Naked Science Forum
Life Sciences => Physiology & Medicine => COVID-19 => Topic started by: Petrochemicals on 26/09/2020 10:55:02
-
Having been a believer in the effectiveness of simple face coverings such as surgical masks against corona virus spread, I am wondering why the measures are not working . it would be easy to blame the pub and club crawlers for this, but in areas of the world like Slovakia that used face coverings for so long they seem to have lost effectiveness . In France face masks are required indoor and out yet infections are increacing.
-
Masks (particularly surgical masks) are not 100% efficient. The best close-fitting masks that are tolerable for civilian use, are about 97% efficient at trapping 0.3 micron particles but the COVID virus is smaller. A loose surgical mask will stop you spitting on your victim but won't trap much more than 50% of the incoming aerosol from your infectious best friend, and very few people even bother to wear those properly. The chief benefit of "social" masks is to encourage everyone else to wear them so they don't project their exhalate so far.
Parachutes and seat belts fail occasionally, but not wearing them can be 100% fatal.
The reason the numbers are rising is because that's what viruses do. One carrier in a household is almost certain to infect all the others eventually unless they all wear space suits, so once you have infected more than 5% of the population you will probably accelerate to 50%.
-
I think it's because not enough people wear them. On another forum flat dwellers reported virtually nobody wears them in communal areas. Slovakia dropped manditory masks at the end of may. Like almost all measures in the UK, mask wearing is widely ignored, social distancing in supermarkets similarly ignored.
We aren't very good at complying:- from a meta study
Only 48.9% of participants identified key symptoms ofCOVID-19.
Self-reported adherence to test, trace and isolate behaviours was low
self-isolation 18.2%
requesting an antigen test 11.9%
intention to share details of close contacts 76.1%
quarantining 10.9%
By contrast, intention to adhere to protective measures was much higher. Non-adherence was associated with: men, younger age groups, having a dependent child in the household, lowersocio-economic grade, greater hardship during the pandemic, and working in a key sector.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.15.20191957v1.full.pdf
-
As Alan says, the vast majority - 70-90% - of cases are transmitted among households. So once you get one case, you get the rest of the household for free.
People don't wear masks at home, and I cannot see anyone realistically entertaining that prospect in the near future.
-
Well with France going into lockdown it can pretty much ruled that they do not work to reduce infection rates, France has had outdoor and indoor masks since August.
-
What would have been the infection rate without masks?
Fact is that, as I've said many times before, a surgical mask is about 50% effective at trapping incoming virus, and a bit of cloth, even less so. The principal value of such face coverings is to limit the broadcast transmission of virus, not its reception.
So eventually everyone will receive an infective dose if they carry on a normal life with inefficient masks: it just takes longer to infect everyone. The infection rate, the number of people infected per day, can be decreased by cloth face coverings, but the total number infected will eventually saturate at the same number as without masks. That is what politicians proudly call "flattening the curve", as if it were a solution rather than merely extending the problem.
Postscript! I have just read a report in Physics World that a Japanese group have simulated various masks on a supercomputer and come to the obvious conclusion that woven soft materials are not effective traps for COVID virus, but a nonwoven surgical mask reduces exhalate transmission significantly.
-
First of all: Masks do work against the spread of coronavirus. The mask mostly protects the people around you but is also useful to prevent getting infected yourself. So far as I can see it is strongly assumed, that the seriousness of the infection depends on how much of the virus you are exposed to. People with less exposure also have less sympoms or are even asymptomatic. We see this by comparing citys or states with similar demographics but different mask regulations.
Secondly: Another reason why infection rate is increasing, is an increase in testing. Though testing is a good measure, relying exclusively on these numbers convey a bit of a false image. The overall mortality isnt correlating with the infection rate as much as it did back in April and May.
Thirdly: A mask is only effective when it is being worn. Even if the majority wears them often, one uncareful event
(wedding or birhday) can boost the infection rate again. Generally people all over the world do not take the issue that serious anymore. See this article for further information: (cant show link so just type: "Still Confused About Masks? Here’s the Science Behind How Face Masks Prevent Coronavirus")
-
So far as I can see it is strongly assumed, that the seriousness of the infection depends on how much of the virus you are exposed to.
That's pretty unusual for a viral infection. The speed with which you develop symptoms may depend on the initial dose, and the probability of infection clearly depends on the concentration, duration and frequency of exposure, but the problem with biological challenges is that the seriousness of the outcome depends as much on the susceptibility of the victim as on the degree of exposure - hence the notion of vaccination, to reduce susceptibility by priming the immune system.
The overall mortality isn't correlating with the infection rate as much as it did back in April and May.
largely because the true infection rate in the UK was unknown. The overall mortality rate among confirmed cases has remained fairly constant around 4 - 6% worldwide since the first data arrived from Wuhan.
-
What would have been the infection rate without masks?
I do not know but the steepness of the daily infection curve ie how fast the infection is increasing per day is not as steep as before, but considering all the other measures brought in, pub closures, social distancing no holidays, its still steep enough. Masks* I THINK *would, not make any difference.
-
An opinion based on what expertise or evidence?
