The Worldwide C0VlD-19 Coronavirus Pandemic Discussion Thread...

[ChickenHawk]

Brother life expectancy was like 40 years old in 1918.
the death rate from this is like 0.3% when you count untested cases
it’s a nothing burger

Yup, the life expectancy was pretty darn low that year, almost like a rampaging illness tore through a third of the population.

Life Expectancy in the U.S.A.​

YEAR​	MALE​	FEMALE​
1915​	52.5​	56.8​
1916​	49.6​	54.3​
1917​	48.4​	54.0​
1918 (Year of Spanish Flu)​	36.6​	42.2​
1919​	53.5​	56.0​
1920​	53.6​	54.6​

(*Meanwhile, Chickenhawk nods sagely as she quietly adds another Rivoli screen capture to her growing "Nothing Burger" collection.*)

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Rivoli]

I've spent much of today pondering the predictions made on this forum, and the more I think about it, the more I believe that the infection and death toll will be higher than many of us anticipate.

Comparing this to the Spanish Flu: According to the CDC, about 500 million people or one-third of the world’s population became infected with this Spanish Flu virus. The estimated number of deaths was at least 50 million worldwide with about 675,000 occurring in the United States.

Some Observations:
I don't see how we expect such drastically lower numbers from C0VlD-19. It's true that medical technology has advanced quite a bit, but on the flip side, our population is more urban (meaning more people packed in closer proximity), less fit, more likely to travel, and more likely to depend on the government for food and shelter. Plus, we no longer produce many of our own medicines and vitamins.

In 1918, the U.S. population was 103 million. Now it's triple that. The Spanish Flu came in three waves. With C0VlD-19, we're only on the first wave, and the numbers are still climbing. C0VlD-19 is more contagious than the Spanish flu, and may have a higher mortality rate. (According to Stanford, the Spanish flu mortality rate was 2.5%. Estimates on the C0VlD-19 mortality rate very wildly by country, but it seems unlikely that they're significantly lower than 2.5% overall.)

If I were a betting person, I'd bet that the death toll here in the U.S. will reach at least 60,000 by summer's end, possibly much sooner. It's not that I want this to happen. I just don't see the numerical evidence that it won't, unless we take further drastic measures as far as social distancing, or a miracle cure or vaccine is developed ahead of expectations.

And let's say (heaven forbid) that 60,000 Americans die by the end of Summer. It is officially not a Nothing Burger? Or is that number still not high enough? Not being snarky, just wondering ahead of time at what point I get to taunt @Rivoli with my screen captures of his posts? (Sorry, just a little dark humor here.)

But it's a serious question. At which point is this officially a Something Burger?

I’ll bet you $1,000 deaths in US don’t pass 59,99 9 in

Yup, the life expectancy was pretty darn low that year, almost like a rampaging illness tore through a third of the population.

Life Expectancy in the U.S.A.​

YEAR​	MALE​	FEMALE​
1915​	52.5​	56.8​
1916​	49.6​	54.3​
1917​	48.4​	54.0​
1918 (Year of Spanish Flu)​	36.6​	42.2​
1919​	53.5​	56.0​
1920​	53.6​	54.6​

(*Meanwhile, Chickenhawk nods sagely as she quietly adds another Rivoli screen capture to her growing "Nothing Burger" collection.*)

It’s literally a nothingburger. 3 weeks it will be over.
On Monday Cuomo will announce 90% of the trial of HCQ is cured.

Done

screen cap this and set a reminder.
I’m calling this just like I called bitcoin in 2017

 

[ChickenHawk]

I’ll bet you $1,000 deaths in US don’t pass 59,99 9 in

I would never take that bet, because I'd be betting on people to die, and I don't truly wish to be right.

On Monday Cuomo will announce 90% of the trial of HCQ is cured. Trump will declare victory. Done

That would be really nice, and would be a real game changer. It could happen, too. I'm crossing my fingers.

It’s literally a nothingburger. 3 weeks it will be over.

(*Quietly adds another screen capture, along with a reminder to taunt you with it on April 17.*)

Edit to Add: I honestly don't want to be right. No one will be happier than myself if my April 17 screen-capture taunting session is cancelled due to a nice tasty helping of Nothing Burger.

 

[Saavedra]

Italian hospital makes heartbreaking decision not to intubate over-60s

HOSPITALS in Italy are no longer intubating patients over the age of 60, with some doctors being forced to make agonising decisions about who lives and who dies in the face of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, according to shocking eyewitness reports from healthcare professionals.

www.express.co.uk

This certainly hits some locations more Than others, but the evidence is pretty strong that horrifying things are happening from this illness. Yes this is anecdotal evidence but highly concerning if this pattern replicates widely.

