There is a new form of protests sweeping across the country as individuals put on anti-Mask masks to defy mandatory mask rules. The anti-masks are made of thin material, mesh or even crochet and are advertised as having no protective qualities for Covid-19. The question is whether they are legal. They appear to be so.
A popular video shows a man wearing a mesh mask to a Tampa Walmart and saying “It was almost like not wearing a mask at all. Nobody cared. That’s because it’s not about safety. It’s all about compliance.”
Most laws like Alabama‘s only refer to a “covering” not a mask with protective qualities:
2. Facial coverings for individuals. Effective July 16, 2020 at 5:00 P.M., each person shall wear a mask or other facial covering that covers his or her nostrils and mouth at all times when within six feet of a person from another household in any of the following places: an indoor space open to the general public, a vehicle operated by a transportation service, or an outdoor public space where ten or more people.
“Facial coverings for individuals.
Effective July 16, 2020 at 5:00 P.M., each person shall wear a mask or other facial covering that covers his or her nostrils and mouth at all times when within six feet of a person from another household in any of the following places: an indoor space open to the general public, a vehicle operated by a transportation service, or an outdoor public space where ten or more people are gathered.”
Even that is subject to exceptions. However, consider the definition of face coverings:
“Face Covering” means a covering that fully covers a person’s nose and mouth, but is not a Medical-Grade Mask. The term “Face Covering” includes, without limitation, scarves and bandanas.”
A mesh mask does cover the fact and, since scarves can be used, there is no effort to indicate a threshold protective level or dimension. There are vast differences between masks and stores are unlikely to want to police the sufficiency of masks, particularly if the states do not specify minimal standards. Even creative work on the noun “cover” does not help much. Oxford defines it as simply “a thing that is put over or on another thing.” A permeable material still covers the mouth and nose. It just does little else.
Twitter is replete with such anti-masks with such disclaimers as “Stylish, breathable and don’t protect you from a darn thing! Masks required? No problem! Breath free while making a statement.”
It is a statement that most people would not want to make. However, it is probably legal. It can bring certain notoriety with a chance of lethal contraction.
However, with cities like Miami threatening $500 fines for failing to wear a mask, more people may choose to protest with these defiant masks — defeating the efforts to curtail the spread.
Given the recent incidents of people flipping out over masks, this is not likely to make things less confrontational. The latest example is some a person named Ruby Musso who filmed herself arguing with staff after she refused to wear a face mask. Multiple employees ask her to leave and she is called a “Karen.” She in turn calls them Nazis.
The store has received threats after the posting of the video. It has become a familiar scene:
The anti-mask mask is likely to trigger new confrontations as stores or other customers object to failure to follow the “spirit” of these orders while others claim the right to comply in their own defiant way.
By the way, the anti-masks are not the only technical workaround pandemic rules. New York bars are now reportedly serving “Cuomo Chips” for $1 to get around the ban on alcohol without food. This is meant to satisfy the requirement that “all restaurants and bars statewide will be subject to new requirements that they must only serve alcohol to people who are ordering and eating food.”
Masks are one layer of filtration, some more effective than others. This is a fact. Distancing is another layer of filtration, the greater the distance the more effective. This is a fact. Washing hands and cleaning surfaces is another layer of filtration, of varying degrees to varying degrees. This is a fact. Testing, tracing, and isolating is another layer of filtration, a proven highly effective layer of filtration. This is a fact. The countries that performed any or all of these filtrations were the least affected by the virus. The countries that were lax and refused to discipline themselves were the most affected: The US, Sweden, Brazil, etc.
The objective is to isolate the virus for long enough that it dies, by not allowing it to contact an animal where it can propagate.
Anyone who is lax in any or all of these filtrations exhibits lethargy and is endangering the common good. Those that carry out all filtrations with discipline are few and to be commended.
Those that refuse to wear any sort of mask or do anything citing ‘rights’ etc are simply fools and in this case dangerous. If these fools were the only ones to suffer and hopefully be culled out of the herd, it would be a good thing; but these fools endanger others. We all pay for the hospitals where the fools rack up the costs. We all pay for the morgues where the fools take up space.
It’s like seat belts and helmets. Statistics show that seat belts and helmets save lives and reduce the costs to society of taking care of idiots who don’t use them. Yet the idiots rant and rave and life goes on.
There is nothing more disgraceful than denigrating the words of the Bill of Rights and Constitution by using them to stand up for nonsense, nonsense that serves only the perverse ego of the fool. Society protects the rights of the individual, not the other way around. Unfortunately society sometimes protects the rights of individuals who pervert those rights. It’s like a low quality mask, some virus gets through. However, most virus is stopped. These fools are being reduced over time. They come out from under their rocks, however, when times are rough.
Please learn what a “fact” is as well as what “filtration” is.
Testing and tracing are neither filtration – nor effective except under limited circumstances.
All the other means you list are filtration only under the very broadest defintion.
For any or any combination of methods to be effective you must get the transmission rate below 1, the further below 1 the more effective, and you must sustain a transmission rate below 1 for long enough for the virus to burn out.
If you do not succeed then all you accomplish is slowing the inevitable.
Contra your claims – NO COUNTRY has done that. The real world evidence is that what small differences there are between countries or states) are attributable to latitude, or demographics – not polices.
Europe as a whole has done no better than the US. Countries such as france, italy, spain, UK have done much worse.
Sweden which you single out has done the same as europe despite having done nothing by force.
“The objective is to isolate the virus for long enough that it dies, by not allowing it to contact an animal where it can propagate.”
This process must be done near perfectly for a long period – that is not possible, even slight deviations will result in essentially having to start over.
“Anyone who is lax in any or all of these filtrations exhibits lethargy and is endangering the common good. Those that carry out all filtrations with discipline are few and to be commended.”
False, Anyone who fails, MIGHT get infected, if they do not, they have done no harm. If they do get infected THEN and only THEN do they have an actual duty to isolate, and if they do so, not only do they NOT harm the “common good” but once they have recovered they BENEFIT the common good – anyone who is infected and therefore immune slows the spread of the virus even if they do NOTHING.
Only those with no argument resort to juggling semantics. Filtration works here in two ways. The masks filter out the virus, to some degree. The precautions filter out the virus from propagating. You have nothing.
Testing, tracing, and isolating have been proven to ‘filter’ out the virus from the society that performs it.
Sweden did little to nothing to offset the spread of the virus and it spiraled out of control to a point where Norway, Denmark, and Finland closed their borders. Norway, Denmark, and Finland set in place many ‘filtrations’ and faired far, far, far better.
In response to the rest of your nonsense, some attempt is better than nothing and nothing is fool proof. It will be a year, probably two before vaccines have any effect. Managing this virus means making an effort. Those who argue idiotically against filtering in any and all ways, are the danger.
Pay attention.
Humans communicate with words. Most think with words, When you abuse the meaning of words, you destroy communication and muddle your thinking – both of which you have done.
That is more than semantics.
It is clear you are completely unfamiliar with the behavior of the virus world wide (and countrywide).
Can you cite a clear example of a government policy showing a statistically significant effect ?
C19 is virtually gone in Italy. Why ? It hit the country hard, but it is not coming back – why ? Italy is no longer “locked down”.
100% of italians did not get C19 – so why is C19 done in italy ?
There are plenty of other examples.
Ultimately the impact of C19 on a country is determined by Demographics and latitude – not government policies.
That is self evident.
I would further note that never before has man – government been so arrogant as to presume that it could stop or contain a respiratory virus.
Are we going to lockdown to stop the flu next winter ?
The fundimental difference between Norway, Denmark and Findland and Sweden is that in Sweden senior care is large facilities like in the US, while in those other countries it is more like small boarding homes. That radically alters the spread of any virus amoung the most vulnerable
Beyond that Norway and finland have less than 1/2 the population density of Sweden.
Most countries in the world have severely restricted travel between countries.
Further there is very little difference between what people in Sweden did and those in other countries.
Your “filtrations” – the difference is that the Swedish government made “recomendations” rather than issue directives.
Actual behavior was nearly identical.
We can only hope that the CCP virus fear mongers will catch the clap and rid us of their reproductive harm to the gene pool
Obviously Jon Say buys into “alternative facts”. I’ll be sure to distance from him and his ilk for the duration.
Way to step up Jon! You’re gonna save us all!
“Obviously Jon Say buys into “alternative facts”.”
How so ? Everything I have argued has been based on real world data, actual studies and the accepted mathematical models of epidemics.
“Way to step up Jon! You’re gonna save us all!”
Is that your objective – to accomplish the impossible ?
That is admirable.
Using force to compel others to adhere to your wishful thinking for your personal moral self gratification is immoral.
You have zero understanding understanding of what a right is – rights are not created by the law or constitution, the constitution – a written expression of the social contract is an agreement to protect rights.
Society is obligated to protect everyone’s rights. Rights are not contingent.
Even those who you call fools have rights that are protected.
Only an idiot believes that he or she alone protects their rights. The rights of a society were bestowed upon its members by the society and are moderated to the moment by the society. Rights come with responsibilities. This is a fact. Society determines those responsibilities and protects rights or rescinds rights. Typically when an individual all by their self demands its rights beyond a certain point, they are thrown in the slammer. However, when enough individuals group together and elect enough representatives the society protects the individual and its rights, rights that are determined by the society or majority of citizens. Follow the rights of the individual back from now to the inception of this country and witness.
No rights are not “bestowed” by society.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, ”
We are endowed with unalienable rights – they are not granted us by society.
The purpose of government is to secure our rights.
Rights do NOT come with responsibilities – they are unconditional.
People are “thrown in the slammer” for violating the rights of others.
Rights are not determined by society.
You can repeal the first amendment – you will still have the right to free speech.
Governments that do not protect rights are authoritarian and usually end when that failure is sufficiently egregious.
John Say,
Rights do carry the responsibility on each individual of making sure one does not violate the rights of another. While we have the right to bear arms, we have a responsibility to live out that right well so we do not violate other’s rights to life.
Laura Ingalls wrote a passage that examines this a little:
“Americans won’t obey any king on earth. Americans are free. That means they have to obey their own consciences. No king bosses Pa; he has to boss himself. Why (she thought) when I am a little older, Pa and Ma will stop telling me what to do, and there isn’t anyone else who has a right to give me orders. I will have to make myself be good.”
John Say,
“Rights do carry the responsibility on each individual of making sure one does not violate the rights of another.”
These are independent.
And not even inherently correct.
As an employer you can limit the free speech of your employees to the extent that it might harm your business.
You can – and do voluntarily cede rights to others all the time.
Free exchange cedes your property rights in one thing for rights in another.
Our responsibility is to:
Not use force or fraud to take from others what is not ours.
To live up to any agreements we made
To avoid harming others and to make whole those we harm.
Enforcing those responsibilities – against the few of us who will not do so naturally, is the responsibility of government.
that is what the declaration means by “securing our rights”.
Regardless, your right to free speech is not conditioned on responsible speech.
There is no explicit quid pro quo.
Government is obligated to protect your rights – whether you use them responsibly or not.
Government protects your rights by punishing those who use force or fraud to violate them, or who fail to live up to agreements with you or who cause you actual harm without making you whole.
I oppose the language of responsibility because it presumes that rights are conditional on using them wisely.
That assumption gives the government far too much power to decide whether you are entitled to some right.