Apparently "Which" has just published the effectiveness of various simple face coverings, which varies from > 93% to < 0.3% transmission of 0.3 micron particles. Some so-called masks are indeed merely cosmetic inconveniences, but a reduction of viral intake by 99.7% could save your life.
-
Masks* I THINK *would, not make any difference.
It depends on the mask.
But a good one certainly does make a difference, regardless of what you "think".
-
Another reason why infection rate is increasing, is an increase in testing.
The uncertainty principle? :)
-
The following study shows that masks are effective at "flattening the curve":
A study in the USA compared 5 counties, 2 of which introduced mandatory masks in public areas.
- Over the 15 week period, cases of infection increased in all counties
- In the 3 weeks before masks were made mandatory, all 5 counties had similar growth
- After 2 counties made masks mandatory, the growth in cases was significantly lower in those 2 counties (M+) than the 3 which did not require masks (M-)
See the study on a pre-print archive: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.28.20221705v1
Of course, masks are even more effective when used in conjunction with other measures like social distancing or curfews (or, if all else fails, a lockdown)...
-
The following study shows that masks are effective at "flattening the curve":
A study in the USA compared 5 counties, 2 of which introduced mandatory masks in public areas.
- Over the 15 week period, cases of infection increased in all counties
- In the 3 weeks before masks were made mandatory, all 5 counties had similar growth
- After 2 counties made masks mandatory, the growth in cases was significantly lower in those 2 counties (M+) than the 3 which did not require masks (M-)
See the study on a pre-print archive: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.28.20221705v1
Of course, masks are even more effective when used in conjunction with other measures like social distancing or curfews (or, if all else fails, a lockdown)...
I find this highly dubious Alan, these are 5 neighbouring areas in a small region in what one can assume is constant intermingled populace.
This ecological study evaluated the effects of a public mask mandate on the daily cumulative
case growth of COVID-19 infections among five neighboring counties within the metropolitan
statistical area of Saint Louis, Missouri: City of St. Louis, St. Louis County, Jefferson County,
Saint Charles County, and Franklin County. The study period included a three-week period prior
the mask wearing is not borne out in places like sweden versus UK cases since the start of october. Outside mask wearing is also not effective as seen in France versus UK cases in the October period.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_St._Louis#/media/File%3ASt._Louis_MSA.svg
The areas are a mix of super urban, urban, sub-urban areas
-
I find this highly dubious Alan, these are 5 neighbouring areas in a small region in what one can assume is constant intermingled populace.
Quite right. If the experts disagree with you, ignore them. That's why we don't allow people with strong opinions and no knowledge onto the flight deck. But politics is different.
And the excess death rate per 100,000 in Sweden is pretty much the same as the UK, despite having a younger population and a much lower population density.
-
If the experts disagree with you, ignore them.
For reasons of repetitive antagonism, this user is currently not responding to messages from;
BoredChemist
Just sayin'
-
Hi,
The reason why face masks might not be effective in curbing the spread of COVID-19 is because people make them unusable or do not use them properly. Firstly, people touch the front of their masks which might contaminate them. Secondly, some people do not make them tight enough or don't cover their nose. The whole point of a mask is to protect other people from droplets when you sneeze or cough. (some people also use it to conceal their smelly breath...)
Anyway, if you don't cover your nose or make the mask lose, you are exposing the world to your saliva drops and your fish breath :o ;D. Also, if your mask gets damp, it could become useless.
From Slickscientist
-
People need to be educated on how to use their mask properly and dispose of them effectively; abandoned masks might contaminate a surface, which will then infect other people.
-
I find this highly dubious Alan, these are 5 neighbouring areas in a small region in what one can assume is constant intermingled populace.
Quite right. If the experts disagree with you, ignore them. That's why we don't allow people with strong opinions and no knowledge onto the flight deck. But politics is different.
.
Spit it out Alan, don't rat around the flight deck. You mean Trump is right?
-
And the excess death rate per 100,000 in Sweden is pretty much the same as the UK, despite having a younger population and a much lower population density.
Which hole did you pull this from Alan, the swedes rank well above the uk, but they do have healthier life stiles.
And the excess death rate per 100,000 in Sweden is pretty much the same as the UK, despite having a younger population and a much lower population density.
The density around Stockholm is also pretty high and other areas. Like any mountainous region any flat ground is at a premium like that in Japan.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_in_Sweden#Metropolitan_Stockholm
-
There is an old saying that politics is the art of the possible. Trump is dismantling 200 years of civilisation by doing what is possible. Politics, but bad politics.
A better adage is that good politics is the art of choosing between the unpalatable and the unacceptable. National quarantine is unpalatable; destruction of the economy, permitting endemic disease and burdening future generations with an unpayable debt is unacceptable.
So far, only the New Zealand government seems to have imposed the unpalatable and thus averted the unacceptable.
-
So far, only the New Zealand government seems to have imposed the unpalatable and thus averted the unacceptable.
I think that China has (at least officially) done the same.
-
Which hole did you pull this from Alan,
The Swedish government statistics that you led me to. Thanks.
