Coronavirus

[Dalal.Holdings]

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/10/poll-increasing-bipartisan-majority-americans-support-mask-wearing/

"92 percent of 2,200 Americans polled say they wear a face mask when leaving their home, with 74 percent saying they “always” do. That “always” percentage is up nearly a quarter since July, according to the poll, which has a 2 percent margin of error."

October 5th article

 

Already 92% are wearing masks in US.  Cases are going up. Does it tell us masks work?

 

If people do stupid things then the virus will spread. The more stupid the faster the spread. Not rocket science. But the REAL problem the US has right now is Trump has, in his usual style, thrown gasoline all over the efforts and communication from virus experts and health care professionals. There is no unified approach. The US is learning that having an arsonist in charge can be lethal.

 

PS: mistakes will be made along the way. They need to be owned, with the learnings becoming part of future actions. But that is not possible under Trump because he refuses to admit he has made any errors; if fact, he ‘double downs’ on errors compounding them further.

 

PS2: Europe has also messed up. The pressure to open the economy up/let families live normal lives is real. So rational politicians/people push the limits. How do you know when you have gone too far? Case counts spike. Then you go the other way. Just what was anticipated back in March in the Hammer and the Dance article.

 

Trump is a marketing reality TV machine who doesn’t care much about details (unless it directly benefits himself). Insiders like Mattis and Kelly have corroborated this.

 

That’s why he’ll say it’s a hoax, makes fun of masks, or “it will be gone by Easter” or “we are turning the corner”. Advertisers/marketers don’t like delivering bad news.

 

95% of the time if you have a leader like this, it’s not a huge deal because underlying staff/cabinet picks up the slack.

 

When you have a once in a century event like a pandemic though, it’s a total disaster.

[KCLarkin]

Already 92% are wearing masks in US.  Cases are going up. Does it tell us masks work?

 

Facepalm emoji.

 

Let's assume your 92% number is correct (b.s.) and that masks are 50% effective. Let's round up and pretend that masks reduce transmission 50%.

 

R0 ~ 2.5. So if masks are the only intervention, Rt ~ 1.25.

 

Cases are going up more than 25% per week! And masks are a massive success!

 

 

 

[KCLarkin]

How do you know masks work in real life?  What data you have?

 

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/sfu-mms100620.php

 

Mask mandates are associated with a 25 to 46 per cent average reduction in weekly COVID-19 cases across Canada.

[Investor20]

How do you know masks work in real life?  What data you have?

 

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/sfu-mms100620.php

 

Mask mandates are associated with a 25 to 46 per cent average reduction in weekly COVID-19 cases across Canada.

 

You are citing a study in Ontario.  Most of Ontario as of August has mask mandates.

https://voxeu.org/article/face-mask-mandates-slowed-spread-covid-19-canada

 

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-sets-new-record-as-covid-19-cases-spike-to-unprecedented-levels-1.5159260

Ontario sets new record as COVID-19 cases spike to unprecedented levels

 

Tried mask mandate.  Got "unprecedented levels" of Covid cases.  Whats your plan?

[KCLarkin]

Tried mask mandate.  Got "unprecedented levels" of Covid cases.  Whats your plan?

 

Per capita, Ontario has 1/3 the daily cases compared to the U.S.

 

But I fail to see your point. You asked whether cases growing meant that masks didn't work. I gave you simple math that proved cases could grow even if masks are extremely effective.

 

 

 

 

[Peregrine]

Of course it's real, just not nearly as bad as many make it out to be and certainly not worth the collateral damage of the extreme measures taken so far in an attempt to counteract it.

Have you considered the possibility that the difference between a)spontaneous individual actions, b)how people react to recommendations and c)how people react to rules may not be different in the extreme?

Also, do you think that 'measures' (whatever the origin) improved, had not effect or worsened virus-related health outcomes (let's forget about the costs for this part of the argument)?

Also, how do you explain the divergent evolution between the US and Sweden after the first phase (percent positive rates, excess mortality)? Do you actually think that 'extreme measures' are explaining the wide and persistent difference?

