Uptick in COVID-19 infections is seasonal, will drop in February

[10tazione]

The point is, if you go to villages in Pakistan and hand them out masks and tell them to wear them, and it turns out it is not effective, you cannot conclude that masks are not effective, you can at best conclude that going to the village and telling them to wear masks is not effective (no big suprise to me). I know there were other measurements too, that can make the result only less reliable regarding masks.

This study was part of the metaanalis you cited.

[unicorn]

15 hours ago, 10tazione said:

The point is, if you go to villages in Pakistan and hand them out masks and tell them to wear them, and it turns out it is not effective, you cannot conclude that masks are not effective, you can at best conclude that going to the village and telling them to wear masks is not effective (no big suprise to me). I know there were other measurements too, that can make the result only less reliable regarding masks.

This study was part of the metaanalis you cited.

The meta-analysis looked at various studies, some of them in tightly-controlled medical settings. Most certainly, it did not back any contention that masks work. That study did include observers to assess compliance. Even with incomplete compliance, one might expect to see some difference. In any case, this is what can be said about our knowledge so far: Yes, it is the case that there is no proof masks have no effect. No, there is no evidence of any effect (beneficial or otherwise). Our current state of knowledge strongly suggests that if there is an effect, the effect is modest--almost certainly no more than 30% (and even that's unlikely). 

Within the range of most probable efficacy (which seem to center near 0%), maximal efficacy is almost not going to be meaningful. I doubt men would wear condoms if their efficacy were around 30% (optimistically), nor would the FDA approve a vaccine that only decreased transmission by 30%. Yes, some people do it just because it makes them feel better, but that's not any evidence of efficacy. 

[10tazione]

 

6 hours ago, unicorn said:

The meta-analysis looked at various studies, some of them in tightly-controlled medical settings.

The meta analisis contains only 2 studies regarding the combo face masks + Covid, non of them in tightly controlled medical setting.

Non of the 2 used pm95 masks

6 hours ago, unicorn said:

I doubt men would wear condoms if their efficacy were around 30% (optimistically),

Thats ridiculous to compare 2 completely different situations! If condoms only had 30% efficacy and there are no better means, some people would wear them, some would stop having sex with strangers and some would continue like before.

On the other hand its difficult to stop using public transport and going to the doctor to avoid Covid, no? Also I cannot install  an air cleaner at the doctors place. So only thing an individual can do is wearing a mask and reduce the odds to get infected, if he wants.

Btw. only in rare circumstances I wear a mask nowadays. But not because of this study!

 

 

 

[10tazione]

If a study asks the question "Is the wood green" and finds out "The wood is not green", you cannot conclude "The trees are not green"!

[Moses]

On 12/20/2023 at 5:16 AM, unicorn said:

The latest research from late 2022 and 2023 has shown that masks do not provide significant protection from infection.

Masks have never protected against infections.

They are needed so that sick people, and those who consider themselves healthy, but are actually in the incubation period of the disease, do not spread viruses while coughing/sneezing/talking along with their saliva, and not to protect healthy people. This was especially important when Covid had a 14-day incubation period.

[reader]

3 hours ago, Moses said:

Masks have never protected against infections.

I guess all those doctors, nurses and emergency medical technicians were all misinformed. Thank God the proprietor of Siam Roads Guides has stepped forward to set them all straight. 🙄

[Moses]

3 hours ago, reader said:

I guess all those doctors, nurses and emergency medical technicians were all misinformed.

They use masks for not to distribute infections from one patient to another. And if you ask any doctor who worked during the peak of Covid, he will confirm that he had Covid several times and not a single mask protected him. If masks protected against viruses, why would this be necessary?

 

[Moses]

You don’t think that surgeons wear masks so as not to get infected from the person being operated on, right? Or is that exactly what you think?

[reader]

I couldn't know because I'm not a DMN--Doctor of Medical Nonsense-- like you. 😅

 

[Moses]

21 minutes ago, reader said:

I couldn't know because I'm not a DMN--Doctor of Medical Nonsense-- like you.