Excess deaths in Sweden is just over 5000 for 2020, in a population of 10,000,000: 0.05%
Excess deaths in UK is about 55,000 for 2020, in a population of 67,000,000: 0.08%
Given the much lower population density of Sweden (less than one tenth of the UK) that isn't particularly impressive..
Excess deaths in New Zealand to date: -1200, population 4,800,000: - 0.025%. Yes, NEGATIVE excess deaths compared with the 5 year average. Now that's impressive, even when you include the known 26 COVID deaths.
-
There is an old saying that politics is the art of the possible. Trump is dismantling 200 years of civilisation by doing what is possible. Politics, but bad politics.
A better adage is that good politics is the art of choosing between the unpalatable and the unacceptable. National quarantine is unpalatable; destruction of the economy, permitting endemic disease and burdening future generations with an unpayable debt is unacceptable.
So far, only the New Zealand government seems to have imposed the unpalatable and thus averted the unacceptable.
Back in your rat hole again? Which hole did you pull this from Alan,
The Swedish government statistics that you led me to. Thanks.
Excess deaths in Sweden is just over 5000 for 2020, in a population of 10,000,000: 0.05%
Excess deaths in UK is about 55,000 for 2020, in a population of 67,000,000: 0.08%
Given the much lower population density of Sweden (less than one tenth of the UK) that isn't particularly impressive..
Excess deaths in New Zealand to date: -1200, population 4,800,000: - 0.025%. Yes, NEGATIVE excess deaths compared with the 5 year average. Now that's impressive, even when you include the known 26 COVID deaths.
Back in you're rat hole! Canadas population density far lower than both yet isn't any better, doesn't quite add upp.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_median_age
87% of Swedes live in urban areas, which cover 1.5% of the entire land area.
-
Interesting thing about population density.
It's not clear how much difference it makes.
Within a city (or even a big town) the population density is usually relatively similar regardless of where you are in the world. Once the virus is in a city it spreads through it.
So a major factor is how well one city is connected to the next.
And then there's the interesting question of sub-populations.
Students are a really good example of that.
So, before you rant at eachother any further, I trust you will incorporate those into your models.
It might look more scientific if you left the rats out of it. They don't seem to be a significant vector.
-
Canadas population density far lower than both yet isn't any better
To be fair, dividing Canada's population by its land area will give a misleading figure for population density because the majority of Canadians live near their southern border.
-
Canadas population density far lower than both yet isn't any better
To be fair, dividing Canada's population by its land area will give a misleading figure for population density because the majority of Canadians live near their southern border.
That was the point!?! It's the amount of urbanisation.
-
I mentioned urban interconnectivity several months ago, when comparing the rates of spread of COVID between the USA and UK. Intercity commuting is far more common in the UK, say between Manchester and Liverpool, Birmingham-Coventry-Leicester, Leeds and York, Glasgow and Edinburgh, than between similar sized conurbations in the USA. At the time I discussed it, COVID hadn't really become fashionable throughout the USA, but with a bit of Presidential approval it has really taken off in those states and cities where Freedom overrides common sense.
Population density does vary between cities. Singapore, at 8000 persons per square kilometer is denser than London, at 5700 or Stockholm (5000) and vastly outstrips Birmingham at 1700.
With half the population of Sweden, Singapore (with a very comprehensive testing program) is now running at about 10 COVID cases per day compared with 1000 in Sweden. Adjusted for population, Sweden is moving into the premier league with the UK at 10,000.
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus is very thorough but unfortunately only covers diagnosed cases and COVID-listed deaths, so it's a bit sketchy in countries with no comprehensive testing, and still dependent on the fashion for reporting COVID as cause of death.
I remain completely baffled by the reference to rats, and despite the renowned national sense of irreverent humor, the suggestion that the Sveriges Regeringen statistical service takes the piss out of itself seems unlikely.
-
.
I remain completely baffled by the reference to rats, and despite the renowned national sense of irreverent humor, the suggestion that the Sveriges Regeringen statistical service takes the piss out of itself seems unlikely.
Avoiding the point and posting unrelated crap whilst feigning ignorange.
As in above missing the point about taking the piss, Canadas obvious low population density, but high cases despite testing and social distancing. Then waffling on about Singapore or trump in a way that avoids and creates subdifuge around the point of sweden doing rather well despite no masks and lockdown as in the title of the thread despite earlier having posted much to dispute it.
To duck down a rat hole - to do/say something underhand/questionable/untrue and then to dissappear from account. To behave as a rat.
-
To return to the OP. They provably work, but only if you wear them properly.
If you don't understand statistics, I can't help you.
-
So far as I can see it is strongly assumed, that the seriousness of the infection depends on how much of the virus you are exposed to. People with less exposure also have less sympoms or are even asymptomatic.
This cannot be the whole story because most of the Covid-19 casualties are elderly, obese men. There is no reason why exposure should be higher in these individuals specifically and not among younger, female, non-obese groups.
-
At low doses we are looking at the difference between a stochastic risk and a deterministic risk. These are more familiar in the context of radiation harm:
The probability of stochastic harm depends on the dose, but the outcome depends on the victim. Small doses of ionising radiation increase the probability of expressing cancer, but once you have a viable cluster of mutated cells (viability probably depends on the physiology of the victim) the outcome depends on where it is, not the dose that induced it. There is a latency period (growth with no clinical symptoms) and there is no inherent recovery process.
