The Wuhan virus—how are we doing? - Page 134 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Provision of the two UN HDI indicators other than GNP.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15191111
boomerintown wrote:To some degree the behavioural argument about the negative impacts of masks in public is speculation, but there is obviously a common sense reasoning behind it.

But ultimatly, your statement is speculation too. It doesnt follow from masks having certain effects on a very specific micro level to them actually having any significant impact on a macro level.


No. Evidence has already been presented in this thread showing that masks significantly reduce viral transmission.

If masks truly have a significant impact, then why havent this been more obvious in the death counts between different countries?


Because science is not always obvious.

In a YouGov survey in june 2020 the number of people in the nordic countries who said they wore masks were extremly low (I think 2 % in Denmark, Sweden and Finland and 4 % in Norway). The same numbers in other countries were 35 % in Canada, 54 % in France and 59 % in USA.
(https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... k-map.html)

Sure, the numbers have probably changed since that. But have the general attitude towards masks done? In Sweden the vast majority have never worn masks, I was in Copenhagen the other day and it seemed to be the same case there (as was it when I was there the last time in 2020 despite a law dictating that had to wear masks in public transport). These numbers to me seems to suggests that masks in public have virtually no impacts whatsoever?


Again, evidence has already been shown in this thread. Your unsupported speculations are not going to make me dismiss real evidence.
#15191113
Well it is obviously not unsupported. It might be wrong, but unsupported would be claiming bubble gum prevented covid-19. There is obviously both data and a clear reasoning behind what I am claiming.

Now, the arguments are not strong, but it is what I got. If there are strong evidence suggesting otherwise I would change my mind. I obviously dont know what evidence you mean, but I can understand if you dont want to repost something already existing in the thread just because I am new.
#15191115
boomerintown wrote:Well it is obviously not unsupported. It might be wrong, but unsupported would be claiming bubble gum prevented covid-19. There is obviously both data and a clear reasoning behind what I am claiming.

Now, the arguments are not strong, but it is what I got. If there are strong evidence suggesting otherwise I would change my mind. I obviously dont know what evidence you mean, but I can understand if you dont want to repost something already existing in the thread just because I am new.


It is unsupported in that you have no evidence whatsoever. All you have is a logical and realistic hypothesis.

I suggest typing the following into Google:

study relationship between mask wearing and social distancing

Then start reading.
#15191138
Pants-of-dog wrote:It is unsupported in that you have no evidence whatsoever. All you have is a logical and realistic hypothesis.

I suggest typing the following into Google:

study relationship between mask wearing and social distancing

Then start reading.


Ok, so first of all evidence is usually understood as something that supports your position. In this case I base my position mainly on the seemingly complete lack in correlation between countries based on how often its respective population wear masks, which definently supports the theory that masks have little to no impact on a macro level.

Anyway, I read the article published in nature (Association of social distancing and face mask use
with risk of COVID-19) if that is the one you are referring to, and I must say I am pretty sceptical to the method. The flaws are pretty apperent and adressed in the article on page 7.

The study is based on self report through an app, and is not a statistical sample of the population. Already this is a significant weakness for any study since it can cause all kind of selection biases it is impossible to account for.

...since our cohort is not a random sampling of the population,
there remains a possibility for selection or collider bias reverse causality, or generalizability. We acknowledge the potential of reverse causality, such as COVID-19 symptoms leading to behavior changes, including social distancing or face mask use.


A major problem I see with this study is that it seems likely that there will be a strong correlation between wearing masks and social distancing, washing your hands and so on (since mask recommendation plays a big part in the american covid-discussion which will likely lead to an overrepresentation of mask-wearers among the most concerned people). Therefore I think you should be carefull to assume that mask-wearing is the causal factor in the seeming correlation the study shows, especially when the hypothesis seems to fail in predicting spread of covid when comparing different countries.
#15191147
boomerintown wrote:Ok, so first of all evidence is usually understood as something that supports your position. In this case I base my position mainly on the seemingly complete lack in correlation between countries based on how often its respective population wear masks, which definently supports the theory that masks have little to no impact on a macro level.

Anyway, I read the article published in nature (Association of social distancing and face mask use
with risk of COVID-19) if that is the one you are referring to, and I must say I am pretty sceptical to the method. The flaws are pretty apperent and adressed in the article on page 7.

The study is based on self report through an app, and is not a statistical sample of the population. Already this is a significant weakness for any study since it can cause all kind of selection biases it is impossible to account for.