BTW, i agree that costs have been (and will be) significant. But i wonder if you can help clarify the benefits, if any.

 

Good point on the voluntary measures. But Sweden's google mobility data are fairly close to 2019 baseline levels now.

 

The US is a much bigger country and the outbreaks right now are concentrated in the places that were spared in the spring. My guess is that higher level of population immunity is a big reason for the current more benign experiences in places that were hit hard in the spring.

[Investor20]

Tried mask mandate.  Got "unprecedented levels" of Covid cases.  Whats your plan?

 

Per capita, Ontario has 1/3 the daily cases compared to the U.S.

 

But I fail to see your point. You asked whether cases growing meant that masks didn't work. I gave you simple math that proved cases could grow even if masks are extremely effective.

 

This is like saying a cancer drug is very effective except that the cancer will grow.

[Cigarbutt]

Of course it's real, just not nearly as bad as many make it out to be and certainly not worth the collateral damage of the extreme measures taken so far in an attempt to counteract it.

Have you considered the possibility that the difference between a)spontaneous individual actions, b)how people react to recommendations and c)how people react to rules may not be different in the extreme?

Also, do you think that 'measures' (whatever the origin) improved, had not effect or worsened virus-related health outcomes (let's forget about the costs for this part of the argument)?

Also, how do you explain the divergent evolution between the US and Sweden after the first phase (percent positive rates, excess mortality)? Do you actually think that 'extreme measures' are explaining the wide and persistent difference?

BTW, i agree that costs have been (and will be) significant. But i wonder if you can help clarify the benefits, if any.

Good point on the voluntary measures. But Sweden's google mobility data are fairly close to 2019 baseline levels now.

The US is a much bigger country and the outbreaks right now are concentrated in the places that were spared in the spring. My guess is that higher level of population immunity is a big reason for the current more benign experiences in places that were hit hard in the spring.

The problem with the discussion may be related to the fact that there are multiple variables and the "lockdown" variable definition makes it hard to isolate, in terms of cost or effectiveness.

It's become clear that restrictive measures (personal, collective or whatever) could have been and can be improved upon. Another aspect that's become clear is that areas that have tried to let the disease spread to some degree and to 'protect' the vulnerable population have had significant excess mortality. The data (age-adjusted etc) you showed before hides the fact that Sweden, during the initial phase, reported very significant excess mortality with an unenviable record for older cohorts and for those born outside of Sweden. The public health authorities have clearly acknowledged that. They are reporting low death rates now despite some resurgence and it's unclear why (many variables). Some of the improved profile (remains similar to neighboring countries who did well also during the initial phase) is related to partial herd immunity developed initially and possibly a better handle and more uniformity in application of cost effective behaviors and policy.  What differentiates Sweden and the US in the latter phases is a persistently high spread (heterogeneous but high nonetheless) and an inability to effectively protect the vulnerable cohorts. Numbers in the US have consistently shown rising cases in the younger and healthier population first and then subsequent spread in older and more vulnerable cohorts, resulting in very significant excess mortality compared to most other areas in the world, including Sweden. Absent improved survival rates for people reaching hospitals, results would have been even poorer. Yesterday, the percent positive test rate (more than 800k tests done) in the US was 9.0% (!). The CFR has not reached zero.. There are regional differences but some areas report incredibly high percent positive rates which implies at least a continuation of poor relative results for excess mortality.

 

This is complex but it's not rocket science. It's about capital allocation, strategy and application of cost effective policy. And it does not need to be ideological.

 

In terms of economic costs, there are slight differences compared to neighbors but the comparison are made around expectations for 2020 and 2021. Also, the countries used to compare (UK, Spain and France) are not a proof that 'lockdowns' don't work, it only shows that countries that cannot effectively contain the spread in one or two phases will likely do worse, economically. Sweden has 'behaved' differently, at the margin, in terms of mobility, but there are other variables.

[Cardboard]

"Per capita, Ontario has 1/3 the daily cases compared to the U.S."

 

Per capita, Vermont has less than half of Ontario daily cases. Please explain?