The harm from a large dose of ionising radiation is determined by a threshold, beyond which the harm is inevitable and the target cannot spontaneously recover - burn or epilation. Above threshold the harm is proportional to dose and fairly independent of the target. The response is rapid (no latency) and confined to the irradiated area, but if the area is small the inherent trauma repair process may result in containment and survival.
Viral infection generally mirrors stochastic rather than deterministic harm. One photon or one virus might strike lucky, a whole army is more likely to succeed, and the patient outcome would be the same in either case. A mask reduces the number of inhaled or broadcast infective particles and thus the probability of acquiring or transmitting the infection, but not the consequence of doing so
-
creates subdifuge
I think you just created that word.
-
Then waffling on about Singapore
Pointing out that, by most sensible measures, Singapore is doing very well in this crisis, is not "waffle".
It's an indication of where we should look for good practice.
-
I think "subdifuge" may have come from the infamous PhD thesis that led to the disastrous invasion of Iraq: SUBterranean DIffusion and centgriFUGE plant for uranium enrichment.
It's a neat word, but AFAIK these are located in Iran, not Iraq, and you wouldn't expect a US president to know the difference.
-
People don't wear masks at home, and I cannot see anyone realistically entertaining that prospect in the near future.
When I were a lad, we wore gas masks whenever the sirens sounded. Seriously impeded the ingestion of jellied eels or tripe, depending on where you lived.
-
you wouldn't expect a US president to know
That's a terrifyingly long list.
-
I understand population-weighted density is a better metric than simply density. It measures how far, on average, people are from their nearest neighbour... I think, perhaps somebody can elaborate.
-
Even that isn't a great metric since the probability of A infecting B decreases roughly with the inverse square of the distance between them when A exhales. I live 5000 miles from one of my clients and thoroughly enjoyed my visits but we don't meet in the factory these days in case someone breathes over someone else in the boardroom!
On a more sensible scale, the population density in the London suburbs is fairly low but the probability of infection on a commuter train into the city is quite high. Inter-urban commuting is a significant epidemiologial variable, and there's a lot more in the UK than in many other countries.
-
I think "subdifuge" may have come from the infamous PhD thesis that led to the disastrous invasion of Iraq: SUBterranean DIffusion and centgriFUGE plant for uranium enrichment.
It's a neat word, but AFAIK these are located in Iran, not Iraq, and you wouldn't expect a US president to know the difference.
I'm guessing BC is posting BS again for you.
-
I'm guessing BC is posting BS again for you.
Nope. Bored Chemist is pretty good about making informed posts.
-
I'm guessing BC is posting BS again for you.
Nope. Bored Chemist is pretty good about making informed posts.
I'm guessing BC is posting BS again for you.
Nope. Bored Chemist is pretty good about making informed posts.
You are obviously about as good.
-
You are obviously about as good.
Can you point out where either of us have a habit of making demonstrably incorrect posts?
-
I think "subdifuge" may have come from the infamous PhD thesis that led to the disastrous invasion of Iraq: SUBterranean DIffusion and centgriFUGE plant for uranium enrichment.
It's a neat word, but AFAIK these are located in Iran, not Iraq, and you wouldn't expect a US president to know the difference.
I'm guessing BC is posting BS again for you.
Would you like to guess again.
Preferably without making up covfefe words like "subdifuge".
-
You are obviously about as good.
Can you point out where either of us have a habit of making demonstrably incorrect posts?
No, not to your satisfaction, as illustrated above, to point it out is a logical impossibility. Any posts that are drivel would have been posted knowing as such, as I pointed out above but would have been posted it anyway, as above. You will contest any provided examples, as you did above originally and thus will not accept and will contest the point, as you did above. Thus its impossible as you will never be satisfied and accept it.
I could find people other than myself who do not appreciate the content posted by either of you, find examples of junk posted by you both. You will forever contest it, instigating antagonism intentionally, as you have above, whilst positioning yourself to be accounted to in a feigned position of innocence and ignorance.
So no, I cannot decide your mind for you as you well know and frankly, why should I bother to try with the stance that you have and the position you will take.
-
Thus its impossible as you will never be satisfied and accept it.
Hardly. All you have to do is show from a reputable source (i.e. one backed by scientific consensus) that any claims that I have made are incorrect. I have admitted to being wrong before.
-
Thus its impossible as you will never be satisfied and accept it.
Hardly. All you have to do is show from a reputable source (i.e. one backed by scientific consensus) that any claims that I have made are incorrect. I have admitted to being wrong before.
Lol
-
...find examples of junk posted by you both. ...
Well that's what he asked you to do, and now I am asking you to do it too.
Please post examples where I have posted stuff that's wrong.
So no, I cannot decide your mind for you
That's not what anyone is asking.
It's not my mind that you need to judge, but the words I type.
So, please either show that we post stuff that's not true or admit that you were mistaken / lied about it.
-
Congratulations, Kryptid and BC. You have identified a true Disciple of Trump.