A major problem I see with this study is that it seems likely that there will be a strong correlation between wearing masks and social distancing, washing your hands and so on (since mask recommendation plays a big part in the american covid-discussion which will likely lead to an overrepresentation of mask-wearers among the most concerned people). Therefore I think you should be carefull to assume that mask-wearing is the causal factor in the seeming correlation the study shows, especially when the hypothesis seems to fail in predicting spread of covid when comparing different countries.


There have been many studies already discussed in this thread. Feel free to see if that particular one has been discussed.

Did you find any evidence for your claim that wearing masks would lead to les social distancing?
#15191158
boomerintown wrote:To some degree the behavioural argument about the negative impacts of masks in public is speculation, but there is obviously a common sense reasoning behind it.

But ultimatly, your statement is speculation too. It doesnt follow from masks having certain effects on a very specific micro level to them actually having any significant impact on a macro level.

If masks truly have a significant impact, then why havent this been more obvious in the death counts between different countries?

In a YouGov survey in june 2020 the number of people in the nordic countries who said they wore masks were extremly low (I think 2 % in Denmark, Sweden and Finland and 4 % in Norway). The same numbers in other countries were 35 % in Canada, 54 % in France and 59 % in USA.
(https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... k-map.html)

Sure, the numbers have probably changed since that. But have the general attitude towards masks done? In Sweden the vast majority have never worn masks, I was in Copenhagen the other day and it seemed to be the same case there (as was it when I was there the last time in 2020 despite a law dictating that had to wear masks in public transport). These numbers to me seems to suggests that masks in public have virtually no impacts whatsoever?

What I really admire about the Swedish approach was that it allowed people to continue to think rationally.

Our approach in Canada was PANIC!! OMG!!! And panic makes people really stupid, just at a time when we really need lucid heads who are rational.
#15191163
QatzelOk wrote:What I really admire about the Swedish approach was that it allowed people to continue to think rationally.
They have suffered for it, suffering rates of infection and death almost as high as that of the USA. 15,000+ deaths in 10 million people is nothing to brag about.

QatzelOk wrote:Our approach in Canada was PANIC!! OMG!!! And panic makes people really stupid, just at a time when we really need lucid heads who are rational.
Canada has done significantly better than Sweden. 27,000 deaths in a population of 37 million. You can do the math, right?

I guess you don't like the facts when they don't support your bullshit.
#15191168
Godstud wrote:They have suffered for it, suffering rates of infection and death almost as high as that of the USA. 15,000+ deaths in 10 million people is nothing to brag about.

Canada has done significantly better than Sweden. 27,000 deaths in a population of 37 million. You can do the math, right?

I guess you don't like the facts when they don't support your bullshit.


He suffers from selective blindness.
I bet you that if the situation was flipped, he would still find fault on the approach of "letting people die because the Canadian government is so evil that is not enforcing a simple mask to protect human beings" WAHHHH WAHHH, cry more.
#15191169
XogGyux wrote:He suffers from selective blindness.
I bet you that if the situation was flipped, he would still find fault on the approach of "letting people die because the Canadian government is so evil that is not enforcing a simple mask to protect human beings" WAHHHH WAHHH, cry more.

Evil capitalism don't want to spend some $$ on masks or ruin the plastic makeup with masks. All for money!
#15191171
I find it comical that virtually the only people who are questioning the effectiveness of mask wearing are those who are not in the "business". Perhaps they ought to look at what was done for Ebola, SARS or H1N1.

I guess all of the health care professionals with whom I work are just deluded. Have been for decades. All of the ever so long accepted infection control measures collapsed when COVID 19 came along.

People who doubt the effectiveness of mask wearing are just idiots. It is really not worth debating with them. The old, "never wrestle with pigs" applies here.

There are two medical professionals on this thread, operating in relative anonymity, capable of understanding these data, who are advocating mask wearing. Hmmmm.... Maybe the 'comm'nists or soch'lists dun got to dem. Dey is only goin' afta yo rats.

There are literally hundreds of thousands of people who are no longer in this world because of abject stupidity. Every time I see an unmasked person in public I can absolutely know they are not a candidate for Mensa. There is no one so utterly stupid as someone who could be vaccinated refusing to be vaccinated.