Rights are not conditional, I agree.
Just to be clear there are actual responsibilities that come with citizenship or even residence.
These are independent of rights.
You have the rights – whether you meet the responsibiities.
You have the responsibilities whether you excercise the rights.
“Masks are one layer of filtration, some more effective than others. ”
so is wearing a bag over your head, a used jockstrap, a dirty bra or placing your hands over your ears and eyes, and running into walls just for shits and giggles. we will notify you when you have hit the wall enough times but for now…keep running
+ 10
Let’s substitute HIV for COVID-19…. would you still feel the same way and say the same things regarding individuals who didn’t follow all of the rules? For example, tracing and isolating left up to the individual (tell your partners that you are positive). There were never negative Op-Ed’s and articles written about the selfishness of individuals who refused to wear condoms or had multiple Partners.
HIV still exists – yet we do not require every person to wear a condom.
You can legitimately constrain the actions of people who know they are infected or who should reasonably know.
In the early 80’s HIV was assumed to be 100% fatal – yet we still did not require everyone to wear a condom.
Maybe I go to the wrong grocery store, but people at mine are not randomly f…..g in the parking lot or at the dairy cooler.
You used HIV as your example.
But your odds of bumping into atleast 1 person in the grocery store than has C19 is near 100%
In my many years treating, educating, screening and studying HIV, the majority of my HIV patients took responsibility for their actions. When they seroconverted to HIV+, they never blamed anyone. I often reflected that women who defend killing an unborn baby never own their behaviors for promiscuity. They blame the developing baby. As if they did not know parting their legs might produce an offspring.
It would be fortuitous if COVID-19 high risk patients owned their girth and took COVID-19 as a threat to themselves as opposed to expecting all of us to shake and quake with them.
In evolutionary theory, natural selection is predicated on fitness. Fitness is key. Self-regulation is key. But that’s science for you
“In my many years treating, educating, screening and studying HIV, the majority of my HIV patients took responsibility for their actions. ”
And they did so absent the threat of big brother breathing down their necks.
So exactly why should we trust ordinary people less than gay men ?
And should some refuse to do so – won’t they end up with the consequences of their own actions ?
I agree with almost everything you say but sometimes people don’t act responsibly. I recall the (?) gay pride event in San Fransisco where gays from all over the world flew into San Fransisco and its bath houses. There were two views: One, close the bath houses to save lives. Two leave them open based on the feeling that lives are less important than the political gains. “Fitness is key”, but that includes mental fitness as well along with a whole host of other things whether they are controllable or not.
I did not use HIV as an example, but if I did the analogy does not hold. Start with the enforcement problems and go onto the willing, elective, and hopefully selective”intercourse” with sex partners vs random interactions with Joe Blow and Betty Boop in the necessary act of procuring food.
“I did not use HIV as an example, but if I did the analogy does not hold. ”
Nor did I, so let it go.
“Start with the enforcement problems and go onto the willing, elective, and hopefully selective”intercourse” with sex partners vs random interactions with Joe Blow and Betty Boop in the necessary act of procuring food.”
There is no difference in the willingness of sexual intercourse and the willingness of buying groceries.
While humans chose to have sex for pleasure, it is “necescary” for the continuation of the species.
There is no absolute necessity. There are myriad ways to acquire food. Failing is also a possibility.
John again confuses risk factors for different behaviors, their frequency, and avoids the enforcement issue.
He chose to extend the analogy and imperfectly so as I noted.
“John again confuses risk factors for different behaviors, their frequency, and avoids the enforcement issue.”
Nope.
Sexual activity is a risk factor for aids.
close Interactions with other humans for more than 10 minutes is a risk factor for C19.
Frequency is a choice. You can choose how often to have sex and whether to protect yourself.
You can choose how often to go shopping, where, when and how close to get to others.
One of the things I did not understand early on is why government reduced store hours.
We should have extended them. The best time to shop to avoid others is 3am. I did lots of grocery shopping at that time BEFORE C19.
There is no legitimate enforcement issue with respect to individual rights. You may not restrict the liberty of another because of you personal misassessment of their risks. You can make choices for yourself, not others.
“He chose to extend the analogy and imperfectly so as I noted.”
It is not my analogy. It is not a great analogy, but I can still make my arguments with it.
I have not “extended” the analogy. It is what it is.
A better choice for kids might be the bus ride to school – that is more of a risk to their lives than C19.
“One of the things I did not understand early on is why government reduced store hours.”
They also closed down large parks and beaches. They crowded people closer together and moved them indoors.
There were so many stupid things that were done by our “experts”.
I do not understand why C19 has not made libertarains of all of us.
The markets worked.
Government failed by the numbers.
Trump is at best less bad than the rest, or less bad than Obama and H1N1.
He is the best of the presidents in the 21st century.
That is not saying much.
“Trump is at best less bad than the rest, or less bad than Obama and H1N1.”
John, you could change the labelling of your remark and say in comparison to Obama and H1N1 Trump did a fantastic job.
It is all a matter of how you want your comment to be perceived just like a half full glass of water and a half empty glass of water where the amount of water is exactly the same in both cases.
I could change my comment – that would be spin.
I happen to think Trump is not just the best president in the 21st century, but likely in the top 10 overall.
That still does not mean I think he is good.
Less bad than the rest is not good.
John, I’d like to hear your list and then look at the dates to determine if your choice was based on the times we were in or the man.
Let’s substitute HIV for COVID-19…. would you still feel the same way and say the same things regarding individuals who didn’t follow all of the rules?
Men who have sex with other men run the risk of HIV for their behaviors.
Women who have promiscuous sex run the risk of an unplanned pregnancy
People who largely get severe COVID-19 illness incur their predicament for their own behaviors: obesity
There were never negative Op-Ed’s and articles written about the selfishness of individuals who refused to wear condoms or had multiple Partners.
There were far worse op-eds and articles. The people who have traditionally railed against HIV+ patients were conservatives or “traditionalist” katholics, invoking natural law and the cardinal sin of Lust. Now these conservatives and Trads are pleading for help because COVID-19 is gunning them precisely because they have lived lives contrary to natural law. Gluttony & Sloth are cardinal sins.
St Thomas Aquinas:
I answer that, Gluttony denotes, not any desire of eating and drinking, but an inordinate desire. Now desire is said to be inordinate through leaving the order of reason, wherein the good of moral virtue consists: and a thing is said to be a sin through being contrary to virtue. Wherefore it is evident that gluttony is a sin.
– Summa Theologiae > Second Part of the Second Part > Question 148
I answer that, Sloth, according to Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii, 14) is an oppressive sorrow, which, to wit, so weighs upon man’s mind, that he wants to do nothing; thus acid things are also cold. Hence sloth implies a certain weariness of work, as appears from a gloss on Psalm 106:18, “Their soul abhorred all manner of meat,” and from the definition of some who say that sloth is a “sluggishness of the mind which neglects to begin good.”
Now this sorrow is always evil, sometimes in itself, sometimes in its effect. For sorrow is evil in itself when it is about that which is apparently evil but good in reality, even as, on the other hand, pleasure is evil if it is about that which seems to be good but is, in truth, evil. Since, then, spiritual good is a good in very truth, sorrow about spiritual good is evil in itself. And yet that sorrow also which is about a real evil, is evil in its effect, if it so oppresses man as to draw him away entirely from good deeds. Hence the Apostle (2 Corinthians 2:7) did not wish those who repented to be “swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.”
Accordingly, since sloth, as we understand it here, denotes sorrow for spiritual good, it is evil on two counts, both in itself and in point of its effect. Consequently it is a sin, for by sin we mean an evil movement of the appetite, as appears from what has been said above (II-II:10:2; I-II:74:4).
– Summa Theologiae > Second Part of the Second Part > Question 35
“Now these conservatives and Trads are pleading for help because COVID-19 is gunning them”
Where do you live ? Certainly not earth !
Conservitives are NIT begging to be saved from C19, They are giving it the finger and demanding to be allowed to return to work, and to be able to go bak out and about their lives, to send their kids back to school and to go maskless if they choose.
They are fed up with your “help”
As to “glutony” – Jerry Nadler is not conservative.
I would further noted that studies show DEMOCRATS are far less likely to take personal responsibility for their weight than republicans.
https://medicalresearch.com/genetic-research/democrats-more-likely-to-attribute-obesity-to-genetics/32766/
I’ll raise the important point that always gets lost in the mask discussion. This is a highly contagious disease and the goal has always been to SLOW the spread so that it’s manageable. Over time, we will develop a herd immunity and possibly a vaccine. But the goal has NEVER been to completely stop the spread of the disease.
Having the focus be on case counts ICU capacity (when non covid procedures are using the majority of ICU space) fuel the narrative is reckless. I expect that from the media, but elected leaders have completely let us down by giving in to the mob hysteria instead of analyzing the data and trying to calm the public with the reality that this will continue to happen and we can deal with it.
Protect the vulnerable. Don’t go out if you’re sick. Wash your hands. And live your life.
The goal is to have fewer to no people infected. Since January the world has been learning how. What has been proven is that socially disciplined peoples fair better than peoples governed by idiots. Case in point the US, Brazil, Sweden, etc.
What has been proven is that countries at lower latitutudes have less deaths. that countries with younger populations have less deaths, that countries with healthier populations have less deaths, that places with lower population density have less deaths.
That governments throughout the world are idiots.
Case in point – everywhere.
See, this is exactly the problem. You are asserting a falsehood. The program was literally called ’15 Days to Slow the Spread’. https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/15-days-slow-spread/
Can you comprehend how slow is different that stop?
The goal has always been to control the spread so the health care system is not overwhelmed. I could go on but why should I…
no the goal is to get the R o factor under 1. look it up isaac
“This is a highly contagious disease and the goal has always been to SLOW the spread so that it’s manageable”
it nothing of the sort. This is not Ebola. Stop catastrophizing. sheesh
10 to 100 times more people have acquired the bug and either never knew it or had minimal symptoms
get a grip.
Why would you compare CV to Ebola? Ebola by comparison had a very high mortality rate. Apple and oranges.
Why do you presume the goal is to slow the virus ? That only works if there is a cure or a vaccine in the future and even then only if the harm in slowing for that long is not so great as to make any gain meaningless.
And yes one of the goals was to protect the health care system.
Contra your claims there was no expectation that we could delay the virus sufficiently to develop a vaccine before it infected sufficiently large a number of people to make that a moot issue.
Further we have already seen C19 go through countries and burn out naturally – we already know that if we do little of nothing it will not infect 100% of people.
Epidemics follow a logistics curve. They rise, peak and fall. the shape of the curve is distorted by our efforts to thwart its spread – but the fundimentals are unchanged.
And that is what we are seeing across the world.
Very early in the epidemic there were many wise persons who saw the populations that were dying most frequently from Covid. Their suggestion was to continue life isolating those that fell into the high risk category. I suppose one could modify that response with sanitatary actions and those things that might reduce the Covid dose possibly reducing the morbidity and mortality.
Before this reached the US or Europe, we had more than enough evidence of the behavior of C19 to make far better choices than we have done.
Even if this was only like the flu – it would still make the most sense to focus on those in care fascilities and not on kids.
Covid-19 is highly contagious and there is evidence for life long damage to the lungs, heart, and brain. You can’t only focus on high risk demographics.
