TBBills Posted December 10, 2020 Posted December 10, 2020 (edited) https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8 To think masks don't work is just a misunderstanding of the science. This is easy to see with Republicans. Edited December 10, 2020 by TBBills 1
BillStime Posted December 10, 2020 Posted December 10, 2020 The MOST CORRUPT administration of our lifetime. CDC officials ‘directed to destroy’ records of potential ‘political interference’ by Trump
TBBills Posted December 10, 2020 Posted December 10, 2020 24 minutes ago, BillStime said: The MOST CORRUPT administration of our lifetime. CDC officials ‘directed to destroy’ records of potential ‘political interference’ by Trump Just doesn't surprise me, everything that Trump touches becomes corrupt b.c he is pure corruption.
oldmanfan Posted December 10, 2020 Posted December 10, 2020 7 hours ago, SoCal Deek said: Nice try. You clearly know very little about science. When the output of an experiment changes, science dictates that the scientists look for the variable in the input that caused the change. I’ve put it to you that I actually live in California and none of the input variables the ‘scientists’ keep ‘explaining’ to me have changed, and yet the output results of the experiment have changed. There must be another variable that hasn’t been fully vetted. I suspect your estimation of either the number of people properly wearing masks, number of people really doing distancing, or number of people properly hand washing may be off. This is an extremely contagious virus so it has to be all hands on deck continuously and correctly. Unfortunately that isn't being done as well as it could be. We all need to remember these are mitigating strategies designed to limit spread, they don’t completely eliminate. 1
SoCal Deek Posted December 10, 2020 Posted December 10, 2020 10 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I suspect your estimation of either the number of people properly wearing masks, number of people really doing distancing, or number of people properly hand washing may be off. This is an extremely contagious virus so it has to be all hands on deck continuously and correctly. Unfortunately that isn't being done as well as it could be. We all need to remember these are mitigating strategies designed to limit spread, they don’t completely eliminate. So...to translate....we’re doomed.
oldmanfan Posted December 10, 2020 Posted December 10, 2020 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: So...to translate....we’re doomed. No, not at all. You talk about science; I am a clinical lab director and researcher for 40 years, so I am a scientist. And science generally is not an all or none phenomenon. The mitigating factors I described are just that, mitigating factors. When used correctly they will greatly diminish the spread of the virus. They are not cures. If used correctly they deprive the virus of hosts for infection We will have vaccines now, and the early data is they seem to be very effective. But to have them to work, or to have things like masks and such work, it requires a team effort. This is a public health crisis and requires public unity to fight it. That is why these silly arguments about masks need to stop, and why people need to get vaccinated. 1
Bob in Mich Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 (edited) I don’t know posters here well enough to know if anyone has any real insight but it is a question that has bothered me. There has been a worldwide drive to develop a vaccine to get us all out of this pandemic. With several nations and companies working on this vaccine now, we have seen a few shining successes, a few fairly successful, and some announced failures that will result in significant delays. Why aren’t financial arrangements being made to allow the manufacture of the highly successful vaccines by the other companies, at least in the short term to get us past crisis mode? I realize that different processes may be involved and manufacturing facilities cannot be put in place in a matter of weeks but it seems when some companies are predicting yearlong delays, what is preventing such arrangements? Edited December 11, 2020 by Bob in Mich
SoCal Deek Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 (edited) 15 hours ago, oldmanfan said: No, not at all. You talk about science; I am a clinical lab director and researcher for 40 years, so I am a scientist. And science generally is not an all or none phenomenon. The mitigating factors I described are just that, mitigating factors. When used correctly they will greatly diminish the spread of the virus. They are not cures. If used correctly they deprive the virus of hosts for infection We will have vaccines now, and the early data is they seem to be very effective. But to have them to work, or to have things like masks and such work, it requires a team effort. This is a public health crisis and requires public unity to fight it. That is why these silly arguments about masks need to stop, and why people need to get vaccinated. I’m glad to have your expertise as insight. I’m not actually making a silly argument about masks. I have no doubt that masks would be part of a solution. But they are of course a tool, not really a solution at all. Relying on the random actions of hundreds of millions of people will only slow the spread, and they certainly have, as we’re rapidly approaching a YEAR of this challenge. My commentary is asking the community of scientists to go back a step and consider whether they may have overlooked something. The current surge doesn’t appear to be tied to any significant change in the random personal behavior I spoke about above. From my personal, strictly anecdotal observations (in Southern California), people have been more cautious in the last few months, not less. There MUST be another, yet undiscovered, variable to this equation. Edited December 11, 2020 by SoCal Deek