An aside. Today at the clinic I wore a N95 mask continuously for just under 6 hours. I am not injured. I am not even tired. There is no downside. I find it laughable that people are afraid of wearing a mask because in their deluded minds they believe it might hurt their lungs. If they think a mask hurts they are going to just love ECMO.

What we have learned so far from COVID and the Trump era is that we absolutely need to overhaul our schools. They are turning out deeply stupid people in great numbers.
#15191175
Drlee wrote:I find it comical that virtually the only people who are questioning the effectiveness of mask wearing are those who are not in the "business". Perhaps they ought to look at what was done for Ebola, SARS or H1N1.

I guess all of the health care professionals with whom I work are just deluded. Have been for decades. All of the ever so long accepted infection control measures collapsed when COVID 19 came along.

People who doubt the effectiveness of mask wearing are just idiots. It is really not worth debating with them. The old, "never wrestle with pigs" applies here.

There are two medical professionals on this thread, operating in relative anonymity, capable of understanding these data, who are advocating mask wearing. Hmmmm.... Maybe the 'comm'nists or soch'lists dun got to dem. Dey is only goin' afta yo rats.

There are literally hundreds of thousands of people who are no longer in this world because of abject stupidity. Every time I see an unmasked person in public I can absolutely know they are not a candidate for Mensa. There is no one so utterly stupid as someone who could be vaccinated refusing to be vaccinated.

An aside. Today at the clinic I wore a N95 mask continuously for just under 6 hours. I am not injured. I am not even tired. There is no downside. I find it laughable that people are afraid of wearing a mask because in their deluded minds they believe it might hurt their lungs. If they think a mask hurts they are going to just love ECMO.

What we have learned so far from COVID and the Trump era is that we absolutely need to overhaul our schools. They are turning out deeply stupid people in great numbers.


@Drlee ;

I'm not denying what you're saying here, after all the world has always been full of fools since the Fall, God love them. But I have regularly met somewhat intelligent people out there in my line of work who are so satanically proud and have been for a long time, that they've become delusional about the Pandemic. At that point it becomes a mental health issue, they've driven themselves a bit mad. That the rules even of nature do not apply to them in their profound narcissism. That if they by an act of Will act as if nothing is abnormal about the Plague times we live in, they can turn back and defy this Plague, defy God to strike them down...

Heaven help us if such people survive, without repentance, and yet interpret their survival as a sign of their election, of their value in the workings of Divine Providence. Like a young dispatch runner during WWI, who always managed to miraculously survive without being wounded (until November 1918, blinded temporarily by a gas attack) and began to think he had great things to do for Germany...
#15191185
But I have regularly met somewhat intelligent people out there in my line of work who are so satanically proud and have been for a long time, that they've become delusional about the Pandemic. At that point it becomes a mental health issue, they've driven themselves a bit mad. That the rules even of nature do not apply to them in their profound narcissism. That if they by an act of Will act as if nothing is abnormal about the Plague times we live in, they can turn back and defy this Plague, defy God to strike them down...


I can't argue with your points at all. I believe you are correct. Perhaps, in my anger, I was just lashing out. You are quite right that they are delusional. They really do not believe that this disease can harm them. Or that it is some kind of elaborate hoax.

They have some how gotten into some cosmic Russian Roulette game. The believe that their actions are brave and stalwart when indeed they are the actions of a narcissistic coward. They willingly risk their own lives and (more importantly) the lives of their friends and family rather than disappoint their fringe-right friends. They will die for some odd political who-gives-a-damn.

I was privy to a conversation between two people in the first class section of a flight from Phoenix to NYC. The one in the seat on the left was whining because Trump did not get credit for the vaccine which he described as "The biggest accomplishment of his presidency". The one seated on the right agreed. But wait. Just a few minutes later this same guy on the said, "I got vaccinated because my wife gave me a load of shit about it but personally I don't believe this Covid stuff is as bad as they say". His seatmate then said, "I hear you brother. I'm not letting them put that shit in me".

So the same guy said that the Covid vaccine was Trumps biggest accomplishment and then that it was "shit" and that he would not have it. This is just bizarre. I suspect that your explanation is better than mine.

I usually avoid the Third Reich references but I think, in this case, you are correct to use it. So may similarities in this odd mixture of secret society, mob bullying and magical thinking that categorizes the fringe right these days. As we speak there are "brown shirts" practicing with their assault weapons on their day off from the accounting firm. It is simply odd.
#15191187
Drlee wrote:I can't argue with your points at all. I believe you are correct. Perhaps, in my anger, I was just lashing out. You are quite right that they are delusional. They really do not believe that this disease can harm them. Or that it is some kind of elaborate hoax.