-
Congratulations, Kryptid and BC. You have identified a true Disciple of Trump.
I'm not sure he's quite as trumpy as puppypower who thinks that Trump has handled the economy well- as evinced by it falling by 30%.
But then again, he believes in homoeopathy, so we should expect much...
-
Alan I thought you were about 75 years old and too young to have any recollections from WWII
-
Alan I thought you were about 75 years old and too young to have any recollections from WWII
Alan is like Odin with Hitler tourettes appearing as an old man someday, and a sprightly child the next who has some birds to peck at those who disagree with him.
-
Lol
The response I would expect of someone without evidence.
-
Just old enough to have been issued with an infant gas mask. Weaned on jellied eels, or so I'm told.
Thanks, petro, for a good idea. I'll see if I can train the chickens to attack people who don't read the small print or understand Tourette's Syndrome. Not sure whether Hitler had it - I thought the fascist return salute was invented by Hugo Boss, along with the uniforms.
-
Thus its impossible as you will never be satisfied and accept it.
Hardly. All you have to do is show from a reputable source (i.e. one backed by scientific consensus) that any claims that I have made are incorrect. I have admitted to being wrong before.
Lol
It's good to know that you can laugh at yourself, but when do you plan to answer the question?
-
Lol
The response I would expect of someone without evidence.
Almost lol
-
I have said before that I think masks should be mandated outside the home. This is what they did in Melbourne. Seems to have worked there.
-
I have said before that I think masks should be mandated outside the home. This is what they did in Melbourne. Seems to have worked there.
Has not worked in France. But the outbreak in France in far more developed. Like Australia New Zealand Japan and for all intents and purposes South Korea, Britain as an island should have been able to do better, but it is also far more of a hub, Heathrow being one of the major airports along with Charles de gaul, London being a business centre etc.
-
I have said before that I think masks should be mandated outside the home. This is what they did in Melbourne. Seems to have worked there.
Has not worked in France. But the outbreak in France in far more developed. Like Australia New Zealand Japan and for all intents and purposes South Korea, Britain as an island should have been able to do better, but it is also far more of a hub, Heathrow being one of the major airports along with Charles de gaul, London being a business centre etc.
Most places have airports.
The UK's problem is that we have Boris.
His policy seems to be to listen to what the experts say and then wait a month before doing it- badly.
-
Hub airports aren't a problem. Most of the internal space is "international" and thus segregated from the civilised world outside, is easy to clean, and has some medical facilities. Strict quarantine can be applied to anyone not in transit, since there are enough hotels (mostly empty these days) around the perimeter.
The current problem is regional airports. I have work to do in various places around the UK and Channel Isles but thanks to our absurd "system of government" I can't tell from one day to the next whether I can get out of the plane outside of England, or even in Manchester.
If Cummings had only waited a month before telling Boris to agree with his intellectual superiors, we wouldn't have a problem. New Zealand has airports but is not governed by an unelected slug.
-
Very good, but cancer patients will not be treated, heart patients will not be treated, suicide will increase and so will infanticide
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-54827702
Yet it is a good thing to have students at uni. There are other ways, such as Sweden.
-
Plus
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54841375
Just too late to avert the lockdown.
-
Worth reading beyond the headline, to find,for instance, the cheering news that
In the week to 30 October, ONS says new daily infections in England stabilised at around 50,000.
which compares utterly brilliantly with Australia (2 cases per day) and New Zealand (0). Shame on you antipodeans - you aren't even trying!
All the stuff about mental health and delayed operations just underlines what I have been saying since this nonsense began. Back in January, instead of encouraging people to drive to Barnard Castle to test their eyesight, the UK government should have imposed an immediate and thorough national quarantine, and thus prevented the disease from spreading in the first place. You can't negotiate with a virus. The longer you mess around with partial measures, the deeper it gets embedded.
-
The stuff about mental health and infanticide both now and future is about locking down driving people to madness. Just saying a lockdown works doesn't ring true in any European country, even the Czech Republic that did so well last time is now locking down.
All the stuff about mental health and delayed operations just underlines what I have been saying since this nonsense began.
-
So how many cases of longterm disability or early death, due to an entirely preventable disease, is acceptable?
Can you name the one person in your immediate family you want to see hospitalised and disabled? And the one in your extended family you want to die from a COVID-related minor infection? If not, why mine?
Endemic diseases do not go away by themselves. The first and most effective preventive measure against an airborne infection with a human vector is to prevent humans infecting each other. There is no magic in Australia or New Zealand, just very effective quarantine.
You can probably quote a dozen places that got it wrong, for a dozen different reasons of compromise and incompetence. Far more useful to study those who got it right - they all used the same virus.
-
So how many cases of longterm disability or early death, due to an entirely preventable disease, is acceptable?
Can you name the one person in your immediate family you want to see hospitalised and disabled? And the one in your extended family you want to die from a COVID-related minor infection? If not, why mine?
Endemic diseases do not go away by themselves. The first and most effective preventive measure against an airborne infection with a human vector is to prevent humans infecting each other. There is no magic in Australia or New Zealand, just very effective quarantine.