Is 60 really that elderly?

Also remember Italy has 3.8/1000 hospital beds compared to 2/1000.

60 > years old have voted and formed the world we live in for decades. if they werent wise enough to get to safe nuclear fission or working fusion and get rid of politicians and lawyers altogether and replace them with engineers and business owners it is mostly their fault.

this coming from someone already thinking of suicide if alzheimers comes knocking on the door by that age, i don't want to be a burden to anyone.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Fox]

I’ll bet you $1,000 deaths in US don’t pass 59,99 9 in


It’s literally a nothingburger. 3 weeks it will be over.
On Monday Cuomo will announce 90% of the trial of HCQ is cured.

Done

screen cap this and set a reminder.
I’m calling this just like I called bitcoin in 2017

Dude no one wants to bet on people dying around here.

Or even discuss betting on it either.

GTFO with these types of post.

 

[MattR82]

Unlike other forums I'm on, the ignore function seems to work exceptionally well here. Other forums still show ignored users when replied to, but not this one, so it still looks like a thread of people talking to no one lol.

Anyway, I just wanted to say it's a good time to think about reaching out to people in isolation, just to say hi. I've worked out a time to give my old nan a call a few times per week as she's new to a nursing home, and although she likes it, they aren't allowed visitors anymore.

I've been making a point to reach out to some people and it's mostly been positive but a bit one sided. Maybe friends and fam think that because I've worked remotely for so long that it doesn't bother me, but I'll say it made my day when someone finally returned the favour.

If only I played video games lol. I would not feel any isolation at all considering that seems to be all my mates do with each other! But.. I can't bring myself to that lol.

 

[MTF]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...isregarding-C0VlD-19-lockdown-going-pint.html

Sweden bucks global trend with experimental virus strategy | Free to read

Fewer restrictions than other leading countries and schools remain open

www.ft.com

https://www.thelocal.se/20200325/whats-missing-from-swedens-coronavirus-strategy-communication

Sweden Is Open for Business During Its Coronavirus Outbreak

The Scandinavian country believes its distinctive high-trust culture will protect it from needing to shut down for the pandemic.

foreignpolicy.com

Any thoughts on Sweden's approach? This is different than Asian countries since testing is only being done on patients with severe symptoms so in other words essentially they aren't doing anything to control it. Yet they have very few deaths and life goes on relatively normally, with schools, restaurants, and bars open and only gatherings above 500 people banned.

According to the current most popular let's-shut-down-everything theory, without all these restrictions their healthcare system should be already overburdened to a much greater extent than in Italy considering they had their first case on January 31 (same date as in Italy).

Some interesting quotes from the articles:

Johan Carlson, head of Sweden’s public health agency, last week defended Sweden’s approach, saying the country “cannot take draconian measures that have a limited impact on the epidemic but knock out the functions of society”.

But he conceded that the 90,000 figure for the number of people who die annually in Sweden would “increase significantly” if its healthcare system became overburdened.

Epidemiologist and science writer Emma Frans had a similar view, saying that this different wording highlights the role of the individual in preventing the spread.

"In Sweden we are letting people use their own judgment," she said. "We should all think not only about our own risk, but also the risk of transmitting the disease, especially young people who think they're not at risk of becoming critically ill or dying and aren't being as careful as they should. We are getting this freedom of not being locked down, but with this freedom comes responsibility."

But Johan Giesecke, Sweden’s former state epidemiologist and a current advisor to the World Health Organization, insists that, so far, “there is no indication that we need to fear a breakdown in trust.” He believes the Public Health Agency, which he once headed, has been too drastic rather than too lenient.

“Banning public gatherings is an idiotic idea,” said Giesecke, “and if you’re not feeling sick you should go to work or school. There’s no reason why people who feel well should stay at home and there is no evidence that shows closing national borders or restaurants reduces the spread of viruses. The only preventative measure that has sound scientific backing is washing your hands. But we’ve known that for 150 years.”

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[c_morris]

I’m calling this just like I called bitcoin in 2017

Then what are you doing here? Shouldn't you being swimming in a vault of gold coins like Scrooge McDuck? Or did you just call it and not act on your bold prediction?

