3 ms·

> This "proof that masks work" is likely more just proof that not having kids in schools cuts a lot of spread. It is? I mean, something worked. You think the

by ajross 4y ago

> This "proof that masks work" is likely more just proof that not having kids in schools cuts a lot of spread. It is? I mean, something worked. You think the fact that flu deaths dropped to essentially zero for two years was exclusively due to school closures? Is there any evidence for that? I'll admit to some individual dithering on the evidence for any given mitigation strategy. But clearly, on the whole, societal mitigations for covid worked very well to control disease. You admit that much, right? People freaked out about school closures too. They freaked out about distancing. They freaked out about travel restrictions. (also covid-specific rules like testing requirements, and vaccination programs). And it was, overall, the same people arguing against all this stuff that was, again, clearly working as evidenced by its effect on influenza and et. al. So why did people argue so hard against exactly those (working!) mitigation strategies?

jdminhbg 4y ago
> You think the fact that flu deaths dropped to essentially zero for two years was exclusively due to school closures? More likely due to nursing home closures I would think.
- ajross 4y ago
  Is there any evidence for that? This again seems like the kind of whataboutism designed to deflect and not engage. Clearly what we did worked vs. the flu. So arguments that "what we did" was not effective vs. covid seem prima facie wrong. Right? It's OK to argue at the margins about what the most effective strategies were, and I'm happy to engage on that. But almost everywhere I see this argument, it seems more like an attempt to paper over a historical refusal to accommodate any mitigation at all.
  - jdminhbg 4y ago
    There's exactly as much evidence for that as there is for any other mitigation, which is to say none because the CDC has spent approximately 0 dollars trying to study any of them seriously. We're all just guessing.
    - ajross 4y ago
      And once again, that seems much more like an evasion to me than a debate. Something worked, per the influenza numbers. You admit that much, right? So, is it so weird to assume that the most obvious hypothesis (general social distancing and mask use) is correct? Must we go in circles of denial and redirection like this?
      - jdminhbg 4y ago
        > Something worked, per the influenza numbers. You admit that much, right? I admit that it's possible that something worked, but I don't even think that's a given. We don't know how covid and influenza interact, and perhaps covid is outcompeting it. I'm not at all a virologist and have only a vague understanding that this hypothesis exists, but just throwing it out there to say I'm not 100% convinced that something we did worked. > So, is it so weird to assume that the most obvious hypothesis (general social distancing and mask use) is correct? This is just begging the question. Why is mask use the most obvious hypothesis? To me the most obvious hypothesis is that by closing nursing homes to outside visitors we shut off the main vector by which new influenza infections enter the facilities. And again, this is just both of us guessing, because we don't have data.
taeric 4y ago
I did not mean my point to be that it was only school closures. My guess is that it was a combination of all items. I would just wager that school closures are the dominant factor. I cannot underscore enough just how sick families get by having their kids in schools. To your last point? I got nothing. At large, we were trying to make a bad situation better. The vehement arguing and digging in on not doing anything seems like it is really only going to make things worse. I will also throw under the bus that it was a single thing that worked. Even my "I think it was largely the school closures" is banking that it is one of the largest factors, but I don't think it was large enough that it alone could accomplish what we did see.

by ajross 4y ago

jdminhbg 4y ago

> You think the fact that flu deaths dropped to essentially zero for two years was exclusively due to school closures? More likely due to nursing home closures I would think.

ajross 4y ago
Is there any evidence for that? This again seems like the kind of whataboutism designed to deflect and not engage. Clearly what we did worked vs. the flu. So arguments that "what we did" was not effective vs. covid seem prima facie wrong. Right? It's OK to argue at the margins about what the most effective strategies were, and I'm happy to engage on that. But almost everywhere I see this argument, it seems more like an attempt to paper over a historical refusal to accommodate any mitigation at all.
- jdminhbg 4y ago
  There's exactly as much evidence for that as there is for any other mitigation, which is to say none because the CDC has spent approximately 0 dollars trying to study any of them seriously. We're all just guessing.
  - ajross 4y ago
    And once again, that seems much more like an evasion to me than a debate. Something worked, per the influenza numbers. You admit that much, right? So, is it so weird to assume that the most obvious hypothesis (general social distancing and mask use) is correct? Must we go in circles of denial and redirection like this?
    - jdminhbg 4y ago
      > Something worked, per the influenza numbers. You admit that much, right? I admit that it's possible that something worked, but I don't even think that's a given. We don't know how covid and influenza interact, and perhaps covid is outcompeting it. I'm not at all a virologist and have only a vague understanding that this hypothesis exists, but just throwing it out there to say I'm not 100% convinced that something we did worked. > So, is it so weird to assume that the most obvious hypothesis (general social distancing and mask use) is correct? This is just begging the question. Why is mask use the most obvious hypothesis? To me the most obvious hypothesis is that by closing nursing homes to outside visitors we shut off the main vector by which new influenza infections enter the facilities. And again, this is just both of us guessing, because we don't have data.

taeric 4y ago

I did not mean my point to be that it was only school closures. My guess is that it was a combination of all items. I would just wager that school closures are the dominant factor. I cannot underscore enough just how sick families get by having their kids in schools. To your last point? I got nothing. At large, we were trying to make a bad situation better. The vehement arguing and digging in on not doing anything seems like it is really only going to make things worse. I will also throw under the bus that it was a single thing that worked. Even my "I think it was largely the school closures" is banking that it is one of the largest factors, but I don't think it was large enough that it alone could accomplish what we did see.