You can probably quote a dozen places that got it wrong, for a dozen different reasons of compromise and incompetence. Far more useful to study those who got it right - they all used the same virus.
That is callous Alan, how many people in your family would you like to see kill their children. I know of one person who is dead due to lockdown and many more who have had trouble. Not quarantining the vulnerable is the problem, rather than a fits and starts of destroying the wellbeing of the national viability.
Why did the first lockdown not work? Why is South Korea and its excellent track and trace, medical provision and fastidious antipathogen psyche still experienceiNG cases?
-
Why is South Korea and its excellent track and trace, medical provision and fastidious antipathogen psyche still experienceiNG cases?
Because their last pandemic was around 2015, and it is still fresh in their memory.
... and because their contact tracing system has access to the credit card records and phone records of patients and their contacts.
I think that there would be a revolt if we tried that in my country! (At least this year - if aerial transmission of Ebola was possible, I think most people would be prepared to give up their credit card & phone details...)
Why did the first lockdown not work?
You could argue that it did work, flattening the curve and bringing the number of new cases down.
But unless you implement international quarantine, you will be continually introducing new cases throughout the country.
And if people just get tired of masks and social distancing, cases will take off again, requiring a further lockdown.
-
You can't negotiate or compromise with a virus. Until you have a proven effective vaccine, any relaxation of quarantine just allows it to spread again, without limit. The rate of increase may be altered by partial measures, but eventually everyone will get infected.
Note that quarantine means exactly what it says: 40 days' isolation for anyone who may be infected. In fact you can probably succeed with 30 days for COVID. It requires organisation and enforcement, not excuses, lies, or appeals to the magical properties of chlorhexidinie..
I'm not the one being callous here. Those who put "the economy" and "saving Christmas" ahead of preventing 70 years of fear, trepidation and early deaths (that's how long it took to eradicate smallpox, despite an effective vaccine having been known since 1796) are being callous.
But just to appeal to the utterly selfish, you will all be old one day, so if you relax quarantine and let COVID become endemic in the UK, you have a 20% chance of seriously suffering from a nasty infection that you voted for.
The only upside is that we now know the hazards of lockdown, so we should be able to avoid them in a comprehensive quarantine. Probably worth studying the statistics of mental illness etc in those states where they have eliminated COVID.
-
Why is South Korea and its excellent track and trace, medical provision and fastidious antipathogen psyche still experienceiNG cases?
Because their last pandemic was around 2015, and it is still fresh in their memory.
... and because their contact tracing system has access to the credit card records and phone records of patients and their contacts.
I think that there would be a revolt if we tried that in my country! (At least this year - if aerial transmission of Ebola was possible, I think most people would be prepared to give up their credit card & phone details...)
Why did the first lockdown not work?
You could argue that it did work, flattening the curve and bringing the number of new cases down.
But unless you implement international quarantine, you will be continually introducing new cases throughout the country.
And if people just get tired of masks and social distancing, cases will take off again, requiring a further lockdown.
Eboal is exactly the point. Never before in the history of mankind has social distancing etc for pathogenic reasons been mandetory, it has always been on one's own initiative based on personal risk. Regarding Australia, how much worse has the cure been than the virus? In my opi ion it is too early to tell, but it does carry risks. We cannot go on mass lockdown continually, whilst understanding quarantine and contact tracing can work this risks further flareups in future and further lockdown, as has been seen prior to in Korea and Japan. Sweden's approach takes into account the need to live and create, it has been done on a risk basis rather than a need to Rob tomorrow to pay today. The vaccine similar to the flu vaccine is on its way yet we are once again destroying the future.
-
Official statistics to date:
UK COVID cases: 17,500 per million population. Deaths: 730 per million
Sweden COVID cases: 14,800 per million. Deaths: 600 per million
Given that COVID arrived in Sweden a few months later that the UK, they really aren't doing particularly well, even by official statistics. You might make a better argument by finding a better comparator. Try
New Zealand cases: 400 per million Deaths 5 per million
If you can find statistics for the consequent economic, health and welfare disaster in New Zealand, I'd be very interested.
-
Never before in the history of mankind has social distancing etc for pathogenic reasons been mandetory, it has always been on one's own initiative based on personal risk
We have a better understanding of "the tragedy of the commons" and recognise that sometimes you need a law.
-
Never before in the history of mankind has social distancing etc for pathogenic reasons been mandetory,
Except for black death, yellow fever, smallpox, ebola, polio, tuberculosis, norovirus..... with varying degrees of rigour and varying lengths of isolation and quarantine.
The list goes on, and what is historically and currently apparent is that "normal life with social distancing" doesn't work particularly well.
-
Official statistics to date:
UK COVID cases: 17,500 per million population. Deaths: 730 per million
Sweden COVID cases: 14,800 per million. Deaths: 600 per million
Given that COVID arrived in Sweden a few months later that the UK, they really aren't doing particularly well, even by official statistics. You might make a better argument by finding a better comparator. Try
New Zealand cases: 400 per million Deaths 5 per million
If you can find statistics for the consequent economic, health and welfare disaster in New Zealand, I'd be very interested.
