Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#91,302
#91,302
Volgolfer1618 said:
Cdc admits masks don't work.
CDC report admits mask-wearing provides no real protection against Covid
Click to expand...

I read through the study a few days ago and this is not a great representation.

That said, the net benefit from masks was low - it was stated as a percentage point reduction in growth rate of cases (confusing) but the upshot is that places with mask mandates had 1.something percentage point lower growth in cases so if a non-mask mandate area saw case growth of 15% a mask mandate area might have been 13.something percent.

so they have a small effect
 
#91,303
#91,303
volinbham said:
I read through the study a few days ago and this is not a great representation.

That said, the net benefit from masks was low - it was stated as a percentage point reduction in growth rate of cases (confusing) but the upshot is that places with mask mandates had 1.something percentage point lower growth in cases so if a non-mask mandate area saw case growth of 15% a mask mandate area might have been 13.something percent.

so they have a small effect
Click to expand...
Seems hardly significant from a statistical standpoint.

This morning I went to a VW dealership on the N side of Houston to look at some cars and was met outside the front door by a salesman dude wearing a mask. I asked him did I need a mask to go inside and he said yes, so I donned the dang thing but once inside I couldn’t help but notice that most of the staff in the showroom were maskless. I mean WTF?
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#91,304
#91,304
volinbham said:
I read through the study a few days ago and this is not a great representation.

That said, the net benefit from masks was low - it was stated as a percentage point reduction in growth rate of cases (confusing) but the upshot is that places with mask mandates had 1.something percentage point lower growth in cases so if a non-mask mandate area saw case growth of 15% a mask mandate area might have been 13.something percent.

so they have a small effect
Click to expand...

Does that really prove the mask itself has an effect? Or is it possible that mask mandated areas are more restrictive on all parts of life, thus created more seclusion in general. So the masks dont cause the reduction, but the overall attitude of that area and those behaviors create the lower growth?
 
#91,305
#91,305
RavinDave said:
Seems hardly significant from a statistical standpoint.

This morning I went to a VW dealership on the N side of Houston to look at some cars and was met outside the front door by a salesman dude wearing a mask. I asked him did I need a mask to go inside and he said yes, so I donned the dang thing but once inside I couldn’t help but notice that most of the staff in the showroom were maskless. I mean WTF?
Click to expand...

well it was statistically significant. what I found missing in the study was the % growth it was compared against. If case growth rate was 3% then masks basically cut that in half. If the case growth rate was 20% then masks had little impact.
 
#91,306
#91,306
allvol123 said:
Does that really prove the mask itself has an effect? Or is it possible that mask mandated areas are more restrictive on all parts of life, thus created more seclusion in general. So the masks dont cause the reduction, but the overall attitude of that area and those behaviors create the lower growth?
Click to expand...

you'd have to read the study. they also looked at indoor dining and it had a larger effect (about double that of masking). but to answer the question it does seem to isolate the mask effect.

overall, I'm betting you don't hear much about this study since it doesn't show masks as being effective at stopping case growth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: allvol123
#91,307
#91,307
volinbham said:
well it was statistically significant. what I found missing in the study was the % growth it was compared against. If case growth rate was 3% then masks basically cut that in half. If the case growth rate was 20% then masks had little impact.
Click to expand...
I do believe they can help limit the spread. And I respect the right of a business establishment to request/require customers to wear them. But if customers are told to wear them yet most of the staff are not wearing them, that’s f’d up.
 
#91,310
#91,310
Remember, not a 1% reduction in case numbers, a 1% reduction in the case growth rate. I.e.: cases still skyrocketed, but by 1% less in the counties with a mandate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#91,311
#91,311
kiddiedoc said:
Remember, not a 1% reduction in case numbers, a 1% reduction in the case growth rate. I.e.: cases still skyrocketed, but by 1% less in the counties with a mandate.
Click to expand...
If the people that conducted this study aren’t double doctorates in statistics and epidemiology I’m not reading it.
 
#91,313
#91,313
kiddiedoc said:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7010e3-H.pdf

If anyone wants to read the actual MMWR release. A 1% reduction in case growth rate does not impress anyone.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my problem with the study as I read it was they never said what the case growth rate baseline was. As I said earlier, 3% case growth rate vs 1.2% is a major impact and a sign masks are highly effective. A 20% case growth rate vs a 17.2% one isn't much of a story and a 40% case growth rate vs a 38.2% is a nothing burger
 
#91,315
#91,315
#91,317
#91,317
volfanhill said:
Just to play devils advocate, many counties don't have mask mandates but the vast majority of people have been wearing them anyway. For example where I live in Georgia. Wouldn't that skew the difference?
Click to expand...

it's a good point - the study doesn't establish that mask mandates themselves had much (though statistically significant) impact. It doesn't tell us much about mask vs no mask wearing behavior.
 
#91,318
#91,318
volinbham said:
Yeah, my problem with the study as I read it was they never said what the case growth rate baseline was. As I said earlier, 3% case growth rate vs 1.2% is a major impact and a sign masks are highly effective. A 20% case growth rate vs a 17.2% one isn't much of a story and a 40% case growth rate vs a 38.2% is a nothing burger
Click to expand...
It would be really nice to see raw case numbers for comparison. I saw them a while back for East Tennessee counties with and without mask mandates, and there was absolutely no difference.
 
#91,319
#91,319
It would also be nice to see what happened in neighboring areas that did not enact mandates for the exact same time periods.

Honestly, this is kind of a nonsense report, the more I read it.
 
#91,321
#91,321
volinbham said:
Hard to imagine why people may not be in a hurry to get it...
Click to expand...

Shocking, isn't it?

I've said since day one of this thing, the CDC and NIH will blow their wad on Covid and when something really bad comes along, people will be hesitant to believe how dangerous it truly is. As viruses go, Covid is pretty tame for the most part. Yeah, it's deadly in certain age brackets and with underlying conditions, but not quite as bad as they let on in the spring of last year.

The problem is, when we get something really virulent that comes out (heaven forbid a hemorrhagic fever of some sort) and the CDC starts freaking out (which they should), people are going to eye roll because of the way they acted this time and drag out their neck gators and value pack of surgical style masks that won't stop a thing while being reluctant to close businesses once again and destroy their livelihood... once again.

And the public is going to get screwed over it because idiots like Fauci and others decided to go overboard with something that really wasn't as bad as they let on. Yeah, given certain parameters, Covid is bad. But not that bad and there is certainly worse. The problem is, now that they've cried wolf, we can easily suffer a lot more because people won't know if this is the one they need to worry about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave and allvol123
#91,323
#91,323
volfanhill said:
How do you go to these sources for news? It's laughable. It's as bad as mother Jones.
Click to expand...
You eventually get to the CDC document. But, like kiddiedoc pointed out, the CDC essentially confirmed that mask usage had very little positive impact.
 
#91,324
#91,324
kiddiedoc said:
It would also be nice to see what happened in neighboring areas that did not enact mandates for the exact same time periods.

Honestly, this is kind of a nonsense report, the more I read it.
Click to expand...
kiddiedoc said:
It would be really nice to see raw case numbers for comparison. I saw them a while back for East Tennessee counties with and without mask mandates, and there was absolutely no difference.
Click to expand...
Another variable that is unaccounted for is adherence to a mask mandate and I’m guessing that in a place like east TN the adherence rate is pretty low.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top