1036 replies to this topic

[Mind]

 

 

Your old-and-obese argument is suspect

 

Seems pretty straightforward to understand. What part of "suspect" do I not understand.

 

COVID mortality is clearly and dramatically linked with obesity and age throughout the world. It is not unreasonable to expect areas of the world with higher elderly populations (northern Italy, for example) or higher obesity (southern U.S., for example), to have worse COVID outcomes on average. To say there could not possibly any connection seems just kind-of strange.

[Florin]

Here's the context:
 

More states are lifting mask restrictions. Texas, Mississippi, Connecticut, Iowa, etc... I suspect they look around and see that the mask mandates did nearly nothing to stop the spread, as evidenced by states like Florida and South Dakota, that never instituted the statewide mask and other ineffective NPI mandates, and ended up the same or even better.

 

In addition the map only shows raw numbers, no controls for health status and/or age. It is not surprising that Colorado did better during this pandemic considering it is often ranked as having the healthiest population in the nation. The deep south has the most obese citizens (Florida one of the oldest), and COVID mortality is highly correlated with age, obesity, and health status.

 
You're claiming that NPIs are ineffective, because if health and age are also considered, there's no big difference between states that had more NPIs and states that had less.
 

Your old-and-obese argument is suspect. For instance, you can compare California to the hardest hit Northeastern states or Sweden to Finland and Norway.

 
In other words, you're claiming that the covid death rate should be the same regardless of NPIs and the only reason California seemed to do better than Florida is that its population was less old and obese. This is what I referred to as your "old-and-obese argument."
 
My claim is that this old-and-obese argument is suspect, because there are older populations which did better than younger populations (Maine versus California) and younger populations which did worse than older populations (Sweden versus Finland). If NPIs are really useless, places with older pops should always do worse than places with younger pops, but that's not what's happening.

 

Maybe you can save your argument by adjusting for obesity, but I'm not sure how conclusive that would be, so I haven't look at any of those stats.

Edited by Florin, 13 March 2021 - 01:12 AM.

[Hebbeh]

Fact check: CDC study links mask mandates to slowed COVID infections (usatoday.com)

 

A new study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found a link between face mask mandates and a reduction in COVID-19 cases and deaths, but at least one widely shared report wrongly interprets that data.

 

One America News Network on March 7 published an article under the headline “CDC: Face masks don’t prevent COVID-19, study finds masks have negligible impact on coronavirus numbers.” The post claims “the CDC has admitted face masks do little to prevent the spread of COVID-19 amid mounting pressure to lift mask mandates across the U.S.”

 

However, the CDC’s study doesn’t say that. In fact, it doesn't study mask efficacy at all. Instead, it links mask mandates to “statistically significant decreases in county-level daily COVID-19 case and death growth rates within 20 days of implementation.”

 

“Over the course of the pandemic, the scientific evidence and our understanding of masks have grown. The data we now have conclusively show that widespread use of masks is a very effective way to reduce the spread of COVID-19,” CDC spokeswoman Jasmine Reed wrote in an email to USA TODAY.

 

The authors found that the growth rate of new COVID-19 cases and deaths dropped after mask mandates were put in place.

 

In the first 20 days after implementing mask mandates, new cases slowed by 0.5 percentage points. They continued to fall over the 100 days analyzed in the study. COVID-19 death rates dropped by 0.7 percentage points in the first 20 days after masks were required.

 

Decreases in the rate of new infections and deaths from the virus were statistically significant, the study’s authors found.

 

“Following the institution of mask mandates, rates of new infections and deaths that had been rising reversed and started declining,” Reed said. “Immediately after these mandates were instituted, these declines were statistically significant.”

 

The study also found a statistically significant increase in the rate of COVID-19 infections and deaths starting 40 days after indoor or outdoor dining at restaurants was allowed.

 

Experts interviewed by USA TODAY said OAN had "misinterpreted" or "mischaracterized" the findings of the CDC study.

