• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Covid-19 - Treatments & Vaccines

2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
So 45 out of 100,000 versus 73 out of 100,000. Are you serious? I'm sure glad the other 99,927 did their part.
Click to expand...

You spread that across the approximately 60,000,000 under 12 kids in the US and we are talking about 20,000 few Covid infected households. So that would be, what, 30,000 fewer infected parents, and all the people those parents would have spread it too. With an R0 of 2.5 for omicron 20K fewer infected kids via school could pretty quickly mean over 100k fewer infections which means thousands of fewer deaths.
 
birdman said:
You spread that across the approximately 60,000,000 under 12 kids in the US and we are talking about 20,000 few Covid infected households. So that would be, what, 30,000 fewer infected parents, and all the people those parents would have spread it too. With an R0 of 2.5 for omicron 20K fewer infected kids via school could pretty quickly mean over 100k fewer infections which means thousands of fewer deaths.
Click to expand...

Even if your extrapolation is correct, the #science estimate of the Omicron death rate is 9 out of every 1,000 infected (which is arguably high given that Omicron is so mild that plenty of positive cases go unnoticed). https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e4.htm?s_cid=mm7104e4_w

So you're affecting the learning of 60,000,000 kids for an entire school year, resulting in ~1,000 more total deaths from Covid, a good portion of whom (a) have chosen to assume the risk of their own volition, or (b) have extensive comorbidities that likely would have gotten them soon anyway. In a country in which over 9,000 people die every single day under normal circumstances.

I understand the concern on a very micro level, but from a national public policy and risk tolerance perspective this has been botched beyond belief. The science does not support the policy that purports to rely on the science. Then people act surprised when others lack faith in the science.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Even if your extrapolation is correct, the #science estimate of the Omicron death rate is 9 out of every 1,000 infected (which is arguably high given that Omicron is so mild that plenty of positive cases go unnoticed). https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e4.htm?s_cid=mm7104e4_w

So you're affecting the learning of 60,000,000 kids for an entire school year, resulting in ~1,000 more total deaths from Covid, a good portion of whom (a) have chosen to assume the risk of their own volition, or (b) have extensive comorbidities that likely would have gotten them soon anyway. In a country in which over 9,000 people die every single day under normal circumstances.

I understand the concern on a very micro level, but from a national public policy and risk tolerance perspective this has been botched beyond belief. The science does not support the policy that purports to rely on the science. Then people act surprised when others lack faith in the science.
Click to expand...

What disruption to the 60,000 million kids are you talking about?...because the cited study from Highland was simply suggesting that school mask mandates and social distancing would lead to a reduction in school community spread, which by my math could have saved 1000s of lives. Are you suggesting that wearing a mask and setting the desks further apart is is really going to negatively effect the learning of 60,000,000 million kids for an entire school year? I will admit that the question "does the burden of prevention out weight the negatives of not preventing?" is a legit question to ask?...but in this case no one has demonstrated a significant burden of making people or kids wear masks in indoor settings. So, even if ultimately the benefits are small, as far as I can tell, the costs are zero.
 
Yeah not even close to 60 million, we have already established masks only effect the hearing impaired and society doesn’t give a shit about the disabled, must be an evolution thing.
 
ConnorEl said:
There's little doubt that public fatigue with the pandemic (understandable) is affecting these blended (scientific/political) decisions.
Click to expand...

It's a mystery how the public became fatigued with all of the "scientific" decisions:

 
Just can't quite put my finger on it...

 
It’s too bad we didn’t know everything from the beginning.

Sure hope we stop learning soon.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Tell me you don’t understand the scientific method
Click to expand...

When the people with the "fart in your drawers" analogies about cloth masks were obviously and ultimately correct from the beginning, then, yes, there will be some pushback on incorporating the scientific method into public policy.
 