“Covid-19 is highly contagious and there is evidence for life long damage to the lungs, heart, and brain. You can’t only focus on high risk demographics.”
C19 is about as contageous as polio, not a fraction as contagious as small pox or measles, it MIGHT be twice as contagious as some flu’s.
Of course how contageous it is, is completely irrelevant.
Those who experience life long complications are the “high risk demographic” – they are the old with multiple comorbidities.
And they are precisely who we should focus on.
Thus far the evidence of harm to those under 20 is LOWER than the long term risks of most vaccines.
The H1N1 vaccine paralyzed 500 people – many of them children.
Your acquaintance with the facts is shallow – yet you seem to beleive you are entitled to make decisions and force them on others ?
John Say – as a victim of polio, they were never sure how contagious polio was. Of the people in my city who got it, there were familial connections for some and no connections for others.
Not picking on Polio. You clearly have more experience than I.
I only know that the “experts” claim it is about as contagious as C19.
Which surprises me given that as bad as it was, it never infected the numbers that the Flu which is less contagious does.
Regardless the measles and smallpox are 10 times as contagious as C19.
Pretty sure polio is a waterborne disease.
DSS – waterborne or food borne.
I stand by my statement.
What you said has no meaning. There were no numbers attached so “life long damage” could mean one person or it could mean millions. That is a sign of an ignorant commentator who generalizes because he is devoid of important facts.
The facts do not care.
Not highly contagious. Somewhat contagious. Highly contagious would be measles, which requires antibodies in 95% of the population for herd immunity to set in. For Covid, it’s more like 60%.
It always makes sense to recognize that the elderly and sick are more vulnerable to disease than anyone else, but I don’t know how good a handle we had on what we were dealing with before it reached Europe and the US. Our experts were mostly wrong. Trump’s underlying instincts IMO were better than those of the Washington experts normal citizens were exposed to. They took 180 degree turns over and over again.
What had lots of data on C19 from China.
The problem is that China is NOT a reliable source of data.
That said nearly all of it has proven correct – or better, it has proven nearly as correct as our own data.
The age curve is not different – we knew this killed old people with mutliple comorbidities.
“What had lots of data on C19 from China. The problem is that China is NOT a reliable source of data.”
That means the data was soft and could NOT be used in the same fashion as hard data. That it was proven mostly correct after the fact doesn’t help the researchers at the time decisions were being made. We didn’t know for sure what population segments were dying in China until after the fact.
Most of the problems with data from China did not effect most of the conclusions that we should have drawn.
As an example, it is likely that China vastly undercounted deaths.
But that does not change the demographic distribution of C19 cases.
It is likely that China undercounted cases – but ultimately EVERYONE has undercounted cases by a factor of 10-20.
One of the reasons for distorted curves is changes in the counting process over time.
Smaller countries that got hit fast – like italy have relatively clean curves that match the normal epidemic logistics curve.
That means their counting process did not adjust much from start to end.
Regardless, it is actually the job of the “experts” to try to find the meaning in data that is less than perfect or might ever be deliberately distorted in some ways.
“Most of the problems with data from China did not effect most of the conclusions that we should have drawn.”
No, but that means all our data was soft and couldn’t be used in the same fashion as hard data which is what I said above.
While US data is not as bad as China, our data has lots of problems too.
We are not counting deaths in the same way that we would for the Flu or pneumonia.
We have ramped up testing but are pretending that has no effect on trends of a disease we know we miss 95% of the time
None of this precludes people with 5th grade math from drawing alot of conclusions.
The China data was not bad enough to prevent us from properly focusing resources – which we failed miserably at.
“our data has lots of problems too.”
Absolutely, our registry of a Covid death is not consistent and in some places the cause of death is misattributed to Covid. None the less our data is reasonably transparent. The Chinese are not transparent at all.
We are here fighting with Seth over the delusion that increased positive tests is not an artifact of increased testing – which is a mathematical certainty.
We are still dealing with a data measure that is just a sample. So changing the sample rate will change the results.
At the same time ALL of our data has a variety of problems.
Purportedly we have 140K C19 deaths. But using the standards used for the 2009 H1N1 flu – I doubt we have 10,000 deaths confirmed by CDC labs.
It is highly likely that the current C19 deaths will be revised downward in time.
When we are trying to make decisions we have to look at the data we have and know that while the best available to us. it has lots of problems and should be weighed accordingly.
I am increasingly convinced that the benefit of masks is small, and that they serve primarily as a delaying tactic, and not a very good one at that.
But I am still going to wear a mask for the time being.
“Trump’s underlying instincts IMO were better than those of the Washington experts normal citizens were exposed to.”
I would agree.
But Trump should have resisted the experts more. Had we not locked down, we would likely be through this by now.
John, you seem to think the President had more power than he actually had. With impeachment looming the President had to compromise on a lot of things. With a biased press the President didn’t have adequate coverage to appeal to the people. With Republican legislators that hated him his own party wasn’t supporting him.
Considering the fact that he was one unarmed man in a forest full of wild animals trying to kill him he did a fantastic job. One of the worst things was he didnt have a Rolodex so he had to rely on people that didn’t like him to help him choose important officials. Many of them hated him as well. He persevered, something that is uncommon in politicians. I don’t believe any politician could have equalled his abilities. I believe almost all would have succumbed within 3 months and none would have been left after a year.
I think though you recognize some of his skills and strength you fail to see how the odds were fatally stacked against him.
We elected him to stand up to all these people.
MOSTLY he has. But not always.
There is only so much political capital an individual has so he had to choose his battles and compromise as I said above. Considering everything against him I think he did a great job.
60 Minutes interview late March.
“Dr. Fauci said people should not be wearing masks”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLNBw7XCM4Q
Then he did a 180.
Anyone who can’t figure out why he did a 180, is an idiot.
I’ll be wearing an anti-mask wherever masks are mandatory.
Otherwise I will continue not to wear one at all. They are not only useless (per Fauci), they are also harmful.
Trump said the virus would go away after 15 cases, that Mexico will pay for his wall, that injecting bleach can destroy the virus inside you. Have you called him an idiot yet?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fauci-masks-no-longer-needed/
In your case injecting bleach full strength can only hurt the needle and syringe in pushing against clogged arteries of the brain
Of course, President Trump did not say that.
You prevaricate.
By contrast, the eminently ineligible Obama stated that the greatest country and form or governance in the history of mankind required his “…fundamentally transforming the United States of America…,” which was either an admission of his de facto cognitive defect, a predilection for substance abuse and a complete congenital dearth of availability of assiduousness, or a subversive presentation of his zealous treason.
Please cite each of these claims in context.
If you are going to defame someone you are obligated to completely prove your case.
Snopes is a propoganda. They are near useless.
“Given that the quote from Fauci is no longer current, we rate this claim as “Outdated.” – Snopes
Thanks for the morning laugh, and for inadvertantly (and moronically) admitting that Fauci clearly said that masks are useless on 60 Minutes in March.
WTF, does this topic have to do with the wall?!
Apparently you’re consuming something more powerful than almond leaf tea.
Apparently nut tea does not grasp that “experts” and politicians are both fallible and even liars.
This is one of the many reasons for limited government.
The less power you give to politicians and experts the less oportunity they have to screw things up.
I wear a mask, I socially distance, I use sanitizer and wipes and wash my hands. I do many things to keep myself safe.
And I do more to keep my wife safe.
If possible – and it may not be possible.
I am fortunate that I work primarily from home – and have for decades.
And that I am well enough off that I can afford to have many of my needs delivered.
Regardless, of the choices I make for myself, of the risks I choose to take – or to avoid.
I am not free to impose my choices by force on others.
It is irrelevant whether masks are effective or not,
Freedom includes the right to choose badly or it is not freedom.
I would further note that one of the things the swedes grasped from the start – is that the overwhelming majority of people were going to take safety precautions seriously – whether they were mandated or not.
But if they were imposed by force, people would gradually chaffe and push back against them.
While if they were voluntary, people would make their own choices as to when it was safe to stop and they would likely do so wisely.
That if it was necescary to social distance or wear masks for long periods – that people would be MORE willing to do so if THEY choose to.
Masks are judged to be a safety device for the benefit of the wearer, but primarily others the wearer will interact with. Therefore the government has the right and obligation to make their wearing mandatory except in situations with overriding conditions. That is both a legal and moral obligation and right of the government.
By the way, this is a factual statement:
“Trump said the virus would go away after 15 cases, that Mexico will pay for his wall, that injecting bleach can destroy the virus inside you.”
Concerning the virus, he’s said many other equally stupid things, and maybe he believes them. That is not comforting.
“Therefore the government has the right and obligation to make their wearing mandatory”
False.
Government has no rights. It has powers, and the purpose of those powers is to protect rights not infringe on them.
Further you have inverted the standard. If you wish to use force to compel others, the burden is on you to prove that what you wish to do will be effective.
Government can compel someone who is actually infected to quarantine. But it can not meet the burden necescary to compel people otherwise.
“That is both a legal, law that infringes on rights without compelling evidence of a net positive effect is itself immoral”.
“moral obligation” Government has no business in positive moral obligations – those are the domain of religion.
“right of the government.” Government has no rights.
“By the way, this is a factual statement:”, no it is not, it is a philosophical argument – one that was resolved two centuries ago.
One of the problems with you and the left is that you continuously try to revive debunked and failed philosophies and ideologies.
Egalitarianist schemes have ALL FAILED, While all arrangements based on liberty have thrived.
You are philosphically wrong, and you are factually wrong.
“Concerning the virus, he’s said many other equally stupid things, and maybe he believes them. That is not comfortin”
Please name a human that has NOT said things that have proven wrong ? Trump has thus far been LESS wrong than the “experts”.
No one who can fog glass would trust Biden.
Regardless, the significant error rate of experts and politicians is a huge counterfactual to your original claim.
We should not allow government to dictate, because we do not know what is right.
I happen to choose personally to mask. But I am aware enough of the known information to grasp that masking could well be completely ineffective. If a choice must be made between multiple different authorities most of which will ultimately prove wrong, that choice belongs to the individual – not government.
Trump thought it would be like many other viruses we have seen in the past. He was wrong but his motives were good. What would your response have been? We heard all sorts of responses from Fauci and the most important Democrats. Trump closed the border to Chinese tourists and was severely criticized for doing so by the Democrats. What do you wish to say to those that wanted to keep the border open. You don’t have any answers, do you?
Some of the loudest criticisms come from those with those with the least knowledge that having nothing to add except to jump on someone else’s bandwagon to make themselves feel more intelligent about the subject despite the fact that they have done nothing to educate themselves.
Glad to see Allan finally admitting Dear Leader was wrong about the virus, on which he was given advanced warning including it’s seriousness. His motivation in pretending it wasn’t, which he still is selling, was protecting his fragile mental state from dealing with reality and then protecting his reelection efforts as an infant would – denying it – not a leader (who would recognize the opportunity)
Trump was not “severely criticized by the Democrats” for closing the border to some travelers from China.
Here’s what any sane President who actually paid attention to reality would have done:
Tell the truth, including the danger. We can handle it.
Get the best people and listen to them.
Use your unique powers to communicate clearly with the country with a simple message about how citizens can best help the effort.
Broadcast that message repeatedly and simply, don’t sabotage it by criticizing those trying to implement it.
Use your unique powers to focus on production of needed supplies and the distribution of them based on need, not the highest bidder.
