New posts

COVID-19

July 29, 2021, 2:42 p.m.
Posts: 1623
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: shoreboy

Im not sure I saw Tashi's article. Is it this one?

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

To sum this one up: 'Models suggest that public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high'

Looks like a different one fwir. Part of my issue with the masks is the lack of data on particle size and comparing that against various types of mask media. From your link:

"There are currently no studies that measure the impact of any kind of mask on the amount of infectious SARS-CoV-2 particles from human actions."

My doubt doesn't lie along the mask/no-mask continuum, but takes into consideration a number of different variables including, type of mask, fit of mask, age of mask, location the mask is used, length of time in said location, conditions which the mask is used under, possibility of compliance and likelihood of compliance. Based on all the things I've read, it seems that in many situations where masks actually would provide benefit people won't or can't wear them or are wearing masks of dubious benefit, making the benefit of mask wearing suspect. At the end of the day, I just see too many holes to be able to say that masks of the kind the majority of people are wearing for sure work.


 Last edited by: syncro on July 29, 2021, 2:53 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
July 29, 2021, 2:45 p.m.
Posts: 1623
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Bam! This sums it up well for me.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

In summary, though we support mask wearing by the general public, we continue to conclude that cloth masks and face coverings are likely to have limited impact on lowering COVID-19 transmission, because they have minimal ability to prevent the emission of small particles, offer limited personal protection with respect to small particle inhalation, and should not be recommended as a replacement for physical distancing or reducing time in enclosed spaces with many potentially infectious people. We are very concerned about messaging that suggests cloth masks or face coverings can replace physical distancing. We also worry that the public doesn't understand the limitations of cloth masks and face coverings when we observe how many people wear their mask under their nose or even under their mouth, remove their masks when talking to someone nearby, or fail to practice physical distancing when wearing a mask.

July 29, 2021, 3:32 p.m.
Posts: 11497
Joined: June 29, 2006

Posted by: syncro

Bam! This sums it up well for me.

Old news.  That's from April 2020.  

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536

Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the efficacy of community mask wearing to reduce the spread of respiratory infections was controversial because there were no solid relevant data to support their use. During the pandemic, the scientific evidence has increased. Compelling data now demonstrate that community mask wearing is an effective nonpharmacologic intervention to reduce the spread of this infection, especially as source control to prevent spread from infected persons, but also as protection to reduce wearers’ exposure to infection.

This always seemed to be a bit of a no brainer to me.  The discussion is always good v no good, when it seemed obvious it would help since they will catch some of the spray coming from our mouths. The question was simply by how much will they help.  We all saw the dipshits with the mask under their nose, but they were maybe 1 in 25.  Some will wear them incorrectly, but that will always just be percentage and part of the calculation.  It is just numbers.  Nobody would question that saving a few cents here or a dollar there will save money overall.  When you consider that wearing a mask is pretty much the easiest sacrifice anyone could make and it could save lives, why not just do it?

July 29, 2021, 3:46 p.m.
Posts: 3465
Joined: May 23, 2006

Horgan's gotta' shut the border before teh Albertans kill us all!

Meanwhile, British Columbia moved in the opposite direction and reimposed mask mandates in the province’s Okanagan Valley.

More than half of the province’s daily and active COVID-19 cases are concentrated in the region, B.C. provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry told a teleconference yesterday. The Okanagan is a popular destination for travellers from Alberta.

Tyee.....

July 29, 2021, 4:06 p.m.
Posts: 14378
Joined: Feb. 19, 2003

On the mask debate. It’s one thing to have a nuanced conversation with someone like Syncro.

But let’s face it, the anti-mask, anti-Vax, anti-science crowd aren’t having nuanced convos. They’re just being a bunch of whiny babies that just want to go to the bar and spread the Kelownavirus because Libtards something or other.