They have some how gotten into some cosmic Russian Roulette game. The believe that their actions are brave and stalwart when indeed they are the actions of a narcissistic coward. They willingly risk their own lives and (more importantly) the lives of their friends and family rather than disappoint their fringe-right friends. They will die for some odd political who-gives-a-damn.

I was privy to a conversation between two people in the first class section of a flight from Phoenix to NYC. The one in the seat on the left was whining because Trump did not get credit for the vaccine which he described as "The biggest accomplishment of his presidency". The one seated on the right agreed. But wait. Just a few minutes later this same guy on the said, "I got vaccinated because my wife gave me a load of shit about it but personally I don't believe this Covid stuff is as bad as they say". His seatmate then said, "I hear you brother. I'm not letting them put that shit in me".

So the same guy said that the Covid vaccine was Trumps biggest accomplishment and then that it was "shit" and that he would not have it. This is just bizarre. I suspect that your explanation is better than mine.

I usually avoid the Third Reich references but I think, in this case, you are correct to use it. So may similarities in this odd mixture of secret society, mob bullying and magical thinking that categorizes the fringe right these days. As we speak there are "brown shirts" practicing with their assault weapons on their day off from the accounting firm. It is simply odd.


@Drlee ;

Cognitive Dissonance. I think that this pandemic merely exposed it, and the flaws of American and Modern world politics in general. Perhaps I could say more about what I think about it, but I won't, not yet. 2024 is still some time away, and by then the social lessons of this Pandemic, along with the pandemic itself, will be long gone.
#15191224
Godstud wrote:They have suffered for it, suffering rates of infection and death almost as high as that of the USA. 15,000+ deaths in 10 million people is nothing to brag about.

Canada has done significantly better than Sweden. 27,000 deaths in a population of 37 million. You can do the math, right?

I guess you don't like the facts when they don't support your bullshit.


The death rate in Sweden does not stand out from other western countries and is significantly lower than in the US.

In addition to this the numbers in Sweden are inflated compared to many countries for two reasons. The first is that the mortality was unusually low in 2019, which meant there was a lot of "surplus" deaths by coincidence already before covid of old and fragile people. (See image below).

The second is that the meassures differs between countries, in Sweden any deaths of someone who had covid (a car crash, heart attack and so on) is included in the statistics. Many countries use the numbers based on who they know died from covid.

Also, you cant really say "compared to its neighbours" (not saying you do this, but a lot of people do), since they are not comparable in this matter, for several reasons. One is that Sweden have a sort of "skiing week" every year, similar I think to the "spring break" in the US where tons of high school students go to the same places to ski. One of the most popular places to go is the alps, which is basically the region of the first breakout in Europe exacly the week it happend. This lead to a huge cluster spread in especially Stockholm very early on and is probably the reasons why mortality was very high in Sweden during the first wave.

Other reasons are different demographic groups. Sweden got a LOT more migrants from very different cultures than its nordic neighbours who are very overrepresented in covid-deaths due to cultural variation (big marriages and unfortunatly, slightly ironically, very big funerals during the first deaths in covid). Stockholm is also a far more "international" city than even Copenhagen. I assume New York saw a much faster spread than for instance Chicago for similar reasons.
Image

I think we will have a better image in 1-2 years when we can evaluate it better by looking at surplus deaths between countries over a 5 year period, but atm I am very glad that we managed to keep relativly normal lives.
#15191231
boomerintown wrote:The death rate in Sweden does not stand out from other western countries and is significantly lower than in the US.
Significantly?

If Sweden had a population of 330 million, like the USA, they'd have had 495,000 deaths. That IS significant.

boomerintown wrote:In addition to this the numbers in Sweden are inflated compared to many countries for two reasons.
Sweden did not inflate the numbers. Please provide evidence for this claim.

boomerintown wrote:The first is that the mortality was unusually low in 2019, which meant there was a lot of "surplus" deaths by coincidence already before covid of old and fragile people. (See image below).
2019? :eh: You mean before the pandemic, of course.

You can compare Sweden to Denmark, for example. They are very close. Denmark has 6 million people and only 2,628 died from Covid-19.

Sweden is no "gold standard" by which Western countries should measure how well they did. Canada did significantly better than Sweden, for instance. Pretending you can't compare countries is poppycock, and really only an excuse.
#15191262
Godstud wrote:Significantly?