Leave clear state responsibilities – running schools – to state officials and stick to the above tasks and helping the states as you can. MUscling opening dates is not helping.
Dear Leader would not have had to be highly successful yet in this as long as we believed he wasn’t lying and doing the best he could to rally the country and get the pandemic under control. His numbers would probably have gone up,not tanked as he deserves them to be now for his complete failure as a leader in crisis. It’s not rocket science, but he’s a needy toddler, not a leader, and entirely incapable of being one.
There is nothing bad about being wrong. Lying as you almost always do is bad. Most of the experts at the time did not believe this virus would lead to so many deaths. He and others are right when they state the risk is small to those people that are healthy and young.
You lie about what democrats said about the Chinese traveller ban but your reputation is one of a liar so I don’t think many if any perceive you to be credible. Your suggestons are worthless because most of the time they represent Monday morning quarterbacking and all too frequently even then you are wrong.
Predictions for C19 were all over the place.
SOME experts predicted that C19 would not get to the US.
Some that if it did it would be stopped close to the border,
or that deaths would be much less than the flu.
Others predicted US deaths in the millions.
I think Los Almost predicted 4.4M US deaths very early on.
At the time there was little to go on to pick what experts were more likely correct.
That said it is ALWAYS wise to bet AGAINST disaster.
Nature is skewed heavily against complete anihilation – or life would not exist.
Diseases that nearly exterminate humanity are incredibly rare.
The 1918 Flu killed 600K people in the US – mostly the young and healthy – very unusual.
It infected 27% of people – that seems to be a limit. Even on the Diamond princess a petri dish for C19.
about 21% of people were infected and only 3.5% of the passengers and crew died.
The 1918 Flu may be a once a millenia anomally.
I strongly suspect that the Diamond Princess (and other similar isolated closed systems give us the upper bounds.
Current CDC estimates are 25M-54M infections in the US. 54M would be 16% of the country.
If 21% is the upper limit then we are 3/4 of the way there.
Of course there are other variables – such as population density. 21% is the upper limit for a dens populaiton,
The max infection rate should decline as the population density decreases.
“Predictions for C19 were all over the place.”
That is true, but a lot of facts were known and distorted.
BTB – can you name a single person who was RIGHT about C19 ?
There is not a single person expert or otherwise who has been 100% right on C19.
There is not a single “expert” that has not been MORE wrong than Trump.
AS to “advance warning” – you are sill of $h!t. China and WHO were the sole initial sources of information – and they were lying.
We KNOW that C19 was in CA atleast as early as Jan. 4. That is long before Trump had any consequential knowledge.
Trump acted FASTER than any other world leader in imposing travel restrictions – and the left, the experts and Biden and Pelosi and the media pissed all over him for doing so.
Trump acted too slowly – But ANY democrat would have delayed even more.
Biden handled H1N1 so well that the rest of the world imposed Travel restrictions on the US.
Absolutely Trump acted too slowly. But almost no one has the right to criticize without being incredibly hypocritical.
BTB – can you name a single person who was RIGHT about C19 ?
Irrelevant, but I don’t know of someone who has lied about it practically every day since January except Trump.
There is not a single person expert or otherwise who has been 100% right on C19.
Irrelevant
There is not a single “expert” that has not been MORE wrong than Trump.
Too many negatives – can you say that in English?
AS to “advance warning” – you are sill of $h!t. China and WHO were the sole initial sources of information – and they were lying.
Our intelligence told Trump they detected a serious problem around a virus in China. So did the CDC. China finally made public it’s crisis, and this was all in January.
We KNOW that C19 was in CA atleast as early as Jan. 4. That is long before Trump had any consequential knowledge.
And?
Trump acted FASTER than any other world leader in imposing travel restrictions – and the left, the experts and Biden and Pelosi and the media pissed all over him for doing so.
No, Biden and Pelosi were not critical of him for the partial China travel restriction. Are you suggesting a medal for doing his job on one thing?
Trump acted too slowly – But ANY democrat would have delayed even more.
That’s irrelevant speculation not based on history. Obama acted quickly with H1N1. Look it up. He also left a pandemic task force in the WH with a permanent NSC seat.
Biden handled H1N1 so well that the rest of the world imposed Travel restrictions on the US.
“The Obama administration declared swine flu, or H1N1, a public health emergency six weeks before H1N1 was declared a pandemic.
No H1N1 deaths had yet been recorded in the United States.
Six months after that initial declaration, when more than 1,000 deaths had occurred, Obama himself declared H1N1 a national emergency.”
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/04/facebook-posts/president-obama-declared-h1n1-public-health-emerge/
Absolutely Trump acted too slowly. But almost no one has the right to criticize without being incredibly hypocritical.
Trump acted slowly, has lied about the virus from the beginning and is continuing to do so, has not taken leadership of the issue though as president he has unique powers, and has actually sabotaged those trying to. If you cant see that you’re blind.
“BTB – can you name a single person who was RIGHT about C19 ?
Irrelevant,”
Because you say so ?
“‘but I don’t know of someone who has lied about it practically every day since January”
That is correct NO ONE – not even Trump has lied about it,
And this is the core of your problem – Orange man bad, Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Whatever Trump says – you must disagree.
Trump imposed travel restrictions – you disagreed – he was lying. Now that it appears he did not act fast enough – he was lying.
Everything Trump says – according to you, is a lie.
Well one of your huge problem is when you use a shotgun you hit more than you are aiming for.
10’s of millions of people share some or many of trump’s positions, have said the same things as Trump, and have done so sincerely.
Many of them came to their conclusions independent of Trump.
When you say Trump is lying – you are also calling them liars – and they are not so stupid as to miss that.
Further when you call ANYONE a liar – the burden of proof is on you.
It is not enough to prove them wrong – as you agreed ALL OF US have been wrong at one time over C19.
A lie is not simply being wrong, or having a different oppinion from yours.
It is an intentional deception – it is a moral failure, an immoral act.
Thus far I have seen evidence that Trump brags, that he exagerates, that he rarely makes promises he can not keep.
Some of those are not endearing – though they are common among politicians.
There is plenty of evidence that he does so with less sophistication than Pelosi or Obama – but then his audience is not incredibly sophisticated – but they are hard working decent honest people, and they beleive him and share his views,
And when you call Trump a liar, you call them a liar too.
I have not see a single instance of Trump actually lying – intentionally deceiving.
He was right about pretty much everything regarding “the collusion delusion” – and you were wrong.
That is a very major issue – and Trump has MORE credibility, than you, the media, the left, even most republicans.
I see lots of intentially deception – but none by Trump.
Regardless, when you defame someone else – Trump, republicans, anyone – you are always obligated to prove your claims.
And because you have repeatedly made false accusations in the past you are 10 times as obligated.
The only moral failures I see are yours.
“There is not a single person expert or otherwise who has been 100% right on C19.
Irrelevant”
Nope, quite relevant.
“He who is without sin, let him throw the first stone” John 8:7
If you are going to make error into lies – then you had better be without error.
“There is not a single “expert” that has not been MORE wrong than Trump.
Too many negatives – can you say that in English?”
It is, and you know exactly what it means, and it is true.
“Our intelligence told Trump they detected a serious problem around a virus in China. So did the CDC.”
Then you should be able to provide cites to that effect. You seem to forget that you have made so many false accusations – you are not trustworthy.
BTW the flu comes from china – there is a serious problem arround a virus in china all the time”
“We KNOW that C19 was in CA atleast as early as Jan. 4. That is long before Trump had any consequential knowledge.”
And?
Seriously – how clueless are you ?
By Jan 4th is was already too late for Trump to act.
There is some less certain evidence it was in the US in december even November. That is sketchier.
I am not sure what the first date they think it got to NYC – but it is likely before Trump shutdown China.
It was also before Europe had a clue they had a problem.
So we know the virus got to europe, mutated, infected lots of people and then got to NYC – before Trump issued a ban on Travel to China.
So when was Trump supposed to act ? November ?
In January you and your ilk were claiming anything said about C19 was to distract from faux impeachment.
Hasn;t history proven the opposite ? That YOUR faux impeachment was a distraction from the real problem of C19 ?
“No, Biden and Pelosi were not critical of him for the partial China travel restriction. Are you suggesting a medal for doing his job on one thing?”
“using scare tactics about people coming back to our country.”
Pelosi 2/26/2020
“We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus. We need to lead the way with science — not Donald Trump’s record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering. He is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency.”
Joe Biden tweet Feb 1, 2020 – this tweet was a reply to Trump’s travel ban tweet
“Trump acted too slowly – But ANY democrat would have delayed even more.”
“That’s irrelevant speculation not based on history. Obama acted quickly with H1N1. Look it up.”
I have, he did not. He was months behind Trump in acting.
“He also left a pandemic task force in the WH with a permanent NSC seat.”
There is STILL no reason for a pandemic task forces on the NSC.
Bloating government is NOT a solution to anything.
“The Obama administration declared swine flu, or H1N1, a public health emergency six weeks before H1N1 was declared a pandemic.”
Correct – Swine flu originated in the US, and the world was reluctant to slam the US despite the US failing miserably to deal with it.
H1N1 is a permutation of the same virus that causes the 1918 flu – there was very good reason to be highly concerned, as that was one of the most fatal flu’s ever far worse than C19.
H1N1 jumped to humans likely in June 2008, The first identified case of the virus was in March 2009 in TX, but it had been arround for 5-9 months prior, and there certainly had been prior deaths.
Obama/Biden were asleep at the switch.
Estimates are 700m-1.4B people were infected by H1N1 estimate deaths are 150,000-500000.
“Six months after that initial declaration, when more than 1,000 deaths had occurred, Obama himself declared H1N1 a national emergency.”
“Absolutely Trump acted too slowly. But almost no one has the right to criticize without being incredibly hypocritical.”
Really – after saying that Obama waited 6 months and until there were 1000 deaths you claim Trump acted too slowly ?
“Trump acted slowly, has lied about the virus from the beginning and is continuing to do so,”
So he was lying when he was acting on C19 and you were saying he was trying to distract from impeachment ?
” has not taken leadership of the issue though as president he has unique powers, and has actually sabotaged those trying to.”
No he does not. If Trump could have acted, he would.
If Trump could force states to reopen – he would.
If you could force them to send children to school – he would.
He is right about both. You are wrong. But he does not have the power to act – despire your claims otherwise.
” If you cant see that you’re blind.”
I probably can not see that because I do not live in your bubble – where the collusion delusion is real.
John, btb has stated more than once and been corrected more than once that Obama acted promptly with the H1N1 flu.
btb lies like a rug.
I provided a quote of facts regarding the H1N1 outbreak and link to their reputable, non-partisan source.
You provided wrong data and you were corrected at least twice but you continued to provide the same wrong data.
I did not see any link and you cited facts that were wildly inaccurate.
Most of us were alive for H1N1 we remember. Further it was not so long ago that the primary sources are readily available on the web.
The first cases were likely in June 2008. Certainly by November.
Obama/Biden flubbed it. But is was just the flu and there was no media claiming that armegedon was coming. So there was no huge pressure on Obama. Only wonks paid attention to briefings.
Imagine if the media treated C19 the same way they did the 1967 flu – which was comparable.
No one shut the economy down. More people died in a few months than the entire vietnam war. Woodstock happened in the middle of it.