 

Cardboard

[Simba]

Tried mask mandate.  Got "unprecedented levels" of Covid cases.  Whats your plan?

 

Per capita, Ontario has 1/3 the daily cases compared to the U.S.

 

But I fail to see your point. You asked whether cases growing meant that masks didn't work. I gave you simple math that proved cases could grow even if masks are extremely effective.

 

I have seen more than my fair of young people outside fail to "social distance". This could be at your local starbucks which crowded with 30 people, at a local park, or at your local gym. This in provinces that have mandatory mask wearing at your local Costco.

 

I'm fairly certain if every Canadian properly socially distanced, properly disinfected themselves and wore a mask at all times, the R0 would be much lower. But we make huge exceptions. It's OK to have a mask at Costco, but fail to wear a mask at 30 other venues. These people carry the virus and are asymptomatic and then keep the R0 higher than it should be.

 

I remember going out in June 2020, everyone was acting all chill, I was the only one with a mask at the time. Same in September 2020.

 

And people wonder why the virus is still ongoing.

[orthopa]

Tried mask mandate.  Got "unprecedented levels" of Covid cases.  Whats your plan?

 

Per capita, Ontario has 1/3 the daily cases compared to the U.S.

 

But I fail to see your point. You asked whether cases growing meant that masks didn't work. I gave you simple math that proved cases could grow even if masks are extremely effective.

 

This is like saying a cancer drug is very effective except that the cancer will grow.

 

For some reason we have gotten to these undeniable truths and perceived ignorant questions below not only on this board but in the "world"; media, social media, public perception etc.  I say that knowing situations are very different throughout but there seems to be some consistencies when you start to explore the topic.

 

1. NZ, S. Korea and Sweden are all examples of options taken. NZ and S. Korea are the right ones, Sweden wrong one.

 

2. Masks unquestionably work. If examples are brought up to suggest they don't its undoubtedly quickly explained as laziness or irresponsibility of people even with wide spread usage. Irresponsibility seems to run contemporaneously on different continents.

 

2.1 For some reason  20%, 50%, 90% of people wearing masks all have the same outcome and you seem to get increasing cases. See 2 for an easy explanation why they don't work.  Hard math is then used to explain softly understood situations. Guilt is placed or ignorance is assumed based on the hard math as its obvious masks work and we quickly move on.

 

4. A plan was needed and that would have made things better. When examples are brought up where plans by a leader didn't work its the peoples fault. People in areas where there was no plan blame the leader.

 

5. The virus can be controlled we just all aren't doing our part. We then take our children for their regularly scheduled immunizations.

 

6. Covid is not the flu/cold no matter what happens. If downward trending IFR's, CFRs are discussed 225k dead brought up in US immediately. End of conversation. If probed unexplainable life long illness or incapacitation is the mic drop. Prove that wrong in 10 years.

 

7. Humans hoarding paper/goods, food etc could be considered panic. The measures put in place by other humans causing hoarding not panic but the correct decision.

 

8. People who die from a contagious disease much more important then other deaths. End of discussion.

 

9. Locking down works. Bringing a wide spread virus back into enclosed areas/houses where mask usage drops significantly best idea. Questioning such obviously stupid. 

 

10. Cases are the important measure now, hospitalizations, ICU usage not so much. "So your saying its a bad thing they didnt use the field hospitals you dummy?"

 

11. We have learned alot about the virus and how to treat it and maybe we could do things different this time? What about the 225k dead?

 

12. Masks work. The people who got the virus when almost always wearing a mask got when they took it off. Duh! That being said even though people mostly take their masks off at home we still should encourage people to stay home at night and avoid public areas to stop the spread.

 

13. Even if masks stop the spread just a little its worth it as it counts in the big picture. If a medication makes only a little difference it didn't work. Look at the data for the masks,er  i mean medicine! Its right there black and white!

 

 

[Gregmal]

LMFAO +1

 

Ive really just stopped caring about this. Its become such a laughable shitshow all around. When from day 1 even the experts(not COBF experts) but scientists, government agencies, etc are all chasing their tails and flying blind, dont wear masks!, oh wait no wear them! type shit, etc....IDK. Its a waste of time and energy. I only continue to be a monitor for the purpose of its investment ramifications. Otherwise, theres a news source and outlet for covid, for everyone. Just choose what you want to hear!