 

[Vigilante]

The United States government is indicating that the curve is breaking favorably

Dr. Birx: Coronavirus Data Doesn't Match The Doomsday Media Predictions

White House coronavirus task force member Dr. Deborah Brix warned the public not to panic when they hear about models and projections of the pandemic's spread. "Models are models," she said. "When people start talking about 20% of a population getting infected, it's very scary, but we don't...

www.realclearpolitics.com

 

[MattR82]

Boris Johnson tests positive.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GIlman]

The United States government is indicating that the curve is breaking favorably

Dr. Birx: Coronavirus Data Doesn't Match The Doomsday Media Predictions

White House coronavirus task force member Dr. Deborah Brix warned the public not to panic when they hear about models and projections of the pandemic's spread. "Models are models," she said. "When people start talking about 20% of a population getting infected, it's very scary, but we don't...

www.realclearpolitics.com

We will see this play out. Even if the trajectory is reduced, how much is it reduced? If the old models where not accurate, why should we believe the new models now. If the government really believed these new models and assumptions wouldn’t we tell ford, GM, Tesla to scrap ventilator plans and return to normal production? Wouldn’t we halt construction on many thousand bed medical facilities around the country? Why the inconsistency with talk and action?

Here is what is odd to me. There is What appears to me logical inconsistencies with what they are saying.

1) First, we are told that we need to flatten the curve.
2) Massive world wide measures are taken to flatten transmission
3) They are now looking at lower than expected rates of transmission and saying that it’s not spreading as fast as projected. Well wasn’t that the point - I mean why quarantine anyone in the first if the expected outcome isn’t reduced transmission rates?
4) Based on what we have seen in other countries it takes about 2 weeks for people to get into trouble, and 20ish days on a ventilator to get off of it. In other words there is a big lag time from infection to outcome (live/die).
5) We have not had sufficient time in the US for this process to play out. I will be watching to see what happens in next 2 weeks.

Well, duh, isn’t this just expressing the expected obvious?Most of the world is on lockdown. We have never studied a disease with the world on lockdown, so how do you know what “normal” lockdown transmission rates looks like. Based on all the alterations to date, how can you make that projection accurately - well you can’t it’s just another model.

Second series of thing that is odd to me.

1) Study from England says 500k dead if nothing done
2) Italy disease rates and deaths begin to spike
3) Italy goes on lockdown
4) Italy’s deaths continue to grow, currently at 8250 (on lockdown for weeks)
5) Revised study from England says now only expect 20K deaths.
6) England and Italy have similar size populations
7) Italy on lockdown nearly 2 weeks is nearing 1/2 the new projected total deaths in England.
8) if the point of lockdowns is to reduce deaths, italy has been on lockdown so there is expectation of reduced death (vs letting it rip), and they still have almost 50% the number of projected deaths in England will lots of people that have yet to be infected - how does any of that add up?
9) England project running out of ICU beds will not be an issue, both Italy and Spain report deficiencies and high death rates because of it.

The problem with these recent model revisions are this. They rely on an assumption that has not been really tested. The assumption is that there is a very large population of people without symptoms in the population that are infected. Therefore the sick are unlucky and tons of people got infected and did fine. That would be great if true....but let’s get the data and prove that - this idea is based on another stinking model.

So right now it’s become, pick your expert, pick your model, and forecast whatever you want.

At the end of the day, I really don’t trust experts using models to predict the future, especially when dealing with unknowns. I’ve seen both be grossly wrong too many times to count. Which way they are wrong is hard to say, but in the area of making predictions their record is terrible. I wish I could find the thread, I had literally said this exact same thing like 3 months ago on a different topic.

Experts do well looking to the past to figure out what already happened, their track record has been terrible for forecasting the future.

I’m still left only being able to look at things around the world, and the picture I see does not add up to the words I hear.

At the end of the day, I hope these new models are correct, I hope we can all get back to work tomorrow, and I hope we are all safe and well. That would be the best outcome at the moment. I like everyone else desperately want to get back to eating out, traveling, and making money.

 

[Kak]

 

[reedracer]

View attachment 31579

I'd like to see the alternate history where Steve Rhodes lived and Ozzy never bit the head off that dead bat.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Vigilante]

I'd like to see the alternate history where Steve Rhodes lived and Ozzy never bit the head off that dead bat.

its not Ozzy biting the bat I’m worried about.

 

[Ubu_roi]

Ok,

there are models, predictions and political issues of every kind.

But the facts seem to point to something seriously dangerous, and real people are dying, in some areas at an alarming rate.

this article got me in tears: ‘We Take the Dead From Morning Till Night’

It’s really too early to think this is over.

please be careful.