oldmanfan Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said: I’m glad to have your expertise as insight. I’m not actually making a silly argument about masks. I have no doubt that masks would be part of a solution. But they are of course a tool, not really a solution at all. Relying on the random actions of hundreds of millions of people will only slow the spread, and they certainly have, as we’re rapidly approaching a YEAR of this challenge. My commentary is asking the community of scientists to go back a step and consider whether they may have overlooked something. The current surge doesn’t appear to be tied to any significant change in the random personal behavior I spoke about above. From my personal, strictly anecdotal observations (in Southern California), people have been more cautious in the last few months, not less. There MUST be another, yet undiscovered, variable to this equation. You can't say masks are a tool for the spread of the virus but not a solution. Those don't match, and do not agree with both observational studies as well as many lab studies indicating that masks can help control spread of droplets and aerosols, the vectors by which the virus is transmitted. I would encourage you to look at the Duke study on masks, it shows that different masks are more effective at controlling droplet spread. One of the issues with designing really good research is to avoid bias up front. That is the biggest issue with studies I have reviewed and rejected for publication; they have a preformed conclusion and try to set up experiments to support it. It might be mask studies reflect that a bit, depending on the specific study you review. But the bigger issue with observational studies, especially with masks, is you depend on the study participants to independently do what you ask in the way you instruct them, or they falsely report what they're doing. For masks, I suspect there is some of that going on, either not wearing them correctly or saying they wear them and don't. I know you live there and see a lot of mask wearing, but you don't know what's going on behind the scenes. I could theorize on other unknown variables that could be affecting rates. Perhaps the spread in very small aerosol droplets is increasing, which would be an argument for all to wear surgical or N95 masks (see the Duke study which would concur), and that would then be an issue for government to be able to supply these. Perhaps virus lasts longer on surfaces than currently believed. But just knowing something about viral infection in general, I can't think of other independent variables that would affect things, Respiratory viruses spread by either contact or inhalation. Covid seems to be highly infectious, which means that strenuous use of mitigating factors is needed to slow things down. Again, slow things down and not completely prevent. You can't let great be the enemy of good. The mitigating strategies, on their own are good things (really the only things) we can do right now while waiting for vaccines to be widely distributed. Vaccines will be great, masks and hand washing and such a re good. They are not mutually exclusive. 1
SoCal Deek Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 6 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: You can't say masks are a tool for the spread of the virus but not a solution. Those don't match, and do not agree with both observational studies as well as many lab studies indicating that masks can help control spread of droplets and aerosols, the vectors by which the virus is transmitted. I would encourage you to look at the Duke study on masks, it shows that different masks are more effective at controlling droplet spread. One of the issues with designing really good research is to avoid bias up front. That is the biggest issue with studies I have reviewed and rejected for publication; they have a preformed conclusion and try to set up experiments to support it. It might be mask studies reflect that a bit, depending on the specific study you review. But the bigger issue with observational studies, especially with masks, is you depend on the study participants to independently do what you ask in the way you instruct them, or they falsely report what they're doing. For masks, I suspect there is some of that going on, either not wearing them correctly or saying they wear them and don't. I know you live there and see a lot of mask wearing, but you don't know what's going on behind the scenes. I could theorize on other unknown variables that could be affecting rates. Perhaps the spread in very small aerosol droplets is increasing, which would be an argument for all to wear surgical or N95 masks (see the Duke study which would concur), and that would then be an issue for government to be able to supply these. Perhaps virus lasts longer on surfaces than currently believed. But just knowing something about viral infection in general, I can't think of other independent variables that would affect things, Respiratory viruses spread by either contact or inhalation. Covid seems to be highly infectious, which means that strenuous use of mitigating factors is needed to slow things down. Again, slow things down and not completely prevent. You can't let great be the enemy of good. The mitigating strategies, on their own are good things (really the only things) we can do right now while waiting for vaccines to be widely distributed. Vaccines will be great, masks and hand washing and such a re good. They are not mutually exclusive. Thanks again. Masks are indeed a tool. They do nothing to the actual virus itself. They’re intention is to stop it’s spread. Again, I’m not making a statement here on whether masks aren’t a good tool. I’m confident they are. As regards your other hypotheses I’m right there with you. I’m wondering whether we’re wearing the right masks. (Once again, there’s been no recent perceivable change in the number or style of masks people are wearing.) Or, have we actually overlooked surface spread. Or some other variable. SOMETHING has caused the recent spread. It is NOT winter in Southern California. We don’t have winter.I’d love to hear your thoughts.