 

Otherwise, I was at a hospital earlier and quite impressed by a little hallway gadget. Maybe the size of a kindle. Or a larger Samsung phone. Mounted on the wall discreetly. I walk by, maybe 5 ft away without even noticing it. Motherfuckin things says to me, "temperature is 97.6, you are fine"...pretty cool.

[KCLarkin]

"Per capita, Ontario has 1/3 the daily cases compared to the U.S."

 

Per capita, Vermont has less than half of Ontario daily cases. Please explain?

 

Cardboard

 

Stop. Breathe. We are talking specifically about masks. So before using Vermont as your counter-example, you might want to look at whether they have a mask mandate. They have a much stronger mask mandate than Ontario.

 

As of Saturday, August 1, 2020, Vermonters and visitors are required to wear masks or cloth facial coverings over their nose and mouth any time they are in public spaces, indoors or outdoors, where they come in contact with others from outside their households, especially in congregate settings, and where it is not possible to maintain a physical distance of at least six feet.

[samwise]

What will happen between November and Jan? If Trump gets out, but is still serving the people who don’t like him, while Biden is in, but waiting for the power transfer and effectively powerless.

 

Will Trump lockdown, or preserve his legacy by staying open no matter what. The market seems to fear a shutdown, but perhaps that doesn’t happen till January?

 

Predictions anyone?

[KCLarkin]

This is like saying a cancer drug is very effective except that the cancer will grow.

 

Why don't you read that again. Slowly. It might not be the brilliant counter-argument you think it is.

[RichardGibbons]

[Cardboard]

"Will Trump lockdown, or preserve his legacy by staying open no matter what. The market seems to fear a shutdown, but perhaps that doesn’t happen till January?

 

Predictions anyone?"

 

He will launch a nuclear war and sanitize the world.

 

Cardboard

[Viking]

Quote from Investor20 earlier in the thread:

 

How do you know masks work in real life?  What data you have?

 

————————————

 

If you do not know the answer to this question then there is nothing that i can say that will help you.

 

PS: How do you know the world is actually round? Maybe, just maybe its flat... better be careful the next time you are out on the water... don’t want to sail right off the edge!

[Cigarbutt]

...

Otherwise, I was at a hospital earlier and quite impressed by a little hallway gadget. Maybe the size of a kindle. Or a larger Samsung phone. Mounted on the wall discreetly. I walk by, maybe 5 ft away without even noticing it. Motherfuckin things says to me, "temperature is 97.6, you are fine"...pretty cool.

Otherwise yesterday, i was visiting my in-laws (retirement home) and there was this sympathetic young person at the entrance regulating the traffic (asking a few questions, telling to sign a timed in-out list and measuring body temperature with a device). So she gets a reading of 33.2 °C (91,8 °F for you) and asks me to write it down beside my name. i did not think it was appropriate to explain that those devices were unreliable devices measuring an unreliable variable (surface body temperature) using an unreliable algorithm to infer core body temperature which, itself, is a relatively unreliable indicator of Covid presence or contagiousness but i felt that it would have been useful to notify her that her device was malfunctioning (all others before me had readings between 32.8 and 33.5) but after a very simple question wondering if it was possible that her instrument could have been precise without being accurate (suggesting the need to replace the battery or to recalibrate it), it became clear that the effort wasn't worth it. i did not insist because even if what she was doing had low 'scientific' value, she was, fundamentally, communicating that she cared about my in-laws. So, i simply said she was doing a great job and she said that's pretty cool.

 

[John Hjorth]

Cardboard now on my ignore list ... [again!]

[LC]

Cardboard now on my ignore list ... [again!]

When the opposition is reduced to a single, lone, miserable voice, even when they are spouting total nonsense, that is when it is most important that they have a voice and are not silenced.