There were a few news stories, but the country did not panic.
But the modern left is fragile and terrified. They have no clue how to deal with life.
“His motivation”
Back to reading other peoples minds. You suck at it. Please stop.
“in pretending it wasn’t, which he still is selling, was protecting his fragile mental state from dealing with reality and then protecting his reelection efforts as an infant would – denying it – not a leader (who would recognize the opportunity)”
This argument is ludicrously stupid.
Only a left wing nut would think that pretending would make a problem go away.
If you want reelected you can not hide from problems.
Logic is not your forte.
“Trump was not “severely criticized by the Democrats” for closing the border to some travelers from China.”
Right, and the clips on youtube and elsewhere are all fakes. Biden was claiming Trump was over reacting as much as 2 weeks later.
“Tell the truth, including the danger. We can handle it.”
He did to the extent that we knew. Regardless, every single one of us saw what had happened in China. We all knew pretty much the same things Trump did. And you and the left wing nut media were saying that he was lying no matter what he says.
“Get the best people and listen to them.”
He did – they were wrong, everyone was wrong.
“Use your unique powers to communicate clearly with the country with a simple message about how citizens can best help the effort.”
He did, you did not listen, you were to busy fixating on whatever nit you could claim was stupid or a lie.
“Broadcast that message repeatedly and simply, don’t sabotage it by criticizing those trying to implement it.”
Which message would that be ? given that the experts STILL do not agree.
What you are really saying is – “Tell people MY version of the truth”
Look at the history here ?
Trump closed faster than anyone else would have and you criticized him.
There was an early panic over hand sanitizer – free markets quickly solved that
There was an early panic over PPE – free markets quickly solved that.
There was an early panic over ventalators – free markets solved that but it turned out not to be necescary.
There was an early panic over hospital beds – so Trump sent hospital ships, and had temporary hispitals constructed by the Nat Guard and military. And volunteers created temporary hospitals.
Turned out we never needed them. We did not exceed 1/3 of our hospital capacity anywhere in the country.
Therefore we never needed to shutdown, never needed to flatten the curve.
The big mistakes that have been made ?
Sending recovering patients to nursing homes – were done by blue state governors, not Trump,
“Use your unique powers to focus on production of needed supplies and the distribution of them based on need, not the highest bidder.”
Was there a REAL supply problem anywhere ever ?
The actual fact is that Trump was ineffective here – for the OPPOSITE reason you claim. All Trump needed to do was shutup and do nothing.
The free market provides ALWAYS.
Biden and Obama had burned through the strategice reserve of PPE during H1N1 and never replaced it.
The free market proved the strategic reserve was unnecescary.
“Leave clear state responsibilities”
That is determined by the constitution.
“running schools – to state officials and stick to the above tasks and helping the states as you can. MUscling opening dates is not helping.”
You are correct – the federal government should stay out of schools entirely – shut down the department of education, and repeal all federal laws on education. End all federal education grants. Just get the federal government entirely out of education.
Schools should reopen – or parents should vote out the governors, representatives, and school board that fail to do so.
If teachers fail to show up – they should be fired.
Schools NEVER should have closed in the first place – that was stupid.
Absolutely Trump should have stayed out of education – states and experts are perfectly capable of failing miserably on their own without his help.
“Dear Leader would not have had to be highly successful yet in this as long as we believed he wasn’t lying and doing the best he could to rally the country and get the pandemic under control.”
In otherwords he would never be successfull – because YOU are an idiot and beleive people are lying when they are telling the truth and doing their best.
You are STILL selling the “collusion delusion”. As is much of the media. Why should anyone trust your judgement on whether someone is telling the truth or doing their best.
CLEARLY you are delusional and have bad judgement in those areas.
“His numbers would probably have gone up,not tanked as he deserves them to be now for his complete failure as a leader in crisis. ”
Yes, during C19 – Trump who is one of the most effective people who has actually been MORE accurate than the “experts” has had his numbers Tank,
While Coumo who has done everything short of murder people has seen his numbers rise.
Clearly left wing nuts show good judgement and politicians should fawn over them.
“It’s not rocket science, but he’s a needy toddler, not a leader, and entirely incapable of being one.”
It is not rocket science – and yet you are still constantly wrong about it.
While pretty much everyone has gotten something wrong about C19, none have done worse than the media or the left.
You have railed constantly about HCQ – which was available and could have been used en masse months ago.
While it is not a miracle cure – it almost certainly would have reduced death and damage by 20%.
That failure is on YOU.
YOU demanded schools shutdown – something that is quite clearly a huge mistake.
YOU demanded the economy shutdown – also a huge mistake.
We have spent months as brain dead governors decide whether you can buy paint or drywall.
We have spent months with YOU taking every oportunity to bash Trump for each participle in his remarks – without actually listening to what he says.
We watch now as YOU burn the country down. As Crime spikes, as YOU seek to erase history. As YOU seek to convince everyone that they are all racist scum.
Trump will either win in November – or people like you will be in charge – and god help us all. Trump has made mistakes. Every president has. But YOU and the left get everything wrong by the numbers.
John, if you have another explanation for Trump lying about the virus since the beginning and continuing to the present, let’s hear it, and maybe in 1 or 2 paragraphs? I’m not reading all that.
“John, if you have another explanation for Trump lying about the virus since the beginning and continuing to the present, let’s hear it,”
Trivial. Being wrong less than the experts is not lying.
But accusing people of lying without proof is defamation, and it is immoral.
And this is not even close to the first time you have done so.
That is not merely an explanation – it is THE explanation.
“and maybe in 1 or 2 paragraphs? I’m not reading all that”
You are free to choose what you read.
But you make so many errors that addressing each one takes time.
My replies will be much shorter if you would fact check your comments.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1258742453441617920
You seem to have forgotten that you and the left are not trustworthy.
Provide full clips with context.
And if you are going to call something a lie – then you must demonstrate a deliberate effort to deceive.
Everyone has been wrong about Covid – if being wrong on occasion is lying – we are all going to hell – but you are in the front car.
“Trump was not “severely criticized by the Democrats” for closing the border to some travelers from China.”
That’s a lie. Either you know that is a lie, or you are completely clueless. Pelosi and Biden (his handlers) said that the travel ban was “racist” and “xenophobic”. So of course that was parroted by numerous other Dems along with the NYTimes and WaPo.
Then Pelosi made a special trip to Chinatown to press the flesh and hug Chinese-Americans to show how “inclusive” she is.
You’re really bad at keeping your BS stories straight, BTB. It’s probably best that you stay home hiding under your bed while wearing a mask.
I do not know what Trump’s motives were.
But I am near certain that C19 has been srawn out by our poor policy choices.
Italy and spain had a horrible month, and now it is pretty much gone.
But for government intervention – though it would have taken longer in the US because of the population size and the country size, it still would have peaked and passed.
Even now the number of deaths suggest C19 is slowly fading.
No, unfortunately in the US that is false.
“No, unfortunately in the US that is false.”
Given that there is little difference between the EU as a whole and the US, given that 2 of the 3 largest countries in the EU are doing much worse than the US, and that 6 EU countries are worse overall than the US.
I am sorry BTB but that is absolutely True.
Trump wants to brag that he has done great.
He has not.
The left wants to crow he has done badly – that too is false.
The fact is C19 does not give a $h!t about your policy choices.
I don’t think Trump wanted to close the nation so tight. I think he initially wanted it open except where the healthcare systems would be overloaded. He understands the economics and health risks of shutting the nation down.
Well, now having caused it to shut down twice, I would hope so.
Streets near empty in my now surging state as even the rednecks are scared.
“my now surging state ”
Tell us what that means. How many people are dying in your state during this surge and compare it to NY during its surge which led to close to 2,000 deaths a day. This is the typical ignorant talk that comes from you.
There are not half as many people dying per day in the entire country right now as died in NY in April.
Current C19 daily deaths are below those of the Flu during Flu season.
John that is the point. There is no reason for hysteria except weak minds like btb and Paint Chips are susceptible to the political hysteria of the press. Neither of them have the ability to take out a pencil and paper and run the numbers. That requires a modicum of intellect.
And yet the death rates and hospitalization rates are declining.
https://www.tmc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/d-covid-19-positive-case-growth-trend-7-19-2020.png
“I don’t think Trump wanted to close the nation so tight. I think he initially wanted it open except where the healthcare systems would be overloaded. He understands the economics and health risks of shutting the nation down.”
Trump lost control very fast. Public health is mostly the responsibility of the states.
After CDC/NIH were unable to stop this at the border, the president mostly becomes an expiditer for what Governors want.
Trump tried to stay in the lime light and get credit for handling this well.
But he should have known the press would not allow that.
Cuomo the killer is painted as a god, and Trump as a goat, and so many idiots on the left actually buy that.
There is no doubt the spike is cases (not deaths) will pass, and when it does – red states will still have done 3-5 times as well as blue ones.
Either Blue state governors are murderers, of the variation has nothing to do with politics or policies.
The latter is the truth – but if the left wishes to pick the former – that is OK with me.
“Trump lost control very fast. Public health is mostly the responsibility of the states.”
John, you seem to rely on too many equations which are only a small part of the picture. President’s appeal to the nation’s people. Think of FDR’s fireside chats.
“After CDC/NIH were unable to stop this at the border, the president mostly becomes an expiditer for what Governors want.”
The CDC represented the big government approach which failed. Fortuantely, despite the bureaucracy Trump repealed laws through his own instincts and powers of persuasion and signed EO’s against advice that permitted the free market to go into action. That was a great moment that no one talks about. Had we had a Biden likely we would have flip flopped around without the ability to get private industry totally involved and energized. Perhaps that is not recognized by those that never had businesses and never had to lead.
Cuomo acted like a fool. He didn’t know what he was doing and was such a poor leader he had to depend on his enemy for virtually everything even the ability to better utilize the resouces he had under his personal control. Based on his performance he is one of the worst governors I can think of. Biden might be a better choice than Cuomo, not for anything positive about Biden rather that one might assume Cuomo was competent and that could get everyone killed.
The actions of Cuomo and DeBlasio had a lot to do with the extraordinary stupidity shown by them. I think that can be seen by looking at deaths per million and accepting a wide range of normal. Accept Belgium as the upper limits of normal since it is the highest of the European states at845 deaths per million. Then look at NY at 1672. NY is an outlier as is NJ Connecticut and Massachusettes all closely linked to NY in many different fashions and all eastern coastal democrat states.
I think the evidence strongly indicates that no government policies had positive benefits – sending recovering patients to nursing homes had negative impacts.
Given that the impact of a Biden presidency would have been minimal. While Biden would have acted stupidly and done other harms. C19 does not appear to care about our policies.
I would also suspect that Biden would have been under far less pressure.
Instead of the media telling everyone this was the end of the world, they would be telling everyone that is just like the flu.
I am not sure that there would have been lockdowns even.
With Biden as President there likely would have been more problems and more deaths. Government would have intervened more unless all of a sudden they felt that since they were in power Covid wasn’t as a big a deal and let things alone.
Total deaths to date (appox estimates) 140,000
Estamated deats from nursing home ~<50% -70,000
equals: 70,000
Some believe there is a 25% overcount 17,500
Total: 52,500
Nursing home doesn' t include alll the elderly
Metropolitan NY deaths are way out of line with deaths elswhere in the country. I believe many are outliers and secondary to poor management by the responsible government agencies. Look at mass transit. Look at the number of deaths of transit workers early on. It seemed they were particularily hard hit.
