coronavirus

[Kenkoko]

There's unfortunately a lot of misinformation out there regarding the efficacy of face masks.

It really got started when diagrams & illustration claiming " There is a 70% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier not wearing a mask and a non-carrier wearing a mask; a 5% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier wearing a mask and a non-carrier not wearing a mask; and a 1.5% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier and a non-carrier both wearing masks." became viral on the internet. Several major news outlet picked up on it and amplified it.

The problems are 1) % claims are not substantiated. 2) Science is thin behind the claims. It was based on a non-peer reviewed study out of South Korea.  3) Study was done using surgical masks, not household cloth masks 4) The CDC, up until March, didn't recommend people wearing masks because there were not sufficient evidence.

Therefore you saw waves of opposing media debunking it, even going as far as calling it a hoax. I suspect many people who are anti-mask are still operating under this influence.

But it's really a partly false claim. While there's almost no evidence to back up these percentages, health authorities around the world do recommend the use of masks to help limit the spread of COVID-19.

In fact, CDC changed their stance by April because new studies have come out.https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover.html#studies

The goal isn't to make you infection proof. It's to lower the probability of you getting infected. When you play that out over the entire population, it slows the spread & keep the disease under control.

 

[eyephone]

R2D points are quite valid.  IMHO, a mask helps somewhat.  A mask on another person helps somewhat.  50%, I doubt it, zero, I doubt it.  At least having the mask on the bottle sniffer probably slow them a little bit from sticking their finger in their nose and then handling twenty tomatoes before picking one. 

So let the business decide.  I'll stay home if I don't like it.

The big hole in the reopen mantra is people like me. It only takes a small percentage like me not going back to spending and going about and our economy is tanked.

I have to agree with Mark Cuban it all comes down to consumer confidence and does the employee feel safe. I used my Costco example. I believe people who shop at Costco feels more safe and are willing to shop there.

 

[Liar Loan]

Guys, there?s 80 deaths in OC since February.  It?s mid freaking May.  3.5 months and 80 total deaths in a county of 3.2M.

There?s 144 cases and zero deaths in Irvine.  Zero deaths.  I guarantee you a TI member won?t be the first Irvine death.  I?m pretty sure when this whole thing is over Irvine will have less than 10 deaths.  Right now, 282,000 residents and zero deaths.

I don?t even want to call you snowflakes because then you?ll think this is political, but it?s not.  I don?t know what you guys do for a living but in my job, data is important.  It?s critical, it?s absolute, it doesn?t lie. 

The data says you?ll be just fine, and if by some amazing chance you win the COVID death lottery, I?ll give the eulogy at your socially distanced funeral.

You like data, but not the math.  If the mortality rate is 0.3% which seems to be a best case scenario, and 70% of Irvine-ites eventually catch COVID, which seems reasonable barring a vaccine, that equates to 600 deaths before this is all said and done.  Then you will have another 9,300 (5% minus the dead) that will suffer horribly for weeks, barely able to breathe, and with lasting organ damage to their lungs and heart.

I hope all of you have your medical directives and living trusts set up, because one in 20 of us on TI is going to suffer and or die from this.

 

[qwerty]

So whatever happened to data and science driving decisions? Several months ago we were told no masks by the CDC

In early March Fauci said there was no need to wear masks.

Now LA is requiring people to wear mask.

Did I miss the science and data?

 

[irvinehomeowner]

So whatever happened to data and science driving decisions? Several months ago we were told no masks by the CDC

In early March Fauci said there was no need to wear masks.

Now LA is requiring people to wear mask.

Did I miss the science and data?

The post above by Kenkoko explains this.