 

 

Rest at link

[Dorian Grey]

A 0.5 - 0.7 reduction isn't exactly eye-popping.  OAN said the effect was negligible, which would seem accurate, though they also said they "don't prevent COVID", which isn't entirely factual.  

 

A tempest in a teapot.  A less than 1% reduction may be impressive overall in populations of hundreds of millions or billions, but hardly a salvation I'd be shouting from the rooftops.  

[Mind]

 

 

Maybe you can save your argument by adjusting for obesity, but I'm not sure how conclusive that would be, so I haven't look at any of those stats.

 

This would not be too hard to do since there are only 200 or so countries in the world and most keep health stats on things like obesity. I was just eye-balling the chart you provided and the most obese states in the U.S. popped out as a concentration of higher mortality wrt COVID. In addition, SE Asian countries have the lowest obesity rates in the world and also (on average) have much lower COVID mortality. So at a minimalist glance, I don't think it is unreasonable to think that the age and obesity of the underlying population would play a part.

[Daniel Cooper]

Fact check: CDC study links mask mandates to slowed COVID infections (usatoday.com)

 

Rest at link

 

0.7% sounds a lot like what some of us have been saying.  Masks help some, just not that much.

[Hip]

Being obese (BMI over 30) gives you around a 1.5 times increased risk of death if you catch coronavirus. Ref: here.

 

Whereas those in their 70s have a 40 times increased risk of death, compared to younger people aged 10 to 39 years old. Ref: here.

 

 

Thus the increased risk from obesity is pretty small in comparison to the increased risk from age.

[Florin]

This would not be too hard to do since there are only 200 or so countries in the world and most keep health stats on things like obesity. I was just eye-balling the chart you provided and the most obese states in the U.S. popped out as a concentration of higher mortality wrt COVID. In addition, SE Asian countries have the lowest obesity rates in the world and also (on average) have much lower COVID mortality. So at a minimalist glance, I don't think it is unreasonable to think that the age and obesity of the underlying population would play a part.

 

Age is a much larger risk factor than obesity. But, Japan, for instance, has the oldest population in the world, and yet, it has one of the lowest covid cases and death rates in the world. There are many examples like this. You could say that they're exceptions, but if NPIs are really useless there would be no exceptions.

Edited by Florin, 14 March 2021 - 02:53 AM.

[Florin]

0.7% sounds a lot like what some of us have been saying.  Masks help some, just not that much.

 

We actually don't really know because the study seems to have lumped all of the waves together. Masks may have worked a lot better for the first wave but worse (or even increased cases and deaths because people may have social distanced less, for instance) for the third wave.

[Florin]

So, If the vaccine does not work and there are no therapeutics that work consistently, where does that leave us?

 
It leaves us using reusable respirators, something that should have been done since the start of this pandemic.

 

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Japan is also one of the least obese countries in the world ranking 185th out of 191 with a 4.3% obesity rate in 2016. Italy is 107th with 19.9% obesity rate (same chart) or, about 4.6 times the Japanese rate of obesity.

 

Japan and Italy are 1 and 2 in the oldest population category.

 

Japan has a death rate of 6.73 per 100,000 and Italy 168.07 per 100,000.-- Italy has about 25 times the Japanese rate.

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 14 March 2021 - 04:48 AM.

[Daniel Cooper]

Age is a much larger risk factor than obesity. But, Japan, for instance, has the oldest population in the world, and yet, it has one of the lowest covid cases and death rates in the world. There are many examples like this. You could say that they're exceptions, but if NPIs are really useless there would be no exceptions.

 

So you don't reckon it had anything to do with the fact that Japan was already one of the more difficult countries to get an entry visa to prior to the pandemic and almost immediately shut down inbound travel once it started?

[joesixpack]

 
It leaves us using reusable respirators, something that should have been done since the start of this pandemic.

 

Kind of where I was going. We are stuck back where we started. I have been reusing my n95's by leaving them out for several days, in the sun if possible, for a time. They can be recycled, but only for a time. We need therapeutics, this vaccine is not going to do the job.