Take a look at states that are similar in longitude and the death rates subtracting NH deaths and differences in counting. Ball parking the numbers ( I am not going to spend the time getting exact information and running the numbers to look for the outliers that I believe exist.)
Note the 52,000 might be considerably off but I don't think as far off as some would like to say.
Fauci definitely was lying, at one moment or another, because both remarks cant be true. So i have lost respect for him.
I am a Trump supporter but masks seem to me to be a good public health measure. They are physical barriers which stop particle dispersion. If physics means anything, and viral load is a factor in COVID as it is in other respiratory illnesses, then masks help.
Just like condoms should help slow the spread of VD. Certainly won’t stop it but better than nothing.
Because people WILL have sex, just as people WILL GO OUT AND WORK AND SOCIALIZE
we are all not just going to stay home even if Democrats tell us to. Wearing a mask inside with other people in closed quarters is not that burdensome, and I freely do it.
Dr Fauci told us in February the virus would have minimal impact on us, then the Surgeon General said masks wouldn’t help.
I think the masks will disappear mid November.
but of course the masks will disappear in mid November!!!!!! That’s a given
all of the fatties will be cowering in their bowls of lard, then blaming the MSM for Biden winning
Americans are such pathetic nimrods.
If you return home and put your mask on any surface — even an n95 mask — it’s going to immediately pick up bacteria. For instance, if you knew how much bacteria is on your kitchen counters and tables, you wouldn’t get out of bed in the morning. If you knew how much bacteria was on those surfaces one half hour after you cleaned them, you would probably burn your house down.
Your cloth mask needs to be disinfected after each use. Fifteen seconds in a microwave will do the trick.
As for me, when I go out and enter an indoor space, I wear a mask. I do this for two reasons: As a full-fledged geezer, I can leave my teeth at home. And if I meet a particularly annoying person I can tell them to F-Off and they won’t know I said it.
But here’s the real reason so many people don’t take what the “experts” say seriously:
A comedienne is not generally considered an expert in anything other than comedy and that only on rare practitioners. But thank you for wearing your mask!
Only a progressive NPR junkie would miss the point of the video. Let me explain, 90% of what she says in the video are things said at different times by the experts;
I don’t wear a mask and people should stay 6 foot away from me.
Please let us know when you get sick so we can laugh at your trumpitity.
Your wife tells us that when she took your best friend’s salami, she denied ever knowing you especially when she was singing mezzo soprano during his impressive maneuvers. just saying.
It takes a special type of horrible person to wear a mask that specificity won’t protect people.
It takes a special type of gullible person to believe that wearing a mask will stop C19.
Were they able to stop it by having people lock down for 8 weeks?
Why not if it only has a two week incubation period?
Have you read the article about the fishing vessel with 61 people aboard, who quarantined 14 days, all tested negative, and then started to come down with C19 after being at sea for 35 days? They returned to port early and all but 4 had it.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-fishermen-test-positive-despite-232641237.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvL0dRenF0cVlGbEU_YW1wPTE&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAL2Kp6-JMN6L35Kznfianph5k4t-PsxPHcdHohSqJUhuTQh3r3OR5IbT4UP25JgR8ddizaziZDqAylm4KJxtEC8btKicXcwAhnUatqCdS2elE_Jzdi47bMhCVtml-WoMKfdaT_PXp3_jod3U2zGMksXusTo1tk8zj8MWMssAZG5R
The numbers after 8 weeks were going down and looking good, then we just threw caution to the wind, resisted all the health measures, and now are screwed. Masks do work, and that is firmly established.
The number of deaths is did not spike, it has plateaued.
“The reopening and relaxing of social distancing restrictions in some states may be contributing to the first noticeable nationwide increase in coronavirus fatalities since April, when the pandemic initially peaked.
The number of cases in late June surged higher than during the outbreak’s first peak. At this same time, daily Covid-19 fatalities decreased slightly, leading President Trump to proclaim that deaths were “way down.” But that divergence may have come to an end last week, when the average number of new deaths per day began steadily rising again….”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/17/us/coronavirus-deaths.html
“The number of cases in late June surged higher than during the outbreak’s first peak. ”
Adjusted for the testing rates the number of cases has not recently peaked and is far lower than in April 20.
That is why the death rate is important.
“At this same time, daily Covid-19 fatalities decreased slightly, leading President Trump to proclaim that deaths were “way down.” But that divergence may have come to an end last week, when the average number of new deaths per day began steadily rising again….”
False. Peak death rate was almost 4000/day. currently the death rate is about 900/day. that is down from a few days ago, up from a week ago and down from two weeks ago, a 7day moving average has either a flat or declining death rate.
But most importantly there is absolutely no spike in the death rate.
That requires one of two things:
Either we are far better at treating C19 and despite radical increases in cases 6 times as many people are now surviving.
Or the increase in reported cases is NOT an increase in actual cases.
Ir do you have another explanation – besides “magic”
John, I can’t help you read.
Death is a lagging indicator and – big surprise – is beginning to surge in states where cases have surged. From the article, which John needs to reread.
How the number of deaths per day has changed since June 1
DAILY DEATHS
PER MILLION CHANGE HOSPITALIZED
PER MILLION POSITIVE
TEST RATE
Arizona 9.6 +319% 500 25%
Texas 3.3 +307% 380 16%
Oregon 0.8 +267% 60 6%
Tennessee 2 +252% 190 8%
Idaho 1.1 +225% 80 13%
Florida 4.4 +204% 400 19%
Nevada 3.1 +163% 360 14%
Utah 1.5 +113% 80 9%
Alabama 4.5 +91% 280 16%
South Carolina 3.3 +90% 310 18%
Arkansas 1.4 +88% 150 11%
Washington 1.8 +60% 50 6%
California 2.4 +38% 210 7%
Oklahoma 0.9 +19% 140 9%
Louisiana 3.7 +10% 290 10%
South Dakota 2.1 +8% 70 7%
Kansas 0.8 +6% — 11%
Mississippi 4.9 -2% 370 17%
North Carolina 1.8 -10% 110 7%
Kentucky 1.1 -19% 100 6%
New Mexico 2 -29% 80 4%
Georgia 2.2 -33% 270 15%
Missouri 1.2 -43% 140 6%
Virginia 1.5 -53% 130 6%
Nebraska 0.8 -61% 60 6%
Iowa 1.7 -61% 60 9%
Ohio 1 -62% 90 6%
New Jersey 3.4 -63% 100 1%
Maine 0.4 -64% 10 1%
Pennsylvania 1.6 -65% 50 5%
Indiana 1.1 -66% 130 8%
Colorado 1 -70% 70 6%
New York 1.2 -73% 40 1%
Maryland 1.6 -74% 70 5%
Washington, D.C. 1.5 -75% 140 2%
Michigan 1 -76% 50 3%
New Hampshire 0.9 -77% 20 2%
Illinois 1.3 -78% 110 3%
Minnesota 0.9 -79% 50 4%
Wisconsin 0.4 -80% 50 7%
Massachusetts 2.6 -80% 80 2%
Connecticut 1.5 -83% 20 1%
Delaware 0.9 -83% 50 5%
Rhode Island 2.2 -86% 60 3%
“Death is a lagging indicator”
Correct – but the lag is 8-20 days most and we are way past where we should have seen effects.
“big surprise – is beginning to surge in states where cases have surged”
Not according to any data I have seen.
Further there is not a single (red) state that is “surging” that is even at 1/3 the death rate/100K people of NY or NJ.
The virgin Islands – which had the highest 7 day increase still has 1/30th the deaths/100K of NJ
Montana – 2nd highest is 1/60th
FL – 1/8th
Can you read your own data ?
The states with the highest test rates have the highest changes
Recent deaths
July 17, 2020 908.00
July 16, 2020 943.00
July 15, 2020 949.00
July 14, 2020 900.00
July 13, 2020 361.00
July 12, 2020 428.00
July 11, 2020 676.00
July 10, 2020 811.00
July 9, 2020 990.00
July 8, 2020 820.00
July 7, 2020 1195.00
BTW the death rate is always down for the weekend.
Masks decrease your chance of transmitting or receiving C19. They do not reduce it to zero. Therefore even with a mask you will eventually be infected.
This is true of just about every other measure. They DELAY infection, they do not prevent it.
Even inside of hospitals where doctors and nurses have the best possible PPE – eventually they ALL get infected.
The PPE just delays the inevitable.
All of this is actually reasonably well known. We have studied the effect of various measures for decades.
“Masks decrease your chance of transmitting or receiving C19. They do not reduce it to zero. Therefore even with a mask you will eventually be infected….”
Well yes, if we all lived forever, statistically you could say that. But we don’t, and you can’t.
“Well yes, if we all lived forever, statistically you could say that. But we don’t, and you can’t.”
Does not require living forever,
The effectiveness of all current methods of reducing the spread of C19 if applied perfectly and concurrently probably would not reduce the spread rate below 1.
In the real world where things are not perfect it is unlikely that we have halved the R0 value (spread rate)
That means that C19 will infect the same total number of people, but may take 4 times as long to do so.
regardless short of absolutely quarantining yourself which is not possible. the most that you can do is buy a small amount of time fdor YOURSELF while concurrently hoping that enough others get infected to protect you through herd immunity.
This is not difficult to understand – you are dragging C19 out. You are not changing the outcome.
If all the stuff you are selling actually worked – Italy and Spain would still have massive numbers of cases.
John, I don’t have the patience to explain the English language and simple logic to you. It is possible for each and every one of us to avoid the virus until we die of other causes or a vaccine is developed and distributed. You said those chances were zero and now you are saying that is only “dragging out” the outcome. You’re welcome to that strategy. Live it up, but stay away from me, OK?
BTB the first requirement would be that you were capable of simple logic or had a grasp of english.
Rather than spew ad hominem – try actually making a valid argument using english words conventionally.
“It is possible for each and every one of us to avoid the virus”
That is possible for a small portion of us. It is not possible for the overwhelming majority of us.
If you do not have the ability to live in your home alone indefinitely – then you will have to expose yourself to risk.
“You said those chances were zero and now you are saying”
If you are going to tell me what I have said – quote me – accurately.
I do not trust you enough to accept anything you say, much less claims about what I have said.
“You’re welcome to that strategy. Live it up, but stay away from me, OK?”
That is all that the people you are pissing on have asked.
Wear a mask if you want.
Social distance if you want.
Lock yourself at home.
I actually do all of these things. I am 62 and had part of my lung removed long ago.
I take the flu seriously.
But my 26 year old daughter has no good reason to be taking the same precautions as I.
All you left wingnuts need to do to avoid conflict with everyone else is quit trying to impliment your ideology by force.
I do not care if you wish to buy a Prius or put up solar panels or a windmill.
So long as you do not demand that I subsidize your choice.
Stay away from the use of force – aka government and we will get along fine.
Can you explain then why, by mask wearing, isolation and testing-contact tracing, most other countries in the world have slowed or stopped the spread? There is not enough information in that article to pinpoint what happened but it does not point to “throwing out the baby with the bath water”!
There is no difference between the US as a whole – and the EU as a whole.
You are fixated on artifacts of scale.