 

[biophase]

Here is what is odd to me. There is What appears to me logical inconsistencies with what they are saying.

Everything that they say has logical inconsistencies. For example, if we just look at the masks.

Masks don't help you because they don't block the virus, this virus is too small. So don't go out buying them, they won't help you. Save them for the hospitals.

Then why do doctors and nurses need the masks?

Masks are worn by doctors to keep doctors from infecting patients as they do surgery. You wear the masks to prevent you from spreading the virus if you have it.

So all the nurses taking care of the virus patients have the virus too? That's why they shouldn't spread it to others?

Well, um not exactly. It's to protect them from getting infected.

I thought you said masks don't work.

Ummm, yeah they do. But most people touch their face too much and contaminate the mask.

So the mask does work, but people don't use it correctly?

Well, most people don't put it on properly and completely seal the edges.

So they do work?

Ummm, yes, sort of, but you don't need them. Save them for the hospitals.

It's common sense that if the masks did not work, the hospitals would not be asking for them. It's also common sense that having any sort of barrier between your nose/mouth and the open air would provide a better level of protection than nothing. It's pretty clear to me that the public was told that masks did not work in order to prevent a panic buying of them.

But what I don't understand is why the hospitals and governments weren't secretly buying masks during this time. If they are trying to save the inventory and keeping them from the public, then why didn't they purchase the 10,000,000 masks during the time when they were telling us that they didn't work?

Anyway, this is my rant for just this one tiny aspect of this whole situation.

I don't believe the revised curve data either. I hope it is correct, but it doesn't make sense to me. Just like the whole mask situation.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Jon L]

Everything that they say has logical inconsistencies. For example, if we just look at the masks.

Masks don't help you because they don't block the virus, this virus is too small. So don't go out buying them, they won't help you. Save them for the hospitals.

Then why do doctors and nurses need the masks?

Masks are worn by doctors to keep doctors from infecting patients as they do surgery. You wear the masks to prevent you from spreading the virus if you have it.

So all the nurses taking care of the virus patients have the virus too? That's why they shouldn't spread it to others?

Well, um not exactly. It's to protect them from getting infected.

I thought you said masks don't work.

Ummm, yeah they do. But most people touch their face too much and contaminate the mask.

So the mask does work, but people don't use it correctly?

Well, most people don't put it on properly and completely seal the edges.

So they do work?

Ummm, yes, sort of, but you don't need them. Save them for the hospitals.

It's common sense that if the masks did not work, the hospitals would not be asking for them. It's also common sense that having any sort of barrier between your nose/mouth and the open air would provide a better level of protection than nothing. It's pretty clear to me that the public was told that masks did not work in order to prevent a panic buying of them.

But what I don't understand is why the hospitals and governments weren't secretly buying masks during this time. If they are trying to save the inventory and keeping them from the public, then why didn't they purchase the 10,000,000 masks during the time when they were telling us that they didn't work?

Anyway, this is my rant for just this one tiny aspect of this whole situation.

I don't believe the revised curve data either. I hope it is correct, but it doesn't make sense to me. Just like the whole mask situation.

Masks work. The problem is: what happens when you take the mask off? The rest of your body is contaminated. As soon as any other part of your body or clothing touches your face, you're infected. People that work in hospitals know this, and they do things to keep this from happening. People that run around with just a mask don't. Their masks are a waste of resources.

 

[AceVentures]

This is how I see it:

- Economic collapse frightened decision makers
- Stimulus package sparked market interest and perception of recovery
- All efforts now being done to further highlight the perception of recovery
- Economic Stock market collapse is temporarily avoided
- All fingers crossed that situation doesn't become worse

There are no clear indications in the data so far that the disease has been contained, or that the threat it poses is mitigated.

All I see is a more contagious and sometimes less symptomatic version of SARS circulating rapidly. Idc what the media says, idc what the government says, idc what anybody's great aunt that has a friend in Italy says. I look at the facts, and I make my own goddamn mind. As should you.

Whether you believe it's dangerous or you don't. Make up your own mind and quit looking at others to validate your assumptions, because none of us have seen this play out before, and none of us will be able to tell with any degree of certainty.

As @GIlman says, models are only as good as the assumptions they're fed, so quit relying on those, but rather look to them to get insights on the most sensitive variables at play, which levers move the needle the most. The end result, 6 months down the line, cannot be predicted by any model.

 

[Vigilante]

Everything that they say has logical inconsistencies. For example, if we just look at the masks.