Well, I’m glad to see that you didn’t have any arguments in favor of your “theory”, since instead of a reasoned answer I read a banal switch to my personality.

[reader]

No, Moses, not at all about your personality. It's about your total lack of expertise on medical matters.

[Travelingguy]

Hey, guess who I found a picture of?

[Keithambrose]

14 hours ago, 10tazione said:

If a study asks the question "Is the wood green" and finds out "The wood is not green", you cannot conclude "The trees are not green"!

Logical positivism, eh!

[unicorn]

7 hours ago, Moses said:

...And if you ask any doctor who worked during the peak of Covid, he will confirm that he had Covid several times and not a single mask protected him...

Well, I met one young Mexican physician whom I hired to come travel with me in the US in 2021. He did contract the virus a couple of times (he had to work inside the hospital, as a resident physician), and yes, he wore masks and protective gear assiduously. One physician who responded to this thread said he worked in the ER during 2020 and didn't contract it then. One cannot be certain why the difference, but a rational explanation could be the difference in the work settings' ventilation designs. I'm not aware of any study which compares healthcare workers' infection rates in different countries. Such a study might provide clues. 

[reader]

On 12/19/2023 at 9:16 PM, unicorn said:

It has also been known for a longer period of time that this virus is not transmitted from surfaces, so hand-washing also does not seem to provide protection from respiratory viruses either.

An alternative way of saying the same thing is that the studies you cite are unable to demonstrate that it does provide protection. But hands washing may be effective in reducing the incidence of infection. Neither conclusion can be "proven" because you can't prove a negative.

On 12/19/2023 at 9:16 PM, unicorn said:

The latest research from late 2022 and 2023 has shown that masks do not provide significant protection from infection.

The same rules of logic apply. Masks then do provide some level of protection but it may or may not be significant--and significant of course is a very subjective number.. For example, if we assume that masks only provided 22% protection than I'll take my chances and wear the mask. This is why people go to Vegas: they don't always win but some do. Also the rationale many late-stage cancer patients take the newest drug knowing that not all will have successful outcomes.

On 12/19/2023 at 9:16 PM, unicorn said:

The two interventions which appear to offer good protection and (1) good ventilation/air exchange (indoor locations), and, of course (2) vaccination. The effective air exchange in most modern airplanes explains why we weren't hearing about outbreaks from plane flights (although planes obviously hold many people in very close quarters). Hopefully, cruise ship companies are also getting the message regarding the importance of effective ventilation. It is extremely rare for vaccinated individuals to get seriously ill (unless severely immunocompromised). 

I agree with both conclusions. Newer aircraft, and older aircraft retrofitted with high-efficiency HEPA air filtration systems do exchange air at fairly rapid intervals and do a good job of cleansing it but only IF those systems are rigorously maintained and filters changed on schedule. The same principle applies to ventilation systems on cruise ships. But other studies have demonstrated that the vast majority of school rooms have inadequate HVAC systems relative to air filtration. Given these  realities, it's only prudent to wear masks  even if they don't provide full protection.

On 12/19/2023 at 10:06 PM, floridarob said:

However, it does from so many other things, Norovirus for example, handwashing is a good habit to get into, anti-bacterial gel and other stuff like that, contributes to antibacterial resistance  .

Not touching your nose/mouth with your hands is a huge transmitter of germs....try to keep track how often you do that subconsciously in 30 minutes, then imagine a day.

The incidence of norovirus outbreaks on cruise ships was well established long before Covid came on the scene. It's spread mainly through surface contact as Floridrob states above (and he's probably spent more time on such vessels than anyone here). When Covid arrived, it likewise spread very efficiently on cruise ships

I believe that many posters here have provided evidence that boils down to this: we can prevent the spread of the virus if both human behavior and both active and passive systems perform at peak efficiency. But vaccination offers the single best form of protection IF humans are in compliance.

[reader]

On 12/19/2023 at 9:16 PM, unicorn said:

It has also been known for a longer period of time that this virus is not transmitted from surfaces, so hand-washing also does not seem to provide protection from respiratory viruses either.