Through out the world contries go through approximately the same curve – stretched more based on the extent they do as you direct, with some distortions due to changes in the extent of testing.
Regardless the curves are the same.
Please tell me how did italy “stop the spread” ?
The answer is simple – the virus infected everyone that it could and died off.
If that were not true C19 would surge back EVERYWHERE as they relaxed policies.
There are only 2 means to stop C19.
a cure
sufficient levels of immunity.
There are vast differences between masks and stores are unlikely to want to police the sufficiency of masks, particularly if the states do not specify minimal standards.
What passes for “masks” in the general population is pure theater.
People need psychological crutches: “cloth” masks, food, internet addiction, food, politics, food….they all serve their intended purpose – soothe their nerves so that they are justified in….eating more food. There is a cure for all of this though: an evolutionary response has selected a subgroup of people who are unfit and do not meet the criteria for natural selection. They brought it on to themselves and expect everyone to cow-tow to them just like BLM. See how that works?
LOL
A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers
MacIntyre CR, Seale H, Dung TC, et al A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers BMJ Open 2015;5:e006577. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006577
Primary end points
There were three primary end points for this study, used in our previous mask RCTs:8 ,9 (1) Clinical respiratory illness (CRI), defined as two or more respiratory symptoms or one respiratory symptom and a systemic symptom;17 (2) influenza-like illness (ILI), defined as fever ≥38°C plus one respiratory symptom and (3) laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infection. Laboratory confirmation was by nucleic acid detection using multiplex reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) for 17 respiratory viruses: respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) A and B, human metapneumovirus (hMPV), influenza A (H3N2), (H1N1)pdm09, influenza B, parainfluenza viruses 1–4, influenza C, rhinoviruses, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV), coronaviruses 229E, NL63, OC43 and HKU1, adenoviruses and human bocavirus (hBoV).18–23
In the univariate analysis, all outcomes were significantly higher in the cloth mask group, compared with the medical masks group. After adjusting for other factors, ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) remained significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group.
Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%).
That was from 2015 ON HIGH RISK HEALTH CARE WORKERS in their work setting. That is not the same- not in risk quantity and approximation of closeness with infected patients- to say; shopping and keeping social distance measures. There have also been further testings since then which enumerate effectiveness of type of cloth used plus construction techniques along with using filtering materials as add- ons. No one recommends cloth masks of any sort for close contact with infectious patients. But they are proven to be, properly constructed and used, an effective tool against spread ALONG WITH SOCIAL DISTANCING.
SO catch up man!
a virus is a virus is a virus.
“Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%)."
"17 respiratory viruses: respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) A and B, human metapneumovirus (hMPV), influenza A (H3N2), (H1N1)pdm09, influenza B, parainfluenza viruses 1–4, influenza C, rhinoviruses, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV), coronaviruses 229E, NL63, OC43 and HKU1, adenoviruses and human bocavirus (hBoV).18–23 "
=====
admit it. You are one of those high risk types who now regrets getting as large as a Macy's Thanksgving Day Parade float.
YOU WEAR THE MASK BECAUSE YOU ARE SCARED TO DEATH FROM YOUR OWN SELF-INDULGENCE. THAT IS YOUR PROBLEM!
exactly
Democrats have never been concerned about Americans dying. Puhlleeezzz! They kill developing babies with the blessing of pregnant women, ostensibly black babies! NY Cuomo killed hundreds of elderly in nursing homes and even today he does not talk about them nor do his boot licking accomplices!
Reggie,,,,TRUE!
Absolutely. But the results are still the same in all contexts.
A mask that passes 44% will pass 44% in a C19 ward, or in a grocery store.
Indeed, but 44% of 1% is a much smaller number than 44% of 85%.
44% * 1% * 100 days is the same as 44% * 100% * 1 day.
or
44% * 1% * 100 people is the same 44% * 100% * 1 person.
So long as the virus is out there you are reducing your odds of getting it TODAY, not reducing your odds of getting it.
over a long enough time period – and that is a year not a lifetime, you will get it.
John is confusing odds in a covid-19 ward with those in a random supermarket.
Most of us would not, and act accordingly. First rule, don’t go in the covid-19 ward.
“John is confusing odds in a covid-19 ward with those in a random supermarket.”
Nope – I am comparing them.
“Most of us would not, and act accordingly.”
But you must go to places where there ARE people with C19 – less than on an ICU ward but they are still there.
Worse you do not know who has it.
“First rule, don’t go in the covid-19 ward.”
What about grocery stores ?
CDC says there are 25M-54M cases in the US.
That means you have between a 1:10 and a 1:6 chance of bumping into one randomly – like at the grocery store.
Not illegal to be a JO.
These “individual rights” snowflakes would have insisted on turning on the lights at their beach house during WWII to stand up to the “Nazis” in the federal government, while the real Nazis patrolled the waters.
Anon – the entire east coast was lit up like a Christmas tree for quite a while. The Germans were amazed and thankful for the nightshooting.
I was for the mask before I was against the mask.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-covid-19-transmitted-by-airborne-aerosols/
Does my old Richard Nixon mask count?
Sure! I saw a guy wearing a V for Vendetta mask, so why not a Tricky Dick mask? 🙂
I have yet to see any real science showing that non-medical masks are helpful enough to justify their mandated use. The ‘why not’ or ‘better than nothing’ logic doesn’t appeal to me because that same argument in the name of safety can be used anywhere.
Why not have everyone drive 20 mph on the freeway – it would save lives!
We routinely take risks. Multiple times per day. We do that because we have a pretty good sense of those risks.
But we don’t have a good sense at all if masks are effective and we are being cowed into doing it by the same people who pretend to ‘trust science’. I looked at the CDC website recently (probably 2 or 3 weeks ago) after they claimed ‘new research’ led them to conclude that mask wearing is effective. The recent studies on that website did not address mask safety, which means they are either reinterpreting older studies or are simply just lying.
And if someone shows information that says masks are good, you will just ignore or deny it.
https://www.ucdavis.edu/coronavirus/news/your-mask-cuts-own-risk-65-percent/
https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2020/07/14/masks-offer-much-more-protection-than-many-think/
Thanks for putting words in my mouth. That’s always an idiotic approach, especially when I have already explained that I actually read the studies posted by the CDC.
The science was solid 2-3 weeks ago and the CDC guidance was pro-mask.
Yes, their guidance was pro mask, but they claimed that it was based on new research. And that new research was NOT on their website, despite publishing other research (so not a case of the site not getting updated).
There is a difference between what people say and what the evidence is. Please try to understand that.
The one from UC Davis addresses 2 different scenarios. One is fine particulate matter and the other is droplets. They don’t explicitly say it, but the droplet scenario seems to be a case where a person is coughing or sneezing. I conclude this because the fine matter scenario is explained as normal breathing.
With that in mind, they say that masks aren’t effective for fine particulate matter and the strategies best used for that are social distancing. That leaves us for the droplet scenario, meaning that it only addresses those who are sneezing and coughing. Now, if you’re sneezing and coughing, how about staying home instead of going out in public and risking those around you? Why would anyone think that someone who is sick should go about their day just because they have a mask on?
Now, for the ADN article. Here is the relevant quote:
‘“There is this theory that facial masking reduces the (amount of virus you get exposed to) and disease severity,” said Gandhi, who is also director for the Center for AIDS Research at UC San Francisco.’
OK, the Dr is describing a theory. Fine. But, that does not mean it’s scientifically justified any more than anything else that any other Dr is opining about.
From MollyG’s UC Davis link’s study (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext).
Capitalization added.
“For the general public, evidence shows that physical distancing of more than 1 m is highly effective and that face masks are associated with protection, even in non-health-care settings, with either disposable surgical masks or reusable 12–16-layer cotton ones, although much of this evidence was on mask use WITHIN HOUSEHOLDS and among contacts of cases”.
“We resolved disagreements by consensus.” Is this science?
After finding those two quotes I found a reanalysis of this study. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.11.20127415v1
Here is the abstract:
Re-examination of the large dataset collected and meta-analysed by Dr Chu and his colleagues contradicts their conclusions about the effects of separation distance on infection risk. Their conclusion was based on misunderstandings of the datasets. Each of these estimated risk relative to that incurred when touching infected individuals. Allowing for this suggests that the main advantage of social distancing, a perhaps 78% (95% CI 24, 92) reduction in risk of infection, occurs at distances below 1m. The data imply an 11% chance of further distances reducing the risk, with any effects likely to be small. However the limitations of the dataset do limit the strength of these conclusions.
MollyG’s second link was just an article with no study attached.
Here’s a quote from that article:
““There is this theory that facial masking reduces the (amount of virus you get exposed to) and disease severity,” said Gandhi, who is also director for the Center for AIDS Research at UC San Francisco.”
Is theory evidence?
“If you want to be wrong, then follow the masses.” – Socrates
The problem is that n95 masks (the kind we’re supposed to wear) protect other people as much or more from your germs than they protect you from theirs. I’m aware of this, and I like the idea.
But wearing a non-mask mask in the certain knowledge it won’t protect someone else from your bacteria and viruses goes beyond political protest. If you’re aware you’ve got a cold of any kind and give other people a false sense of security – it’s still legal,but now you’re infecting people on purpose. If one of those people is a cancer patient you may as well smack them upside the head with a large stick.
But wearing a non-mask mask in the certain knowledge it won’t protect someone else from your bacteria and viruses goes beyond political protest.
It appears nobody here is capable of probablistic thinking.
If you’re wearing a mask, why do I need to?
Does your mask not protect you?
If you’d like to read a randomized study that shows surgery patients get less infections when non-scrubbed staff DO NOT WEAR MASKS while in the operating room, here it is. https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/35762/66135_1.pdf%3bsequence=1
There are no studies showing the efficacy of masks AND the effects on the restriction of oxygen.
“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” Robert Green Ingersoll
There are no studies showing the efficacy of masks AND the effects on the restriction of oxygen.
Who assembles your bibliographies for you?
Empiric thought is still valuable. We use parachutes or some other similar devicewhen jumping out of planes.
That is proven!
No it isn’t.
No scientific study has ever been performed yet we wear such devices.
If a person has reason to believe they are contagious with any disease, they should absolutely take preventative measures so they don’t harm others. The most likely solution to that problem is to stay home and/or stay away from others if you do have to leave the house while contagious.
That isn’t what this is about. This is about forcing people to do something that is not scientifically proven to be significantly effective.
Furthermore, if the only benefit is stop the spread by infected people, why would we expect those who have recovered from it to wear a mask? Same thing with children since they have been shown to not spread the disease.
The latest studies prove that a combination of masks of varying effectivenesses, distancing, and washing hands, helps reduce the transfer of the virus. This study has been going on for the past seven months, all over the world. The rest is BS. If you want to focus on BS then……
Just reducing the transmission rate is insufficient.
You must get the transmission rate below 1 and sustain it there for a long time.
If you do not do so the virus will spike the moment you relax even a little.
There are only two means of defeating C19 that actually work.
Immunity
Cure.
Until you get all of society to a high level or resistance C19 will not die out.
If that level or resistance is transient – as with policy measures – the virus will rush back whenever policies relax.
BTW Math proves that none of your polices are actually effective at doing anything but delay.
And real world observations proves that Math is right.
Similarly and so with death always. Not a reason to therefore abandon the effort.
“Similarly and so with death always. Not a reason to therefore abandon the effort.”