If Sweden had a population of 330 million, like the USA, they'd have had 495,000 deaths. That IS significant.

Sweden did not inflate the numbers. Please provide evidence for this claim.

2019? :eh: You mean before the pandemic, of course.

You can compare Sweden to Denmark, for example. They are very close. Denmark has 6 million people and only 2,628 died from Covid-19.

Sweden is no "gold standard" by which Western countries should measure how well they did. Canada did significantly better than Sweden, for instance. Pretending you can't compare countries is poppycock, and really only an excuse.


I am not claiming Sweden did better than Canada or Denmark. Sweden have a death count of around 1400 per million. USA and UK got 2000, Spain 1800, Belgium 2200, France 1700, Switzerland 1300, NL 1000. Denmark did extremly well with 450, but Sweden got a pretty normal score if you take west as a whole. Ive given several reasons to why it would be higher than Denmark even if we had used the similar strategy, its not intended as excuses or anything, its just that you must understand a lot of different factors are at play. I am sure we will have a better understanding of this in a couple of years, but based on these numbers I cant really see how you would conclude that Swedens strategy was a failure compared to lockdowns etc.
#15191266
boomerintown wrote:I cant really see how you would conclude that Swedens strategy was a failure compared to lockdowns etc.
:eh: You can by LOOKING at the numbers of deaths in countries where they locked down properly, like Australia, where they had 1,167 deaths out of a population of 25 million.

Sweden had more by a factor of more than TEN. Having more deaths than necessary IS a failure. USA and UK failed, bigtime! Half-assed lockdowns or no lockdowns were the cause.

Pretending lockdowns didn't work is not even factual. It's willful ignorance.

I'm in a country(Thailand), where lockdowns last year kept deaths to under 100 people. This year they didn't lock down and we're looking at 15,000+ so far...

The facts speak for themselves.
#15191270
Godstud wrote::eh: You can by LOOKING at the numbers of deaths in countries where they locked down properly, like Australia, where they had 1,167 deaths out of a population of 25 million.

Sweden had more by a factor of more than TEN.

Oh, nvm you wrote Australia not Austria. I think its pretty obvious you cant compare Australia to normal countries. Its an isolated island, obviously you can keep covid out if you just keep people out. This is not an alternative for european countries.

Anyway, I think Swedens strategy will prove to be very good in the long run when we can start to evaluate the impact on small business owners (coffee shops, bars, restaurants, etc), mental health, violence in the home, the effect on the cohorts of children currently in school (especially in very young age) and so on.

Also, for me, freedom is a value in itself which we should be very carefull in letting politicians compromise.
#15191293
Also, for me, freedom is a value in itself which we should be very carefull in letting politicians compromise.


Freedom my ass. Freedom is not an excuse for willfully killing your family and friends.

Comparing death rates between countries is pointless. It proves nothing.
#15191298
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95699-9

    Comparing the responses of the UK, Sweden and Denmark to COVID-19 using counterfactual modelling

    Abstract
    The UK and Sweden have among the worst per-capita COVID-19 mortality in Europe. Sweden stands out for its greater reliance on voluntary, rather than mandatory, control measures. We explore how the timing and effectiveness of control measures in the UK, Sweden and Denmark shaped COVID-19 mortality in each country, using a counterfactual assessment: what would the impact have been, had each country adopted the others’ policies? Using a Bayesian semi-mechanistic model without prior assumptions on the mechanism or effectiveness of interventions, we estimate the time-varying reproduction number for the UK, Sweden and Denmark from daily mortality data. We use two approaches to evaluate counterfactuals which transpose the transmission profile from one country onto another, in each country’s first wave from 13th March (when stringent interventions began) until 1st July 2020. UK mortality would have approximately doubled had Swedish policy been adopted, while Swedish mortality would have more than halved had Sweden adopted UK or Danish strategies. Danish policies were most effective, although differences between the UK and Denmark were significant for one counterfactual approach only. Our analysis shows that small changes in the timing or effectiveness of interventions have disproportionately large effects on total mortality within a rapidly growing epidemic.

    …..

Once again, science answers the speculations.
  • 1
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • 153

If i were a celeb I wouldn't say anything politica[…]

1] It seems to be a lot easier to claim I make […]

"Whether we like it or not"

I didn't say you were. But you sound strangely di[…]

I personally can't wait for a country known for i[…]