[Florin]

Kind of where I was going. We are stuck back where we started. I have been reusing my n95's by leaving them out for several days, in the sun if possible, for a time. They can be recycled, but only for a time. We need therapeutics, this vaccine is not going to do the job.

 

You might want to use reusable respirators rather than disposables. Reusables have many advantages over disposables including not having to disinfect their filters.

 

https://www.longecit...ndpost&p=902069

https://www.longecit...ndpost&p=902077

[Daniel Cooper]

 
It leaves us using reusable respirators, something that should have been done since the start of this pandemic.

 

 

Tell me Florin, how many hours a day do you spend wearing a mask like that?
 

[Florin]

Tell me Florin, how many hours a day do you spend wearing a mask like that?

 

Tell me Daniel, how many hours a day have you tried spending wearing a mask like that?

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Considering the fact that the man in the mask photo exhibits Frank's sign

 

https://en.wikipedia...i/Frank's_sign 

 

and thus is at higher risk of dying if infected by COVID-19 than most, I would suggest a greater level of protection. In addition, he should get that mole biopsied.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 15 March 2021 - 12:39 AM.

[Florin]

Japan is also one of the least obese countries in the world ranking 185th out of 191 with a 4.3% obesity rate in 2016. Italy is 107th with 19.9% obesity rate (same chart) or, about 4.6 times the Japanese rate of obesity.
 
Japan and Italy are 1 and 2 in the oldest population category.
 
Japan has a death rate of 6.73 per 100,000 and Italy 168.07 per 100,000.-- Italy has about 25 times the Japanese rate.

Yeah, but age is a WAY bigger factor than obesity, and yet, not a lot of old people have died of covid in Japan. Or look at California versus Maine. Maine has an older and more obese population, yet it has done a better than California. There are numerous examples like this.
 

Being obese (BMI over 30) gives you around a 1.5 times increased risk of death if you catch coronavirus. Ref: here.
 
Whereas those in their 70s have a 40 times increased risk of death, compared to younger people aged 10 to 39 years old. Ref: here.
 
 
Thus the increased risk from obesity is pretty small in comparison to the increased risk from age.

 

[Florin]

So you don't reckon it had anything to do with the fact that Japan was already one of the more difficult countries to get an entry visa to prior to the pandemic and almost immediately shut down inbound travel once it started?

According to Mind, NPIs don't work, except maybe in extreme cases like China where people were physically sealed inside their homes (by welding their doors shut, for instance).

 

Also, Japan has had outbreaks, but it wasn't overrun or take any extreme lockdown measures.

 

Or look at the rest of Asia. There are plenty of old people in every country but not a single one has become a covid hell hole.

[Daniel Cooper]

Tell me Daniel, how many hours a day have you tried spending wearing a mask like that?

 

You're the one advocating for that mask. The burden in on you, not me.

 

And I'll bet I spend more hours masked in a week than you do. Probably at least 50 hours. And I can't image having that thing strapped to my face that long.

 

So what about it? You're the "masks for everyone" advocate. How many hours a week do you spend masked up?

[Florin]

You're the one advocating for that mask. The burden in on you, not me.
 
And I'll bet I spend more hours masked in a week than you do. Probably at least 50 hours. And I can't image having that thing strapped to my face that long.
 
So what about it? You're the "masks for everyone" advocate. How many hours a week do you spend masked up?

 
I've already answered that question in another thread. The answer is that I don't need to spend that much time using a respirator, but a lot of painters, construction and health care workers wear these kinds of respirators a lot, and I'd be surprised if they don't spend hours in them every day. Maybe you won't be able spend 50 hours in a respirator every week, but maybe you could spend 40 hours with frequent breaks. You'll never know if you don't try.

[Daniel Cooper]

 
I've already answered that question in another thread. The answer is that I don't need to spend that much time using a respirator, but a lot of painters, construction and health care workers wear these kinds of respirators a lot, and I'd be surprised if they don't spend hours in them every day. Maybe you won't be able spend 50 hours in a respirator every week, but maybe you could spend 40 hours with frequent breaks. You'll never know if you don't try.