Delaying death results in a longer life – death is an end.
Delaying C19 just changes the 14 day period of your life during which you have it.
As a choice that is up to you.
As a policy imposed by force that is immoral
Yeah, real tough choice, and obviously the government should not assume we are not all happily suicidal, or try to protect others from those who are.
Is that on the Libertarian platform document this year? I hope so.
If you are under 45 the fatality rate is lower than the flu. If you are under 20 it is 11times lower than the flu.
Risking getting C19 by not following the orders of our fuhrers is not suicidal – not unless you are over 75.
“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. ”
Thomas Jefferson.
That would be a fair statement of the libertarain platform – every year.
The question is how much impact do the mask have?
For example, if everyone in the study social distanced to the point that they were isolated and wore a mask the whole time, would you conclude that mask were critical to the outcome?
https://www.ucdavis.edu/coronavirus/news/your-mask-cuts-own-risk-65-percent/
If the mask cuts your risk by 65% over X amount of time then in X amount of time the risk of infection is 35%
At 2X your additive risk would be over 55%
At 3X and above your additive risk would continue to rise until your risk approximates 100%. One can draw a curve to define exactly what your risk is at any point in X time.
What stops you from getting the virus is one’s immunity to the virus and the properties of the virus. You cannot escape the math.
The level of cumulative protection necescary to avoid contracting the virus is inversely proportionate to the infection rate.
This also effects the level of immunity needed to reach herd immunity.
The more infectuous the disease the higher the effectiveness needs to be to stop it.
Further you MUST reduce the spread rate to below 1 or the only thing you are accomplishing is stretching things out.
The higher the R0 of the disease the harder it is the lower the spread rate.
If masks are only 10% effective they will STILL reduce the spread rate. But NOT even close to below 1. All the measures we have taken cumulatively are not likely to have reduced the spread rate below 1 sustainably.
That means they accomplish nothing but drawing this out.
That said the cumulative effects of masks are NOT the same as the individual effects.
The fact that we can not overall come close to reducing the spread rate sufficiently does not mean I can not personally reduce my odds of being one of those who is not naturally resistant and does not get C19.
But one of the problems is that actually converts this into a competition – the more other people SD, wear masks etc. the better I have to do to “win the lottery” – that is unless we ALL reduce the overal rate below 1.
This is why we should NOT be fixated on children and younger adults, and those at low risk.
It is actually a mistake to protect children from something that is unlikely to harm them.
John, did you read my reply to Molly? There was a reason in my response to Molly. I don’t think you helped clarify the issue to Molly and her point.
Personally I wear a mask when I am out and about but in a paper released in April by the National Academies’ Standing Committee on Emerging Infectious Diseases and 21st Century Health Threats, the authors report that there is no data as of yet to show whether wearing a cloth mask has any effect on the spread of the Covid-19 virus. So the question to me is should a law require people to obey a health regulation that is based belief rather than science? As I recall, President Trump was skewered for stating his belief that the anti-malarial drug could be beneficial in treating Covid-19, and he wasn’t making anyone do anything. Perhaps the regulation can be justified because the right people believe it will help?
My health care provider (a huge, prestigious chain of hospitals and clinics all over the Gulf Coast) and my health insurance company BOTH sent me cloth masks in the mail with their logos on them.
The hospital chain partners with at least two university medical schools with virology research programs. They could arguably be presumed to “know better” than to encourage their customers to rely on cloth masks that might not offer full n95 protection. Are they in much more legal jeopardy?
loupgarous– My guess would be no. I do not think anyone has said or implied that wearing a mask is 100% effective so if a mask-wearer caught the virus, it would be practically impossible to blame the mask. Also, wearing the mask cannot hurt you (unless you have a very fragile respiratory system). Even so, it is an interesting question.
Wearing a mask fogs my glasses.
Me too. Take them off or stop talking.
It reminds me why I should gargle.
Young……..Try pulling your glasses OVER the top of the mask and there will be no “fog” The fog happens if your mask is .pulled up over the bottom of your glasses…I push my glasses over top of my mask and slide them down my nose just a little.
This doesn’t necessarily mean they believe they are effective. It means they think they could help, and if so, they would then likely save money in the long run by having to treat fewer people.
This is different than the government making it a requirement, because the private company is doing a risk/reward analysis whereas the government doesn’t have to eat the downside of their mandates – we do.
You know, you could look up more recent research about it. Here’s an example:
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00818
“As I recall, President Trump was skewered for stating his belief that the anti-malarial drug could be beneficial in treating Covid-19”
As I recall, he was skewered because he said things like “What do you have to lose?” (when the drug can kill people), because he lied when he talked about it (unsurprising, as he lies about all sorts of things), because his advocacy led the government to spend a lot of money buying hydroxychloroquine (possibly a huge waste of taxpayer money) and in turn resulted in shortages of the drug for people who rely on it for treatment of other diseases (like lupus) where it’s known to be effective, … If you’re going to compare the two, be honest about the comparisons.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/lrc-cdn/assets/2020/07/Screenshot_20200717-0803122.png
Hydroxychloroquine: The One Chart You Need To See
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/hydroxychloroquine-one-chart-you-need-see
The purpose of the masks is to reduce the probability of transmission and to reduce the viral load of people to whom you transmit. See the Japanese experience, where mask wearing has been common in enclosed spaces. This isn’t that difficult.
+1
This is absurd………..Apparently it IS that difficult, because scientists, doctors, including Dr. Fauci, have gone back and forth about it.
It’s my belief that the Japanese, Koreans, and such cultures have been successful with masks because it’s not just the mask wearing.. They strictly enforce other forms of public hygene, along with wearing masks. It’s a deeply cultural thing over there.
“hygiene”
Most of the masks are not meant to protect the wearer. For that you would need an N-95 or medical grade mask and they aren’t that easy to come by. The mandated mask is to protect other people from your respiratory particles, and they will be wearing a mask to protect you from their respiratory particles. I really don’t understand why anyone would have a problem with something as simple as wearing a mask until we get a more effective method of protection. Now every jurisdiction that has mandated a mask will have to come out with a new mandate describing in detail what is and is not acceptable.
Most of the masks are not meant to protect the wearer.
They don’t protect the wearer categorically. So what?
We were able to locate N-95 masks without too much trouble.
My point was that they protect other people, and other people protect you. I strongly support the wearing of masks and support the requirement to do so in public. It was my understanding that at the beginning of the pandemic there was a shortage of N-95 masks, but the requirement is for the protection of others you come in contact with. It seems at most a small inconvenience for a time of crisis. I really don’t understand why anyone would go to such lengths to avoid wearing one.
Sally Jarvis – do you wear N-95 masks?
What are the “lengths”, you’re talking about?
It’s really easy, Sally. I just don’t wear a mask.
But as I have done for years, I take lots of vitamin C, D3, and Zinc, every day to keep my immune system operating at maximum capacity. Not to mention all of the other health benefits.
“How to Avoid Getting Sick When You’re Around People All Day”
https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/01/15/how-to-avoid-getting-sick-when-youre-around-people-all-day/
“Take vitamin C. It can enhance your body’s defense against microbes. I take 1,000 milligrams a day. Many people also do not get enough vitamin D, which affects a lot of body functions, so that would be helpful, too.”
– Dr. Anthony Fauci
Yet now, he doesn’t say a thing about vitamin C and D.
Do you know why, Sally?
Here’s a hint.
For the same reason that he did a 180 on why wearing a mask was useless.
Rhodes,
Great tips for warding off illness. When I feel something trying to get me sick, I make sure to take extra Epsom salt baths with tea tree E.O. and to drink extra turmeric tea, green tea, chicken broth, and a nice combo honey-lemon-garlic-ginger tea, too (albeit not all at once). Elderberry syrup or elderberry zinc lozenges also seem to help.
Elderberry is best used when it comes in a bottle containing alcohol and drunk liberally. 🙂
LOL. Never tried it that way, Allan. The syrup is pretty tasty, as are the lozenges.
In fairness to my health care provider, as part of screening patients to enter their clinic and hospital spaces, they do offer n95 masks at point of entry, and are very generous about letting you have more than one. Again, I am just as happy that my efficient n95 mask is containing any pathogens I’m breathing out as that they’re reasonably efficient in protecting me from other folks’ pathogens.
Are you sick?
Re: “I really don’t understand why anyone would have a problem with something as simple as wearing a mask until we get a more effective method of protection,” some people simply don’t care about protecting others.
Unfortunately, it has been turned into a partisan issue: https://navigatorresearch.org/public-opinion-on-coronavirus-navigator-update-21/ (see the different views on mask-wearing by party affiliation about 2/3s of the way down the page).
Commit,
“some people simply don’t care about protecting others.”
That is unfair. People have a responsibility for protecting themselves, too.
Upwards of 80%+ of people who get sick don’t bother going to see their doctor. Of those that do, a smaller percentage end up in the hospital (many recuperate at home); many of these folks typically have chronic disease (that is, often lifestyle-induced) co-morbidities.
I feed my family lots of real food, we take extra supplements when necessary, we stay home when sick, and make sure to practice additional personal hygiene. I have an autoimmune condition that I have worked very hard to heal from–changing my diet and lifestyle.
I am trying to be responsible with my health. What are others doing to be responsible with theirs? Masks won’t stop diabetes or obesity.
I would encourage you to actually go on Twitter and find how many Tweets are like this, as you write “Twitter is replete with such anti-masks.” I found one news article from WTHR from a man in Wisconsin. I went there to challenge these people on Twitter from such messages. Except I couldn’t find them.
@Twittersafety is falling down on the job by not removing Tweets that encourage spread of disease-causing organisms. But @Jack’s minions often ignore Twitter Rules when it suits them. If a chain of transmission resulting in patient injury or death can be traced to Tweets that encourage the wearing of non-mask masks, however, Mr. Dorsey might wind up sharing some of those gigabucks with those patients or their bereaved families.
I support this movement, however my nagging wife does not. 😉
I’m glad you have sense enough to listen to her, Paul.
Sally Jarvis – when you are trapped in the care and getting an uneducated lecture for 25 minutes, finally you are ground down. Actually, I do not have to wear a mask because of breathing problems, but she does not see that as my problem. 😉
The mask problem is basically a hoax. People are led to believe that if they were a mask, they are “protected” from the virus. However, the CDC and other organizations stress that they don’t protect the wearer, but that an infected person “might” be prevented from spreading the disease. This, however, is doubtful since the molecules are so small they can easily penetrate any material used to make masks except, perhaps, those of the highest grade. Medical personnel know that the reason they wear masks is to protect patients (although their masks are not capable of preventing the spread of a virus.) Fauci and others were correct when they advised that wearing a mask will not protect a person. They “changed their minds” when it became political. In short, these legislative rules are bogus because they do not protect anyone. I rarely go out but when I do and am in a building I wear the damned thing but only because my wife made it and local proclamations by Democratic mayors and judge pronounce that I may be prosecuted if I don’t.
https://www.ucdavis.edu/coronavirus/news/your-mask-cuts-own-risk-65-percent/
https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2020/07/14/masks-offer-much-more-protection-than-many-think/
Jerks gaming the system.
Probably legal, but not right.
And watch the outrage as ordinary people call the gamesters on their games.
Have noticed a marked increase in incivility.
Expect more videos of incidents in stores.
Play silly games…