Best call the WHO Alan, tell them it started in Britain as Sweden den had cases in March
What that actually say is doing anything else other than what Boris did is preferable.
-
doing anything else other than what Boris did is preferable.
Generally a reasonable assumption.
-
Best call the WHO Alan, tell them it started in Britain as Sweden den had cases in March
I think WHO already know that we had cases in the UK in January, even if you didn't. They also know it began in China, not Britain..
-
What that actually say is doing anything else other than what Boris did is preferable.
Not quite "anything". That term includes the national disaster in the USA. But following the best practice of Australia, New Zealand and even Singapore would be a lot better than pretending it will all go away, or discharging infectious patients into nursing homes.
Indeed if you subtract the nursing home idiocy from the UK record, Sweden is doing extremely badly by comparison.
-
.
Indeed if you subtract the nursing home idiocy from the UK record, Sweden is doing extremely badly by comparison.
Citation needed.
-
Never before in the history of mankind has social distancing etc for pathogenic reasons been mandatory, it has always been on one's own initiative based on personal risk
In the Middle Ages, once a house was known to harbour the Black Death, I understand that those in authority marked the door, restricting movement in and out. That doesn't sound very voluntary to me...
Ships arriving in Venice were forced into isolation for 30 (later 40) days - that wasn't voluntary. Infected citizens were exiled to an island in the lagoon
- London had a nominated hospital for infected patients
- Typhoid Mary in New York was exiled to an island in the harbour
- Ships arriving in Sydney as recently as the 1900s were forced into quarantine if they carried smallpox or a number of other diseases.
In the case of the Black Death, it was this voluntary social distancing that spread it faster.
- Once this Plague arrived in a town, all the residents would get their belongings together, and move to another town
- The rats (and their fleas and the bacterium) hitched a ride with the refugees to other towns, where it broke out too...
- A lockdown and travel restrictions may have been more effective at slowing the spread.
See: https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/plague-black-death-quarantine-history-how-stop-spread/
Let's face it, restrictions have been enforced for more trivial reasons than public safety. Like: your social class, the color of your skin, or your religious or political beliefs... and it's still happening in many places today.
-
Never before in the history of mankind has social distancing etc for pathogenic reasons been mandatory, it has always been on one's own initiative based on personal risk
In the Middle Ages, once a house was known to harbour the Black Death, I understand that those in authority marked the door, restricting movement in and out. That doesn't sound very voluntary to me...
Ships arriving in Venice were forced into isolation for 30 (later 40) days - that wasn't voluntary. Infected citizens were exiled to an island in the lagoon
- London had a nominated hospital for infected patients
- Typhoid Mary in New York was exiled to an island in the harbour
- Ships arriving in Sydney as recently as the 1900s were forced into quarantine if they carried smallpox or a number of other diseases.
In the case of the Black Death, it was this voluntary social distancing that spread it faster.
- Once this Plague arrived in a town, all the residents would get their belongings together, and move to another town
- The rats (and their fleas and the bacterium) hitched a ride with the refugees to other towns, where it broke out too...
- A lockdown and travel restrictions may have been more effective at slowing the spread.
See: https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/plague-black-death-quarantine-history-how-stop-spread/
Let's face it, restrictions have been enforced for more trivial reasons than public safety. Like: your social class, the color of your skin, or your religious or political beliefs... and it's still happening in many places today.
That's the difference between quarantine (plague x on the door) of suspected cases and social distancing as in the rich running for the hills and leaving the poor to withdraw from socialising.
-
.
Indeed if you subtract the nursing home idiocy from the UK record, Sweden is doing extremely badly by comparison.
Citation needed.
You could start with https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/deathsinvolvingcovid19inthecaresectorenglandandwales/deathsoccurringupto1may2020andregisteredupto9may2020provisional
and do the calculations for yourself.
But the statistics come from the UK government, and you don't believe those from the Swedish government, so why accept these?
-
.
Indeed if you subtract the nursing home idiocy from the UK record, Sweden is doing extremely badly by comparison.
Citation needed.
You could start with https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/deathsinvolvingcovid19inthecaresectorenglandandwales/deathsoccurringupto1may2020andregisteredupto9may2020provisional
and do the calculations for yourself.
But the statistics come from the UK government, and you don't believe those from the Swedish government, so why accept these?
Non follow.
Sweden is doing slightly better than us without lockdown from a common start point. Amazingly its cases trough and peak without the need for lockdown. As a counter example The Czech Republic, ducked the first wave with face masks etcetc yet 400,000 cases and 420 deaths per 1 million people versus Sweden 525. The Czechs are in a far worse position at present to boot registering 200 fatalities per day versus swedens 4. One must shame the Czechs too for not being Australia, even though it does partake in wellness destroying lockdowns. It begins to look like face cverings do not work yet heard in unity seems to be.
-
It begins to look like face cverings do not work yet heard in unity seems to be.
Tosh.
No country has a high enough level of exposure, never mind immunity to demonstrate whether herd immunity works or not.
If it wa going to work, it could only do so after almost everyone had been exposed.
That hasn't happened so there's no way you can claim that herd immunity exists, never mind that it's working.