 Last edited by: Couch_Surfer on July 29, 2021, 4:07 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
July 29, 2021, 5:02 p.m.
Posts: 14378
Joined: Feb. 19, 2003

https://youtu.be/wODOuqXv7JI

July 30, 2021, 9:05 a.m.
Posts: 11497
Joined: June 29, 2006

Posted by: Couch_Surfer

On the mask debate. It’s one thing to have a nuanced conversation with someone like Syncro.

But let’s face it, the anti-mask, anti-Vax, anti-science crowd aren’t having nuanced convos. They’re just being a bunch of whiny babies that just want to go to the bar and spread the Kelownavirus because Libtards something or other.

Agreed.  Most of us will just listen to the recommendations and move on with our lives even if we question some parts of the policies, but there is a segment of the population that cannot be convinced.  One of my favourite lines from Mad Men was when Don Draper walks out on a client that won't listen to his ideas.  "You’re a non-believer. Why should we waste time on kabuki?"  I work in sales and run across this all the time.  If someone doesn't believe in the concept you are selling it's pointless.  After years of Shogun I think this theory could be upgraded to law.

July 30, 2021, 10:42 a.m.
Posts: 1992
Joined: April 25, 2003

Posted by: shoreboy

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: chupacabra

Kelowna already seemed to have more than their share of people that acted like wearing a mask was akin to a ball and chain.  I can't imagine what working retail and trying to tell these idiots that they need a mask again must be like.

I'm still skeptical/divided about masks. I think they have their purpose, but in situations where they could be seen to provide benefit they're either impractical or won't be worn anyways. I don't know if there'll ever be any sort of conclusive proof as to their effectiveness or as to what percentage of a difference they'll make. Tashi's meta analysis article he posted a while back had some good things in it, but I think it was too contradictory to be held up as sort of conclusion that masks are necessary.

Im not sure I saw Tashi's article. Is it this one?

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

To sum this one up: 'Models suggest that public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high'

I should correct myself, that article is a literature review, not meta analysis. There can be no statistically significant conclusions drawn in a literature review, and studies are often chosen to be included that illustrate competing hypotheses, leading to the appearance of contradiction.

Since the research is very new and not standardized (even the definition of aerosol is in flux) the conclusions of individual studies are going to appear contradictory. 

My takeaways from my quick skim of that and other articles:

- masks reduce transmission

- they’re more effective the more people use them

- they’re more effective if they’re better masks. A fitted respirator is great, but a n95 (or kn94) provides very effective protection in both directions. 

- viral load is important. This means that reductions are valuable. When people say they’re worthless or in effective they’re latching on to the fact that they’re not perfect but perfection isn’t possible, nor is it the goal for the general public. Reduction is viral load is. Please consider this when you go into a public space (like a grocery store) as the employees there are exposed to far higher numbers of people than you and many of them are young and not fully vaccaniated yet, and the emerging variants are more of a threat to the young than the original as well as being more transmissible.

I say this as someone who’s done some science and read a fair amount of papers and not to be condescending - science is hard, Particularly while it’s in its early stages like COVID is. It will be very hard for the layman to interpret the work that’s happening right now for themselves; IMO this is the time to look to the experts and watch for trends and consensus to emerge. That’s how science works and yes, new knowledge will come to light that contradicts old knowledge, that’s not evidence of conspiracy or incompetence, that’s just learning. 

That article was also just the top result of a google search. One will have to keep reading to actually understand the current state of the research fully. And it’s going to change. Again and again. If you have a job you will not have the time to do your own research and come to informed conclusions.  Respect the thousands of hours that the experts have invested in their field and listen to them.

July 30, 2021, 1:21 p.m.
Posts: 1623
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: chupacabra

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536

Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the efficacy of community mask wearing to reduce the spread of respiratory infections was controversial because there were no solid relevant data to support their use. During the pandemic, the scientific evidence has increased. Compelling data now demonstrate that community mask wearing is an effective nonpharmacologic intervention to reduce the spread of this infection, especially as source control to prevent spread from infected persons, but also as protection to reduce wearers’ exposure to infection.