 

[Peregrine]

I think anti-masking has become ideological just like how much of this debate has evolved. I think it's rather silly to object too much - it's a fairly small inconvenience with some possible benefits (if not reducing transmission then maybe reducing viral load) and none of the massive collateral damage that comes with lockdowns. I think the consensus gradually focusing on masking and moving away from lockdowns is a good thing on balance.

[Viking]

...

Otherwise, I was at a hospital earlier and quite impressed by a little hallway gadget. Maybe the size of a kindle. Or a larger Samsung phone. Mounted on the wall discreetly. I walk by, maybe 5 ft away without even noticing it. Motherfuckin things says to me, "temperature is 97.6, you are fine"...pretty cool.

Otherwise yesterday, i was visiting my in-laws (retirement home) and there was this sympathetic young person at the entrance regulating the traffic (asking a few questions, telling to sign a timed in-out list and measuring body temperature with a device). So she gets a reading of 33.2 °C (91,8 °F for you) and asks me to write it down beside my name. i did not think it was appropriate to explain that those devices were unreliable devices measuring an unreliable variable (surface body temperature) using an unreliable algorithm to infer core body temperature which, itself, is a relatively unreliable indicator of Covid presence or contagiousness but i felt that it would have been useful to notify her that her device was malfunctioning (all others before me had readings between 32.8 and 33.5) but after a very simple question wondering if it was possible that her instrument could have been precise without being accurate (suggesting the need to replace the battery or to recalibrate it), it became clear that the effort wasn't worth it. i did not insist because even if what she was doing had low 'scientific' value, she was, fundamentally, communicating that she cared about my in-laws. So, i simply said she was doing a great job and she said that's pretty cool.

 

Cigarbutt, you have my favourite comment of the week :-) well done!

[Investor20]

I think anti-masking has become ideological just like how much of this debate has evolved. I think it's rather silly to object too much - it's a fairly small inconvenience with some possible benefits (if not reducing transmission then maybe reducing viral load) and none of the massive collateral damage that comes with lockdowns. I think the consensus gradually focusing on masking and moving away from lockdowns is a good thing on balance.

 

It is not objecting to masks Frank.  But pro-maskers were saying if only every one wears masks Covid disappears.  Even CDC director said that - masks are more important than vaccine. CDC director said "masks are our best defence".  If masks are our best defence and are better than vaccine, we are doomed.  Because mask mandates have been tried in many places and masks are worn by above 90% people and yet there are big spikes in infections.  The best defense is not working.

 

Coming back to whether masks are better than not wearing, not everyone agrees on this.  For example as per this article

Reduction of Self-Reinoculation

It is well-recognized that COVID-19 exists outside the human body in a bioaerosol of airborne particles and droplets. Because exhaled air in an infected person is considered to be “loaded” with inoculum, each exhalation and inhalation is effectively reinoculation.....

 

We propose that fresh air could reduce reinoculation and potentially reduce the severity of illness and possibly reduce household spread during quarantine. This calls for open windows, fans for aeration, or spending long periods of time outdoors away from others with no face covering to disperse and not reinhale the viral bioaerosol.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7410805/

 

This article is written by some of the top doctors including Baylor, Johns Hopkins, Emory, Yale....and many more....

 

There is one randomized study that is cited by anti-maskers which is

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.short

This study does not have an arm of not wearing mask and it is not with Covid 19.

It compares "Hospital wards were randomised to: medical masks, cloth masks or a control group (usual practice, which included mask wearing). Participants used the mask on every shift for 4 consecutive weeks."

 

What we need are proper studies which are lacking.  That is why I keep asking what is your evidence?  There is no evidence.  Only arguments and pronouncements.

 

Now I am not going to tell you whether CDC director is correct (Masks are our best defence in which case we already lost because our best defence has been tried many places) or all these doctors are correct that re-innoculation of virus is bad and will lead to more severe disease.

 

What we should demand from CDC is evidence, not pronouncements.

 

 

 

 

[KCLarkin]

Very funny that you ask for evidence for masks (there is substantial evidence in the literature) but then claim that 90% of people are wearing masks (with no evidence).