Masks don't help you because they don't block the virus, this virus is too small. So don't go out buying them, they won't help you. Save them for the hospitals.

Then why do doctors and nurses need the masks?

Masks are worn by doctors to keep doctors from infecting patients as they do surgery. You wear the masks to prevent you from spreading the virus if you have it.

So all the nurses taking care of the virus patients have the virus too? That's why they shouldn't spread it to others?

Well, um not exactly. It's to protect them from getting infected.

I thought you said masks don't work.

Ummm, yeah they do. But most people touch their face too much and contaminate the mask.

So the mask does work, but people don't use it correctly?

Well, most people don't put it on properly and completely seal the edges.

So they do work?

Ummm, yes, sort of, but you don't need them. Save them for the hospitals.

It's common sense that if the masks did not work, the hospitals would not be asking for them. It's also common sense that having any sort of barrier between your nose/mouth and the open air would provide a better level of protection than nothing. It's pretty clear to me that the public was told that masks did not work in order to prevent a panic buying of them.

But what I don't understand is why the hospitals and governments weren't secretly buying masks during this time. If they are trying to save the inventory and keeping them from the public, then why didn't they purchase the 10,000,000 masks during the time when they were telling us that they didn't work?

Anyway, this is my rant for just this one tiny aspect of this whole situation.

I don't believe the revised curve data either. I hope it is correct, but it doesn't make sense to me. Just like the whole mask situation.

I don’t understand why they didn’t have a gigantic surplus of them anyway. Before the crisis kicked in the masks were almost free. I can’t believe a hospital wouldn’t have a supply room with a one year supply of masks. That will never happen again.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[TTG SS]

Anyone from NY here? They just forced my Dad to shut down (construction industry), which sucks.

Fortunately, my Mom's business is still running as it is considered essential because they support the federal government and railroads.

 

[Jon L]

I don’t understand why they didn’t have a gigantic surplus of them anyway. Before the crisis kicked in the masks were almost free. I can’t believe a hospital wouldn’t have a supply room with a one year supply of masks. That will never happen again.

I thought the government had stockpiles of stuff like this? Guess that assumption was a little naive.

 

[GIlman]

I don’t understand why they didn’t have a gigantic surplus of them anyway. Before the crisis kicked in the masks were almost free. I can’t believe a hospital wouldn’t have a supply room with a one year supply of masks. That will never happen again.

Likely regulation. Almost everything in the hospital has an expiration date, whether the item truly expires or not, I.e. loses effectiveness or not. For decades we have shipped “expired” medical supplies to other countries (third world). Lots of supplies are not stocked too much to prevent expiration waste.

There is tremendous regulatory nonsense, yes some things do expire, does everything need to expire. Next time I’m in a hospital I’ll take a look at a box of masks and see if they have an expiration stamp.

either way, this expiration cycle leads to a JIT philosophy for all medical supplies.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[lowtek]

Masks work. The problem is: what happens when you take the mask off? The rest of your body is contaminated. As soon as any other part of your body or clothing touches your face, you're infected. People that work in hospitals know this, and they do things to keep this from happening. People that run around with just a mask don't. Their masks are a waste of resources.

Then the problem is that people need education on the proper best known methods for using masks and dealing with the remainder of the contaminated clothing. The establishment simply lied and told people they don't work, which was a colossal mistake.

They're going to have to walk back that propaganda 6 months to a year from now, when we decide we have to get on with things and just start mitigating risks. That means everybody wearing a mask in public. People are going to be mistrustful / confused due to the early message that masks don't work. It's absolutely idiotic. They should have just said "masks work but we screwed up and don't have enough. We need to save them for the people with the greatest need and greatest impact."

 

[Jon L]

Then the problem is that people need education on the proper best known methods for using masks and dealing with the remainder of the contaminated clothing. The establishment simply lied and told people they don't work, which was a colossal mistake.

They're going to have to walk back that propaganda 6 months to a year from now, when we decide we have to get on with things and just start mitigating risks. That means everybody wearing a mask in public. People are going to be mistrustful / confused due to the early message that masks don't work. It's absolutely idiotic. They should have just said "masks work but we screwed up and don't have enough. We need to save them for the people with the greatest need and greatest impact."

Its not propaganda. When you write stuff for the general public, you have to phrase it in the most basic form possible. "If you do the following 10 steps, in order, every single time, then a mask will work for you. If not, it won't." is not something that will EVER work for the general public. What will happen is that you'll create a false sense of security. People will skip steps, will end up going out more often than they would otherwise, and spread of the virus will increase.