This always seemed to be a bit of a no brainer to me.  The discussion is always good v no good, when it seemed obvious it would help since they will catch some of the spray coming from our mouths. The question was simply by how much will they help.  We all saw the dipshits with the mask under their nose, but they were maybe 1 in 25.  Some will wear them incorrectly, but that will always just be percentage and part of the calculation.  It is just numbers.  Nobody would question that saving a few cents here or a dollar there will save money overall.  When you consider that wearing a mask is pretty much the easiest sacrifice anyone could make and it could save lives, why not just do it?

Hey, that's better info than what I've seen - and yes more current than 14 months ago ;) There's still some open areas in it tho which is why I had questions about the effectiveness of masks. Personally I find them uncomfortable to the point of hating to have them on for extended periods, reasons for which probably extend beyond most people. Those reasons are not what I'd consider enough of a reason to warrant a medical exemption, but they do affect my breathing. That said, I've always worn one when required as most of the time I had to have them on was luckily only for short periods,usually less than 10 minutes - the exception being all day at work. There it was a no brainer for me as working in a gym full of people breathing hard represented high risk. I spent the majority of my time in the office though to max out on physical distancing.  Your point how how much they will help has always been my question, especially when taken into consideration of how/when they are used by myself and the population as whole.

My point about when they are most effective is held up in that study as well as all the others I've read -  when people spend time in smaller enclosed spaces with other people where significant breath exchange takes place between different individuals. For situations like restaurants, masks can't be worn. Same thing if people are say at a pub, movie theatre, etc. So my issue came down to the question of where masks will be most effective, and in those situations they're not practical or aren't being worn.  That's where physical distancing and limiting the time length of your exposure is probably as or even  more effective than mask. And of course vax's make a huge difference.

So why not just do it (wearing a mask)? Pragmatism, risk evaluation and personal comfort. When required I did wear them  and even in the beginning when not required I did. I was even wearing my respirator for max protection at first. But as I found more info and considered my own risk exposure, the idea of needing to have a mask on to protect others and myself became less necessary. I think if we had 90% or higher compliance with physical distancing, masking, shutdowns and better border closures - especially airlines, we could have either not had to go through this at all or had it be way less of an issue than it was. Back at the beginning Govt's and health officials made arguments against closing air traffic and/or mandatory quarantines, probably the biggest mistake in all of this. The controls at YVR for international flights were basically non-existant, the Feds really fucked that one up imho.

Going forward I think covid is here for good and it's now a game of managing it vs eradicating it - similar to how we deal with the flu. I'll be happy t be wrong on that one tho. Better guidelines/practices are still needed for not only protecting the most vulnerable, but I think also figuring out who they are. They're not just the elderly. We will probably need yearly booster shots and should probably considered tight regulations around travel . Between climate change, environmental pollution. coivd and god knows what else is coming down the pipe next, I almost wish I was a bit older so I didn't have to live with this shit for another 40 yrs or so.

Oh, and with what Couch_Surfer said, definitely don't lump me into the anti-vax or anti-mask/freedom crowds - I'm not either of those. I know I'm cutting a thin wedge here, but I'm also not denying reputable science either.

July 30, 2021, 1:42 p.m.
Posts: 1623
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: tashi

I should correct myself, that article is a literature review, not meta analysis. There can be no statistically significant conclusions drawn in a literature review, and studies are often chosen to be included that illustrate competing hypotheses, leading to the appearance of contradiction.

Since the research is very new and not standardized (even the definition of aerosol is in flux) the conclusions of individual studies are going to appear contradictory. 

My takeaways from my quick skim of that and other articles:

- masks reduce transmission

- they’re more effective the more people use them

- they’re more effective if they’re better masks. A fitted respirator is great, but a n95 (or kn94) provides very effective protection in both directions. 