An alternative way of saying the same thing is that the studies you cite are unable to demonstrate that it does provide protection. But hands washing may be effective in reducing the incidence of infection. Neither conclusion can be "proven" because you can't prove a negative.

On 12/19/2023 at 9:16 PM, unicorn said:

The latest research from late 2022 and 2023 has shown that masks do not provide significant protection from infection.

The same rules of logic apply. Masks then do provide some level of protection but it may or may not be significant--and significant of course is a very subjective number.. For example, if we assume that masks only provided 22% protection than I'll take my chances and wear the mask. This is why people go to Vegas: they don't always win but some do. Also the rationale many late-stage cancer patients take the newest drug knowing that not all will have successful outcomes.

On 12/19/2023 at 9:16 PM, unicorn said:

The two interventions which appear to offer good protection and (1) good ventilation/air exchange (indoor locations), and, of course (2) vaccination. The effective air exchange in most modern airplanes explains why we weren't hearing about outbreaks from plane flights (although planes obviously hold many people in very close quarters). Hopefully, cruise ship companies are also getting the message regarding the importance of effective ventilation. It is extremely rare for vaccinated individuals to get seriously ill (unless severely immunocompromised). 

I agree with both conclusions. Newer aircraft, and older aircraft retrofitted with high-efficiency HEPA air filtration systems do exchange air at fairly rapid intervals and do a good job of cleansing it but only IF those systems are rigorously maintained and filters changed on schedule. The same principle applies to ventilation systems on cruise ships. But other studies have demonstrated that the vast majority of school rooms have inadequate HVAC systems relative to air filtration. Given these  realities, it's only prudent to wear masks  even if they don't provide full protection.

On 12/19/2023 at 10:06 PM, floridarob said:

However, it does from so many other things, Norovirus for example, handwashing is a good habit to get into, anti-bacterial gel and other stuff like that, contributes to antibacterial resistance  .

Not touching your nose/mouth with your hands is a huge transmitter of germs....try to keep track how often you do that subconsciously in 30 minutes, then imagine a day.

The incidence of norovirus outbreaks on cruise ships was well established long before Covid came on the scene. It's spread mainly through surface contact as Floridrob states above (and he's probably spent more time on such vessels than anyone here). When Covid arrived, it likewise spread very efficiently on cruise ships via multiple vectors of transmission.

I believe that many posters here have provided evidence that boils down to this: we can prevent the spread of the virus if both human behavior and both active and passive systems perform at peak efficiency. But vaccination offers the single best form of protection IF humans are in compliance.

[Moses]

21 hours ago, reader said:

It's about your total lack of expertise on medical matters.

Is this your declaration based on..? Oh , sorry, you haven't any base for such declaration. Just hopes maybe? Or dreams?

[reader]

No, cogent arguments and the rules of logic. But I well appreciate why that challenges your reasoning.

[unicorn]

5 hours ago, reader said:

...Masks then do provide some level of protection but it may or may not be significant--and significant of course is a very subjective number.. For example, if we assume that masks only provided 22% protection than I'll take my chances and wear the mask. This is why people go to Vegas: they don't always win but some do. Also the rationale many late-stage cancer patients take the newest drug knowing that not all will have successful outcomes...

There is ZERO evidence at this point that masks provide ANY level of protection against SARS-CoV2. The confidence intervals include both harm and help, so it's possible that masks increase the risk. In fact, one of the meta-analyses showed a relative risk of 1.01. Comparisons with casino gambling do not support your argument. Gambling against the casino with the expectation to come ahead is irrational. Coming out ahead is possible but unlikely. Comparisons with cancer chemotherapy are also irrational. While chemo provides no guarantees, those medications have been been proven to extend life in large studies. The alternative is usually certain death. 

People frequently take actions just to allay fears without proven benefit. Rhinoceroses may be going extinct because of the myth that their horns, taken in powdered form, may help with erections. This is despite the fact that rhino horns are simply made of keratin, the same material as fingernails or hair. One cannot prove something which isn't true by using irrational "arguments." Facts are discovered through scientific scrutiny, not sophistry. The fact that people can and do at times act irrationally doesn't prove anything.

[reader]

We agree to disagree on this one.