 

[qwerty]

So I just picked one of the studies that the CDC had in their data to support the change to recommend masks. I picked the last one

Here is the relevant section:

Epidemiological characteristics after 23 January 2020
We also modeled the transmission of COVID-19 in China after 23 January, when greater control measures were effected. These control measures included travel restrictions imposed between major cities and Wuhan, self-quarantine and contact precautions advocated by the government, and more available rapid testing for infection confirmation (11, 12). These measures, along with changes in medical care?seeking behavior due to increased awareness of the virus and increased personal protective behavior (e.g., wearing of face masks, social distancing, self-isolation when sick), likely altered the epidemiological characteristics of the outbreak after 23 January. To quantify these differences, we reestimated the system parameters using the model-inference framework and city-level daily cases reported between 24 January and 8 February. Given that intercity mobility was restricted after 23 January, we tested two altered travel scenarios: (i) scenario 1: a 98% reduction of travel in and out of Wuhan and an 80% reduction in travel between all other cities, as indicated by changes in the Baidu mobility index (16) (table S2); and (ii) scenario 2: a complete stoppage of intercity travel (i.e., ? to 0) (see supplementary methods for more details).

The results of inference for the 24 January?8 February period are presented in Table 2, figs. S23 to S26, and table S3. As control measures have continually shifted, we present estimates for both 24 January?3 February (period 1) and 24 January?8 February (period 2). For both periods, the best-fitting model for scenario 1 had a reduced reporting delay, Td, of 6 days (versus 9 days before 23 January), consistent with more rapid confirmation of infections. Estimates of both the latency and infectious periods were similar to those made for 10?23 January; however, ?, ?, and Re all shifted considerably. The transmission rate of documented cases, ?, dropped to 0.52 (95% CI: 0.42?0.72) during period 1 and to 0.35 (95% CI: 0.28?0.45) during period 2, less than half the estimated transmission rate prior to travel restrictions (Table 2). The fraction of all infections that were documented, ?, was estimated to be 0.65 (95% CI: 0.60?0.69), i.e., 65% of infections were documented during period 1, up from 14% before travel restrictions, and remained nearly the same for period 2. The reproductive number was 1.34 (95% CI: 1.10?1.67) during period 1 and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.83?1.16) during period 2, down from 2.38 prior to travel restrictions. While the estimate for the relative transmission rate, ?, is lower than before 23 January, the contagiousness of undocumented infections, represented by ??, was substantially reduced, possibly reflecting that only very mild, less contagious infections remain undocumented or that individual protective behavior and contact precautions have proven effective. Similar parameter estimates are derived under scenario 2 (no travel at all) (table S3). These inference results for both periods 1 and 2 should be interpreted with caution, as care-seeking behavior and control measures were continually in flux at these times.

Even here they don?t say that the masks are effective
They say that is a possible contributing factor. Not really hard data and science. And they even say in the last sentence these results should be interpreted with caution. I guess the CDC missed that part

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Myself and others have also posted several links that show the effectiveness of masks. Did you not read my Yahoo link debunking morekaos? theory about farts vs coronavirus?

While you may say that I don?t like to accept others opinions that don?t align with mine, you don?t read the links that has the data and science that doesn?t align with yours. So yes, you *are* missing the science and data, because you want to.

 

[qwerty]

Myself and others have also posted several links that show the effectiveness of masks. Did you not read my Yahoo link debunking morekaos? theory about farts vs coronavirus?

While you may say that I don?t like to accept others opinions that don?t align with mine, you don?t read the links that has the data and science that doesn?t align with yours. So yes, you *are* missing the science and data, because you want to.

I barely have time to teach my kids. I?m not going to spend time reading stuff that may contradict my position

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Myself and others have also posted several links that show the effectiveness of masks. Did you not read my Yahoo link debunking morekaos? theory about farts vs coronavirus?

While you may say that I don?t like to accept others opinions that don?t align with mine, you don?t read the links that has the data and science that doesn?t align with yours. So yes, you *are* missing the science and data, because you want to.

I barely have time to teach my kids. I?m not going to spend time reading stuff that may contradict my position

Teacher: So qwerdita, why are all the answers on your test incorrect?
qwerdita: My dad said that I can ignore the science and data if I don't agree with it.