- viral load is important. This means that reductions are valuable. When people say they’re worthless or in effective they’re latching on to the fact that they’re not perfect but perfection isn’t possible, nor is it the goal for the general public. Reduction is viral load is. Please consider this when you go into a public space (like a grocery store) as the employees there are exposed to far higher numbers of people than you and many of them are young and not fully vaccaniated yet, and the emerging variants are more of a threat to the young than the original as well as being more transmissible.

I say this as someone who’s done some science and read a fair amount of papers and not to be condescending - science is hard, Particularly while it’s in its early stages like COVID is. It will be very hard for the layman to interpret the work that’s happening right now for themselves; IMO this is the time to look to the experts and watch for trends and consensus to emerge. That’s how science works and yes, new knowledge will come to light that contradicts old knowledge, that’s not evidence of conspiracy or incompetence, that’s just learning. 

That article was also just the top result of a google search. One will have to keep reading to actually understand the current state of the research fully. And it’s going to change. Again and again. If you have a job you will not have the time to do your own research and come to informed conclusions.  Respect the thousands of hours that the experts have invested in their field and listen to them.

I wasn't so much latching on to the fact they not perfect, just expressing my doubts. In retrospect I probably could have a been a lot less blustery with that post, but I had other things on my mind that influenced my writing style. I also know that science is hard and have done enough bio/chem/physics and physiology (exercise science) to have a better than layman's understanding of the human body. I also know how to read a scientific paper and understand it, or for the most part decipher what I don't. This means also considering the opposing views, even if there is consensus. The change in the scientific community on the issue of aerosol spread is a great example of how the accepted view may not be right. You're right about respecting experts in their field, although I prefer to call that trust. It's there, but I also carry around a sense of skepticism and curiosity as experts are not infallible and can fall prey to influences from outside their field that can influence decisions in their filed. So when things don't quite seem right or it seems like there are other alternative I start to ask questions. It's good to ask questions if they have a reasonable basis - that's part of science as well.

July 30, 2021, 6:17 p.m.
Posts: 14378
Joined: Feb. 19, 2003

Posted by: syncro

Oh, and with what Couch_Surfer said, definitely don't lump me into the anti-vax or anti-mask/freedom crowds - I'm not either of those. I know I'm cutting a thin wedge here, but I'm also not denying reputable science either.

I think it’s perfectly reasonable to express doubts re:effectiveness.  I’ve had many similar thoughts and they extend to several other forms of theatrics that continue today.  The real zealots take a hard line based on dumb nonsense.

Personally, I’m fully vaxxed and continue to wear a mask more as a show of respect to workers that have to endure it for 8 hours.  Although the new reports on viral load levels from Delta with fully vaxxed people is of concern.

July 30, 2021, 10:56 p.m.
Posts: 15437
Joined: Dec. 30, 2002

This concern?

MSNBC: CDC study shows 74% of people infected in Massachusetts Covid outbreak were fully vaccinated

July 31, 2021, 8:07 a.m.
Posts: 11904
Joined: June 4, 2008

https://thebeaverton.com/2021/07/meet-the-unvaccinated-this-33-year-old-mom-is-a-real-fucking-idiot/

July 31, 2021, 8:48 a.m.
Posts: 15437
Joined: Dec. 30, 2002

Posted by: Sethimus

fully vaxxed 🙌

People signaling this is similar to people celebrating they swam with the sharks while still in the water.

No one's out of the water yet.

July 31, 2021, 8:52 a.m.
Posts: 15437
Joined: Dec. 30, 2002

Posted by: syncro

Oh, and with what Couch_Surfer said, definitely don't lump me into the anti-vax or anti-mask/freedom crowds - I'm not either of those. I know I'm cutting a thin wedge here, but I'm also not denying reputable science either.

What is your Vax status anyways? Obviously it's private medical info but I don't recall you posting up about getting one or both.

Forum jump: