4 ms·

how much protection would be enough for you to wear one? 50%? 75%? Hell, even 1% is higher than 0 and really, what's the harm? Yea most people don't get very s

by yibg 6y ago

how much protection would be enough for you to wear one? 50%? 75%? Hell, even 1% is higher than 0 and really, what's the harm? Yea most people don't get very sick, except for the 300k that are dead just in the US.

worker767424 6y ago
> and really, what's the harm? If people think a mask offers them more protection than it really does, they might engage in riskier behavior. When I see people out walking around the neighborhood with masks on, I really wonder what they're trying to accomplish. You're not going to get covid walking outdoors passing within 6 feet of someone for 5 seconds. These days, my theory is more people get infected at home than out in public.
- yibg 6y ago
  Judgement is important of course. I wear masks around people but not when I’m driving or outdoors by myself. I think for a lot of people, it’s just easier not to put it on and take it off. For me for instance if I’m out hiking I just put it on and leave it on. Where as my partner will remove it when there is no one around and put it back on when someone is coming close by. I see the same thing with people driving short distances. People getting infected at home may be a large vector, but the virus got in the home some how in the first place. It’s just easier to spread from that point onwards once it’s in.
- EB-Barrington 6y ago
  New York State recently reported that 74% of infections spread between Sept and Nov 2000 took place during household social gatherings (based upon contact tracing data).
  - worker767424 6y ago
    > household social gatherings Also known as pods and bubbles.
WhiskeyVictor 6y ago
2020 is coming to a close. In a couple of weeks we will have the final tally for the year. This is good because we can then compare it to other years in total. I suggest you check the all cause excess mortality figure. It's already been projected to be essentially the same. This is a really good metric to evaluate the threat level. Here's a nice graph of deaths per month per millon for a nearly 200 year perspective: https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/#foobox-1/3/sweden-monthly-deaths-1851.jpg https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/#foobox-1/3/sweden-mo...
- slaw 6y ago
  There will be some mortality excess in 2020. 'The observed temporary excess mortality likely arises because people in vulnerable groups die weeks or months earlier than they would otherwise, due to the timing and severity of the unusual external event.' https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v1.full https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v...
- yibg 6y ago
  I’m all for data driven decisions. We just need to be more careful to dig into the details of the data. A simple excess mortality figure may not be relevant. Both covid and the lockdowns could have caused increased or decreased mortalities in other areas. Eg if there was zero excess mortality, that alone doesn’t prove much either way.
- worker767424 6y ago
  I wonder if we would have noticed this before modern hospitals and record keeping. I suspect it would have spread much slower, maybe over a decade. In a village of 1,000, there might be 5 deaths that would have been written off as a bad flu, or whatever people used to call getting sick like that.

by yibg 6y ago

worker767424 6y ago

> and really, what's the harm? If people think a mask offers them more protection than it really does, they might engage in riskier behavior. When I see people out walking around the neighborhood with masks on, I really wonder what they're trying to accomplish. You're not going to get covid walking outdoors passing within 6 feet of someone for 5 seconds. These days, my theory is more people get infected at home than out in public.

yibg 6y ago
Judgement is important of course. I wear masks around people but not when I’m driving or outdoors by myself. I think for a lot of people, it’s just easier not to put it on and take it off. For me for instance if I’m out hiking I just put it on and leave it on. Where as my partner will remove it when there is no one around and put it back on when someone is coming close by. I see the same thing with people driving short distances. People getting infected at home may be a large vector, but the virus got in the home some how in the first place. It’s just easier to spread from that point onwards once it’s in.
EB-Barrington 6y ago
New York State recently reported that 74% of infections spread between Sept and Nov 2000 took place during household social gatherings (based upon contact tracing data).
- worker767424 6y ago
  > household social gatherings Also known as pods and bubbles.

WhiskeyVictor 6y ago

2020 is coming to a close. In a couple of weeks we will have the final tally for the year. This is good because we can then compare it to other years in total. I suggest you check the all cause excess mortality figure. It's already been projected to be essentially the same. This is a really good metric to evaluate the threat level. Here's a nice graph of deaths per month per millon for a nearly 200 year perspective: https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/#foobox-1/3/sweden-monthly-deaths-1851.jpg https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/#foobox-1/3/sweden-mo...

slaw 6y ago
There will be some mortality excess in 2020. 'The observed temporary excess mortality likely arises because people in vulnerable groups die weeks or months earlier than they would otherwise, due to the timing and severity of the unusual external event.' https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v1.full https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.11.20229708v...
yibg 6y ago
I’m all for data driven decisions. We just need to be more careful to dig into the details of the data. A simple excess mortality figure may not be relevant. Both covid and the lockdowns could have caused increased or decreased mortalities in other areas. Eg if there was zero excess mortality, that alone doesn’t prove much either way.
worker767424 6y ago
I wonder if we would have noticed this before modern hospitals and record keeping. I suspect it would have spread much slower, maybe over a decade. In a village of 1,000, there might be 5 deaths that would have been written off as a bad flu, or whatever people used to call getting sick like that.