Yes, the real villians in all of this are medical professionals like Fauci and the doctors at the CDC. The heroes are the people who pushed remedies like horse paste on the gullible, all those right-wing talk radio hosts who spun fake stories about the vaccine and subsequently got covid and died, and all those folks like Laura Ingraham and others at Fox and other right-wing news sites who also spread news of fake cures and other disinformation. And all of those people who just melted down when told they needed to wear a fucking mask to help prevent the spread of the disease. They're the good guys in all of this. It's the mainstream medical experts who are the enemy - why can't everyone see this?
 
birdman said:
What disruption to the 60,000 million kids are you talking about?...because the cited study from Highland was simply suggesting that school mask mandates and social distancing would lead to a reduction in school community spread, which by my math could have saved 1000s of lives. Are you suggesting that wearing a mask and setting the desks further apart is is really going to negatively effect the learning of 60,000,000 million kids for an entire school year? I will admit that the question "does the burden of prevention out weight the negatives of not preventing?" is a legit question to ask?...but in this case no one has demonstrated a significant burden of making people or kids wear masks in indoor settings. So, even if ultimately the benefits are small, as far as I can tell, the costs are zero.
Click to expand...

You seriously think there has been no disruption? So are you cool with masking in school full time going forward to prevent the obvious marginal impact on season flu deaths? I mean if there is no disruption, why not?
 
birdman said:
What disruption to the 60,000 million kids are you talking about?...because the cited study from Highland was simply suggesting that school mask mandates and social distancing would lead to a reduction in school community spread, which by my math could have saved 1000s of lives. Are you suggesting that wearing a mask and setting the desks further apart is is really going to negatively effect the learning of 60,000,000 million kids for an entire school year? I will admit that the question "does the burden of prevention out weight the negatives of not preventing?" is a legit question to ask?...but in this case no one has demonstrated a significant burden of making people or kids wear masks in indoor settings. So, even if ultimately the benefits are small, as far as I can tell, the costs are zero.
Click to expand...

my personal worldview, being shaped by close relationships with several educators, is that the cost of masking especially K-2 students is, without question, greater than zero. Whether that cost is greater than the cost of being unmasked is certainly worthy of debate.

I suggest you read this article (maybe you already have and concluded that you disagree)
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
When the people with the "fart in your drawers" analogies about cloth masks were obviously and ultimately correct from the beginning, then, yes, there will be some pushback on incorporating the scientific method into public policy.
Click to expand...

What is the “fart in your drawers” analogy?

All masks work to filter some degree of aerosolized viral particles. How one wears a mask is even more important than the type of mask. You can triple mask n95s and it will make no difference if you pull them down every time you talk to someone up close to you.
 
ConnorEl said:
It’s too bad we didn’t know everything from the beginning.

Sure hope we stop learning soon.
Click to expand...

Well with the masks... it is pretty evident that they did know enough from the beginning to understand that masking was effective. They lied to us to try and prevent a run on masks and protect them for front line workers.
 
They also didn’t want people thinking they could just get a mask a carry on as normal for the 2-4 weeks they thought this would last.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Well with the masks... it is pretty evident that they did know enough from the beginning to understand that masking was effective. They lied to us to try and prevent a run on masks and protect them for front line workers.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure that’s evident. No doubt they didn’t want a run on masks to the point there were none available for medical staff, but in the beginning ID researchers weren’t as convinced that the virus was aerosolized. They had us wiping down everything, which we now know isn’t necessary because it’s mainly airborne spread. I think the initial idea of fomite spread came from cruise ship studies, where some virus was detected on surfaces hours after exposure.
 
Rafi said:
I’m not sure that’s evident. No doubt they didn’t want a run on masks to the point there were none available for medical staff, but in the beginning ID researchers weren’t as convinced that the virus was aerosolized. They had us wiping down everything, which we now know isn’t necessary because it’s mainly airborne spread. I think the initial idea of fomite spread came from cruise ship studies, where some virus was detected on surfaces hours after exposure.
Click to expand...

Didn't you say previously that you were first asked to mask up at work in March 2020?
 
PhDeac said:
They also didn’t want people thinking they could just get a mask a carry on as normal for the 2-4 weeks they thought this would last.
Click to expand...

Oh, cool, the government lied to us for our good. That's fine then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top