oldmanfan Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Thanks again. Masks are indeed a tool. They do nothing to the actual virus itself. They’re intention is to stop it’s spread. Again, I’m not making a statement here on whether masks aren’t a good tool. I’m confident they are. As regards your other hypotheses I’m right there with you. I’m wondering whether we’re wearing the right masks. (Once again, there’s been no recent perceivable change in the number or style of masks people are wearing.) Or, have we actually overlooked surface spread. Or some other variable. SOMETHING has caused the recent spread. It is NOT winter in Southern California. We don’t have winter.I’d love to hear your thoughts. Ideally we should outfit everyone in the country with N95 masks, as they are the most efficient and can be fitted better than cloth. The gaiter ones should not be used. That would be my first move if I were running the show
shoshin Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 41 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: I’m glad to have your expertise as insight. I’m not actually making a silly argument about masks. I have no doubt that masks would be part of a solution. But they are of course a tool, not really a solution at all. Relying on the random actions of hundreds of millions of people will only slow the spread, and they certainly have, as we’re rapidly approaching a YEAR of this challenge. Relying on the random acts of individuals and groups is all we have to combat it until now. 41 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: My commentary is asking the community of scientists to go back a step and consider whether they may have overlooked something. The current surge doesn’t appear to be tied to any significant change in the random personal behavior I spoke about above. From my personal, strictly anecdotal observations (in Southern California), people have been more cautious in the last few months, not less. There MUST be another, yet undiscovered, variable to this equation. I can only go from what I see. Summer helped everywhere that is not SoCal. Here's a possible narrative. Summer followed the strictest shutdown we had in the spring: In the spring, we had little knowledge of the virus and there was energy to be diligent in the lockdown efforts. I suspect those efforts yielded a case slowdown. Summer came and cases were lower coming out of spring, distancing was still going on but lots of people were hanging outdoors. Note where cases rose in the summer: Very hot places where people went indoors (South). Cold comes...seeded by a sh##-ton more cases than we had to seed from in January...and more importantly an exhaustion from being locked up and no more ability to be locked up economically...and cases are shooting up. SoCal may benefit from weather but it doesn't benefit from people traveling in from all over and it can't stop the exhaustion from Covid lockdowns. I have gone out with people and seen relatives this fall that I definitely would not have seen in the spring. My wife sees patient families every day in person where in March and April she was totally remote. We're not in the same mindset we had in April. For the most part, that's OK: Everyone needs to take care of their own selves to get through this. But the aggregate effect is more deaths and hospitalizations.
SoCal Deek Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 I’m only going to hypothesize here. Could it be that we should be looking to do something internally rather than externally? Masks, had washing and social distancing are all external solutions. They try and prevent the virus from getting inside you. What if the solution was to eat something or take a vitamin or increase the dosage of something that would counteract the virus’ ability to spread inside your body? By FAR, the biggest change (variable) we’ve seen in Southern California is the daily decrease in hours of sunlight. What if there was a way to counteract that? 1
shoshin Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 35 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: I’m only going to hypothesize here. Could it be that we should be looking to do something internally rather than externally? Masks, had washing and social distancing are all external solutions. They try and prevent the virus from getting inside you. What if the solution was to eat something or take a vitamin or increase the dosage of something that would counteract the virus’ ability to spread inside your body? By FAR, the biggest change (variable) we’ve seen in Southern California is the daily decrease in hours of sunlight. What if there was a way to counteract that? For sure vitamin D may play a role but I'd point to the swiss cheese model above. It's not one thing.
SoCal Deek Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, shoshin said: For sure vitamin D may play a role but I'd point to the swiss cheese model above. It's not one thing. So should we pushing forward Vitamins more? It’s rarely talked about 1
shoshin Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 Just now, SoCal Deek said: So should we pushing forward Vitamins more? It’s rarely talked about Like hydrochloroquine, no studies show it's effective. D you get from sun exposure. Not sure if it's as effective swallowing (though I've been taking it for about a year).
SoCal Deek Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 47 minutes ago, shoshin said: Like hydrochloroquine, no studies show it's effective. D you get from sun exposure. Not sure if it's as effective swallowing (though I've been taking it for about a year). I’m not promoting anything here. All I know is that doing the same thing g and expecting a different result is.... you know the rest. I’m interested to hear what’s being done to determine any common denominators of those in the ICU. There must be a connection. THAT is science!
oldmanfan Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: I’m not promoting anything here. All I know is that doing the same thing g and expecting a different result is.... you know the rest. I’m interested to hear what’s being done to determine any common denominators of those in the ICU. There must be a connection. THAT is science! Well, the connection is simple: the virus. Why it affects people differently has to do with initial viral load, the patient’s immune system, and co-morbidities. I’d focus on children and why they can carry a large viral load and still have low incidence of symptoms.
Big Blitz Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 3 hours ago, SoCal Deek said: I’m only going to hypothesize here. Could it be that we should be looking to do something internally rather than externally? Masks, had washing and social distancing are all external solutions. They try and prevent the virus from getting inside you. What if the solution was to eat something or take a vitamin or increase the dosage of something that would counteract the virus’ ability to spread inside your body? By FAR, the biggest change (variable) we’ve seen in Southern California is the daily decrease in hours of sunlight. What if there was a way to counteract that? Been taking Vitamin D and zinc since March. Advised everyone I knew to do the same. But that doesn't profit big pharma. And since I've been a teenager I workout and these days its 3-4x a week if I'm lucky. After the holidays it will be 5-6. Haven't been sick with even a cold all year. I usually get the flu in November or December. Nothing so far. And I'm out at least 2 or 3 times a week at stores and restaurants and have been since May when we "opened." Americans don't have a Covid problem. We have an obesity problem. And an overabundance of self centered narcissism. 1
SoCal Deek Posted December 11, 2020 Posted December 11, 2020 2 hours ago, oldmanfan said: Well, the connection is simple: the virus. Why it affects people differently has to do with initial viral load, the patient’s immune system, and co-morbidities. I’d focus on children and why they can carry a large viral load and still have low incidence of symptoms. Interesting, but we can’t become children....at least not physically. Our immune system ages with us.
Recommended Posts