 

Well here's the thing. You've told us how comfortable that mask is in other posts, I think even at one point claiming that it was more comfortable than an N-95 mask.

 

I submit you don't know what you're talking about until you've gotten one and worn it for an extended period of time. Since masks are your thing, why don't you get one and wear one around the house for 8 hrs a day/5 days a week for a month? Then you can speak from experience.

 

I get a little tired of people that aren't inclined to leave the house telling me how lock downs are no issue and people that don't wear masks telling me how comfortable they are.

[Florin]

Well here's the thing. You've told us how comfortable that mask is in other posts, I think even at one point claiming that it was more comfortable than an N-95 mask.
 
I submit you don't know what you're talking about until you've gotten one and worn it for an extended period of time. Since masks are your thing, why don't you get one and wear one around the house for 8 hrs a day/5 days a week for a month? Then you can speak from experience.
 
I get a little tired of people that aren't inclined to leave the house telling me how lock downs are no issue and people that don't wear masks telling me how comfortable they are.

I doubt it would make any difference to you even if I wore a respirator 24/7.

According to one study, health care workers tolerated wearing a reusable respirator for a median of about 7 hours per day. See? It won't eat your face off. I promise.
 
Respirator Tolerance in Health Care Workers
https://www.doi.org/...1/jama.2008.894

Edited by Florin, 15 March 2021 - 07:50 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

I doubt it would make any difference to you even if I wore a respirator 24/7.

According to one study, health care workers tolerated wearing a reusable respirator for a median of about 7 hours per day. See? It won't eat your face off. I promise.
 
Respirator Tolerance in Health Care Workers
https://www.doi.org/...1/jama.2008.894

 
I think you've mischaracterized the results. 17 out of 27 couldn't wear your preferred elastomeric half face respirator for 8 hours. The mean time they would tolerate it was 6.8hrs. And that was only over a single day. 

 

Speaking from experience, these things do not get easier to wear as time goes on. Rashes and skin abrasions take weeks to show. Anyone can put up with something like this for a day. Come back and talk to me after a year.

 

If you'll read the results of this study, it hardly seems positive on the tolerability of wearing these sorts of masks and respirators.
 

 

[smithx]

What's the point of this discussion?

 

Daniel Cooper are you saying that wearing masks at all is dumb because some people can't wear them for 8 hours straight? I hope that's not your point because it would be silly.

 

 

[Florin]

I think you've mischaracterized the results. 17 out of 27 couldn't wear your preferred elastomeric half face respirator for 8 hours. The mean time they would tolerate it was 6.8hrs. And that was only over a single day.

 
I said the median was 7 hours, not 8 hours. That's your mischaracterization. I did say "per day," so that might imply that it was more than a day, but at the time I posted, it wasn't clear to me if the study was for 1 or more days. That's my mistake.

 

A smaller study ran for 2 days, and there were almost no issues with wearing disposable respirators for 12 hour shifts.

 

Physiologic and other effects and compliance with long-term respirator use among medical intensive care unit nurses
https://dx.doi.org/1...jic.2013.02.017

 

Another study compared elastomerics and disposables: "After more than 1 month of use, no healthcare workers chose to return to [disposable] N95 usage."

 

Implementation of an Elastomeric Mask Program as a Strategy to Eliminate Disposable N95 Mask Use and Resterilization: Results from a Large Academic Medical Center
https://doi.org/10.1...urg.2020.05.022
 

Speaking from experience, these things do not get easier to wear as time goes on. Rashes and skin abrasions take weeks to show. Anyone can put up with something like this for a day. Come back and talk to me after a year.

If you're concerned about skin issues, you can just take more frequent breaks. Thousands of health care workers have probably (I don't have a study to cite but it seems a fairly safe assumption to make) worn this stuff for many hours every day during this pandemic, but I haven't heard about their faces falling off. And again, there are many trades (painting, construction, mining, etc.) where wearing respirators for long periods of time every day for years is a requirement.

