weathering it in NYS and other areas. How many died? How many have long term effects? 4 minutes ago, spartacus said: even in current "hotspots" around the world- the mortality rates are not skyrocketing they are in fact still dropping 95% of those testing positive do not have symptoms and are not sick of those that get sick, 99.7% successfully recover use treatments the the media continually tries to sabotage take zinc - which boosts your immune system to stop the replication of the virus the proper plan would be to spread it as quickly as possible to use up the remaining hosts masks are a joke because it is a physical impossibility for a mask to stop a .27 micron virus particle The masks stop droplets and help stop aerosols. You can keep saying 2 + 2= 5 and you will still be wrong. The idea of spreading it as rapidly as possible will kill millions. That is immoral. 11 minutes ago, fansince88 said: I say open up and infect away. If you are afraid for any reason whatsoever stay home. My co-workers father, 82yo and his sister, 55 and his nephew 25 all got it two weeks ago. Sister was deathly sick for about 2 days and still not feeling well but he says she complains about everything so hard to say. His nephew had a bad headache and lost his taste. His 82yo father said it was like a bad cold and put in two cord of firewood and changed 3 basement windows. He is glad he got it and has the antibodies. I think I had it in February. How many people in the US and the world are you Ok with dying? Give me a number. Edited October 17, 2020 by oldmanfan
Recommended Posts