 

[nosuchreality]

Look on the bright side people, Wisconsin has volunteered to show us if the rona Is going to take the summer off.  We will have a pretty solid answer by middle of June and I?d guess a good hint by Memorial Day.

Pretty much perfect timing, two weeks to get the ball rolling and then a holiday weekend of gatherings.  Mostly outdoors.

 

[zubs]

Ivanka wears a mask.  Why can't her father set an example for the rest of the nation?

Instead he's polarizing mask wearing as a democrat vs. republican issue.
Another poor decision from the reality tv star.


Ivanka would make a better president then that retard she calls daddy.

 

[eyephone]

Look on the bright side people, Wisconsin has volunteered to show us if the rona Is going to take the summer off.  We will have a pretty solid answer by middle of June and I%u2019d guess a good hint by Memorial Day.

Pretty much perfect timing, two weeks to get the ball rolling and then a holiday weekend of gatherings.  Mostly outdoors.

Inland empire no mask required. (I am not sure it is a winning formula)
I do not know if it due to the cost, not fashionable, expertise.

Do they have disposable income to spend on masks? Idk

 

[StarmanMBA]

Instead he's polarizing mask wearing as a democrat vs. republican issue.
Another poor decision from the reality tv star.


Ivanka would make a better president then (sic) that retard she calls daddy.

The irony of YOU calling President Trump "retard" after writing "then" instead of "than" is at once tragic and delightful. 

Was that you in the knit cap and glasses screaming on your knees and wailing that Hillary lost the election? 'NOOOOOOOOO! ! ! ! !"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDYNVH0U3cs


http://

 

[zubs]

Please address Trumps lack of leading by example than my lakk uf grammur.

 

[nosuchreality]

No social distancing measures is 35X the spread rate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/05/15/social-distancing-study-coronavirus-spread/

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Washington Post paywall.

 

[qwerty]

No social distancing measures is 35X the spread rate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/05/15/social-distancing-study-coronavirus-spread/

We don?t need a study to tell us staying at home or staying farther apart reduces infections.  How much longer are they going to make people stay home and keep business in modified open mode? Hospitals are not overwhelmed and the curve was flattened by all accounts.  Georgia has been open for a couple of weeks and the numbers are holding stepdads.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Here?s the actual study:
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00608

State and local governments imposed social distancing measures in March and April of 2020 to contain the spread of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These included large event bans, school closures, closures of entertainment venues, gyms, bars, and restaurant dining areas, and shelter-in-place orders (SIPOs). We evaluated the impact of these measures on the growth rate of confirmed COVID-19 cases across US counties between March 1, 2020 and April 27, 2020. An event-study design allowed each policy?s impact on COVID-19 case growth to evolve over time. Adoption of government-imposed social distancing measures reduced the daily growth rate by 5.4 percentage points after 1?5 days, 6.8 after 6?10 days, 8.2 after 11?15 days, and 9.1 after 16?20 days. Holding the amount of voluntary social distancing constant, these results imply 10 times greater spread by April 27 without SIPOs (10 million cases) and more than 35 times greater spread without any of the four measures (35 million). Our paper illustrates the potential danger of exponential spread in the absence of interventions, providing relevant information to strategies for restarting economic activity.

So without locking down, it would have been so much worse.

That?s not proving a negative, that?s common sense.

We don?t need a study to tell us staying at home or staying farther apart reduces infections.

But you said it wouldn?t be much worse if we didn?t lock down. *You* keep contradicting your own opinion... not me.

 

[qwerty]

It wouldn?t be much worse. We will end up in the same place. The number of deaths will be the same spread out over more time. The number of infections will be the same just spread out over time.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

It wouldn?t be much worse. We will end up in the same place. The number of deaths will be the same spread out over more time. The number of infections will be the same just spread out over time.

Please post links that back your opinion with science and data.

You really are misunderstanding the concept of flattening the curve.