On the other hand, the evidence
http://ftp.iza.org/dp13319.pdf
shows that face coverings do work.
So, why tell the lies?
-
So the Czechs are well into a second wave, having done much better than the Swedes in the first wave, thanks in part to wearing face masks. And as you can see from their government statistics, the Swedes are just beginning their second wave.
That's the problem with science - it's kind of inexorable. As of last Thursday:
"We have a very serious situation," Prime Minister Stefan Löfven warned, adding that the virus was "going in the wrong direction".
How very inconsiderate of it.
The maximum number of people allowed to sit together in a cafe or restaurant is eight people.
Stricter restrictions have been introduced in the regions of Halland, Örebo and Jönköping including a work from home order and the premier urged Swedes to avoid using public transport.
Almost 70 per cent of the 10.5million people who live in the Nordic country are now under the voluntary government guidelines.
And so the government learns, at the expense of the dead.
At present, about 0.2 - 0.3% of the UK population has been infected with COVID. You need to reach about 80% infection before herd immunity becomes significant, with 2.7 million excess deaths occurring en route in the UK - 6 times the WWII casualty figure. Only a corrupt politician would wish for such a trajectory, and the USA is well on the way.
-
So the Czechs are well into a second wave, having done much better than the Swedes in the first wave, thanks in part to wearing face masks. And as you can see from their government statistics, the Swedes are just beginning their second wave.
That's the problem with science - it's kind of inexorable. As of last Thursday:
Just beginning, as in not started yet, as in no 2nd wave, plus you have once again sidestepped the points of why do the swedes have a trough at all, considering they have consistently bucked your advice and the point of The Czechs even though following your advice being not much better off than your own UK?
"We have a very serious situation," Prime Minister Stefan Löfven warned, adding that the virus was "going in the wrong direction".
How very inconsiderate of it.
The maximum number of people allowed to sit together in a cafe or restaurant is eight people.
Stricter restrictions have been introduced in the regions of Halland, Örebo and Jönköping including a work from home order and the premier urged Swedes to avoid using public transport.
Almost 70 per cent of the 10.5million people who live in the Nordic country are now under the voluntary government guidelines.
And so the government learns, at the expense of the dead.
At present, about 0.2 - 0.3% of the UK population has been infected with COVID. You need to reach about 80% infection before herd immunity becomes significant, with 2.7 million excess deaths occurring en route in the UK - 6 times the WWII casualty figure. Only a corrupt politician would wish for such a trajectory, and the USA is well on the way.
Armageddon hellfire death death death, or vitamin terror once again just like your nemesis Trump to divert from the point that the Swedes are not using face coverings, have 8 in groups in pubs and have had no lockdown, yet your obedient Czechs are more than likely to be worse. How so? Could it be herd immunity and shielding?
-
If you can't be bothered to look at the Swedish government's published data, or learn the simplest facts about herd immunity, I can't be bothered to tell you why you are wrong.
-
If you can't be bothered to look at the Swedish government's published data, or learn the simplest facts about herd immunity, I can't be bothered to tell you why you are wrong.
No, you can't be bothered to prove yourself wrong nor admit that a managed outbreak is a far better way to go that the all or nothing of Australia and Czech republic or the live and let die approach of USA Or Brazil or the Chinese model of absolute state control whose figures seem awfully dubious for a population of 1.6G.
I will admit one thing though, if this where Ebola I would not want it managed this way. We do need to learn if anything else about disease management like the Asian countries ha e done, but we need to learn more also.
-
managed outbreak
Oxymoron of the week.
-
Could it be herd immunity
No It could not
Are you an idiot, or just too rude to actually read people's replies to your posts?
Tosh.
No country has a high enough level of exposure, never mind immunity to demonstrate whether herd immunity works or not.
If it wa going to work, it could only do so after almost everyone had been exposed.
That hasn't happened so there's no way you can claim that herd immunity exists, never mind that it's working.
-
Chicken need no training to attack people they even occasionally kill infants or old folk
-
True, but you can train dogs to selectively seek out explosives or not kill the sheep they are herding. So how can I train my chickens to only attack idiots and innumerates?
-
The Czech Repiblic is a good country to evaluate the effectiveness of masks. They did very well when they adopted masks earlier than the rest of Europe. Then disasterously when they abandoned masks. Of course masks work. OK lots of us don't like wearing them but I don't see the point in pretending that they don't work.
Incidently Sweden leads the world in fortifying foods with vitamin D. We need both masks and vitamin D. They save lives without hurting the ecconomy.
-
The Czech Repiblic is a good country to evaluate the effectiveness of masks. They did very well when they adopted masks earlier than the rest of Europe. Then disasterously when they abandoned masks. Of course masks work. OK lots of us don't like wearing them but I don't see the point in pretending that they don't work.
Incidently Sweden leads the world in fortifying foods with vitamin D. We need both masks and vitamin D. They save lives without hurting the ecconomy.
2 points
They have not abandoned masks, they stopped for a time
They have implemented strict curtailments of the public liberty despite being so good at usilising masks.
-
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-answers/vitamin-d-toxicity/faq-20058108 is a good read.