 

How many hours have you actually sent wearing a reusable respirator? In another comment, you mentioned that you couldn't imaging wearing "that thing." Now you say that one day might be okay. Perhaps your skin is too fragile for regular respirator use, but this doesn't seem to be a common problem.

 

If you'll read the results of this study, it hardly seems positive on the tolerability of wearing these sorts of masks and respirators.

The point is is that they're tolerable enough to be worth using.

 

 

Edited by Florin, 16 March 2021 - 08:36 PM.

[Mind]

Masks were used and mandated during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic (and several since, as researched by the CDC and referenced earlier). https://www.washingt...y-were-useless/ They didn't work very well in 1918 and same thing in 2020.

 

I am saddened to see that past experience and research with masks (and other NPIs) was ignored. In 2020 we had to learn all over again that masks have little effect on the spread of respiratory diseases (outside of a lab or "clean-room" environment). What is unfortunate is that Dr. Fauci, the CDC, and the WHO were spot on early in the pandemic when they all referenced the limitations and problems with general population masking. They knew the past research. They knew that in the real world, it doesn't work too well. I am unsure why or how they were persuaded (or strong-armed) to ignore past experience and research.

 

It is very interesting to see that every time masks are studied and found to have little effect (like last year  - a tiny 1% or so difference in the U.S.), the researchers remark about how mechanistically and "in the lab" it seems like masks should work really well.

Edited by Mind, 16 March 2021 - 08:11 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

What's the point of this discussion?

 

Daniel Cooper are you saying that wearing masks at all is dumb because some people can't wear them for 8 hours straight? I hope that's not your point because it would be silly.

 

I'm saying that the evidence that has been presented here shows a rather small (0.7% in one case) decrease in covid transmission and I'm pointing out that these things are not without downsides.

 

As information has come in showing a small(ish) positive benefit, some have suggested escalating to ever more elaborate masks - up to these reusable half face respirators. They are bulky, they are uncomfortable to wear, and they interfere with communication. I just think it easy for someone that stays at home all day to suggest mandating their use when they have no experience using them for long periods of time day in day out.

 

It's very easy to mandate costs on other people that you yourself will not bear, and I'm not talking primarily about financial costs here. 

 

"It's easy to write checks that others will have to cash".

 

The point is is that they're tolerable enough to be worth using.

 

They are infinitely tolerable if you aren't the one wearing it.

[Florin]

The death blow to the obesity argument is that there just aren't that many covid cases in Asia period.

 

So, the only plausible explanations are NPIs and variants. Asia just happened to get lucky and didn't have to deal with the more contagious variants. The most affected countries did NPIs the earliest which suppressed the spread and the development of variants. It will be interesting to see how long it can last before it's luck runs out.

Edited by Florin, 16 March 2021 - 09:49 PM.

[geo12the]

Masks were used and mandated during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic (and several since, as researched by the CDC and referenced earlier). https://www.washingt...y-were-useless/ They didn't work very well in 1918 and same thing in 2020.

 

I am saddened to see that past experience and research with masks (and other NPIs) was ignored. In 2020 we had to learn all over again that masks have little effect on the spread of respiratory diseases (outside of a lab or "clean-room" environment). What is unfortunate is that Dr. Fauci, the CDC, and the WHO were spot on early in the pandemic when they all referenced the limitations and problems with general population masking. They knew the past research. They knew that in the real world, it doesn't work too well. I am unsure why or how they were persuaded (or strong-armed) to ignore past experience and research.

 

It is very interesting to see that every time masks are studied and found to have little effect (like last year  - a tiny 1% or so difference in the U.S.), the researchers remark about how mechanistically and "in the lab" it seems like masks should work really well.

 

Actually if you look on Pubmed there are tons of papers that show that mask efficacy against respiratory diseases. More positive than negative, so no need to be sad. I believe masks have kept an extremely contagious virus from infecting a large % of the population. 

Edited by geo12the, 17 March 2021 - 01:05 AM.