I'm not a medical expert. I do custom software, so take this with a grain of salt. But, only a small one. The same thing is true for computer users. Anything more than a 1 step solution to a problem for most computer users is too much. Things need to be dead simple. If they're not, you'll create more problems than you'll solve.

 

[Jon L]

This guy is awesome. There's a reason he's in the position he's in. How to run an organization and think through a difficult problem:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCsidYDqWo0

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChickenHawk]

Turns out, the guy who supposedly backed off from his estimate of 500 million deaths in the UK is standing by his original data. Basically, he's STILL saying that up to 500 million might still die if the UK doesn't do intensive social distancing and other public health interventions. Here's his Twitter thread clearing up the misconception that he suddenly believes that C0VlD-19 is less lethal than he originally estimated. (The short story: He's found it to be MORE transmissible, not less.)



The rest of the tweet thread reads:
3/4 - My evidence to Parliament referred to the deaths we assess might occur in the UK in the presence of the very intensive social distancing and other public health interventions now in place.

4/4 - Without these controls, our assessment remains that the UK would see the scale of deaths reported in our study (namely up to 500 thousand.)

 

[Vigilante]

Turns out, the guy who supposedly backed off from his estimate of 500 million deaths in the UK is standing by his original data. Basically, he's STILL saying that up to 500 million might still die if the UK doesn't do intensive social distancing and other public health interventions. Here's his Twitter thread clearing up the misconception that he suddenly believes that C0VlD-19 is less lethal than he originally estimated. (The short story: He's found it to be MORE transmissible, not less.)

View attachment 31585

The rest of the tweet thread reads:
3/4 - My evidence to Parliament referred to the deaths we assess might occur in the UK in the presence of the very intensive social distancing and other public health interventions now in place.

4/4 - Without these controls, our assessment remains that the UK would see the scale of deaths reported in our study (namely up to 500 thousand.)

So the pressure got to him. It’s basically career suicide within that arena to do what he did. Correcting the correction of his message may allow him to save face with his peers. And since nobody reported on it… No harm no foul. Unfortunately or fortunately his correction has more scientific weight.

 

[biophase]

Masks work. The problem is: what happens when you take the mask off? The rest of your body is contaminated. As soon as any other part of your body or clothing touches your face, you're infected. People that work in hospitals know this, and they do things to keep this from happening. People that run around with just a mask don't. Their masks are a waste of resources.

That doesn’t change the fact that the masks themselves do work. They just assume that the general public would not properly be able to correctly use the mask. Is that the type of information you want the media reporting?

Did that stop you from getting some masks yourself?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Jon L]

That doesn’t change the fact that the masks themselves do work. They just assume that the general public would not properly be able to correctly use the mask. Is that the type of information you want the media reporting?

Did that stop you from getting some masks yourself?

They don't work unless they're part of a full system. Its like a ship with a giant hole in the bottom. You can have the nicest engine, airtight compartments all over the place, etc. But with the hole, you're still gonna sink. Would the general public:

1) put on full PPE when going into a public place
2) Take it all off and dispose of it prior to getting into their car (if they didn't, they'd contaminate their car, negating the purpose of the mask). Oh, and when they take it off, they have to do it in a specific order and in a certain way to avoid contaminating themselves.
3) disinfect the stuff they brought home with them, cleaning the surfaces those items touched in the process
4) etc etc etc

If they wouldn't, then masks are a waste of resources that could be better used in hospitals. At best, masks delay the inevitable if not properly used.

I didn't buy any for myself.

 

[Jon L]

I love the confirmation bias in this thread...

Guy says, "Here's my data..." and people say, "BULLSHIT!!! HE CAN'T BE TRUSTED!!!"

Media then says, "Guy admits data is wrong..." and people say, "LOOK AT THE NEW DATA...HE'S RIGHT THIS TIME!!! SEE!!! WE WERE RIGHT ALL ALONG!!!"

Guy then says, "Media misinterpreted me..." and people say, "BULLSHIT!!! HE CAN'T BE TRUSTED!!!"

I've only skimmed over his updated model, but my impression is that it doesn't say what the media (and people on this thread) think its says. There's nuance all over the place here, and you have to really pay attention on a journal article like that to pick up on it. Deep knowledge of the subject is also important. None of us have that, with the possible exception of @GIlman .

I'd love to see how an actual epidemiologist interprets his statements. I'm betting its quite different from what we're saying here.