Covid Spread Can’t Only Be Explained by Who’s Being ‘Bad’ (1 Viewer)

[diz]

Covid Spread Can’t Only Be Explained by Who’s Being ‘Bad’
Seeing disease in moral terms seems to be the American way. But scientists still have a lot of questions.
By Faye Flam

There are some weird things going on in the coronavirus data. It’s curious that cases dropped so fast, and have stayed pretty low, in the spring hot zones — New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. And why did cases remain so low in Idaho and Hawaii until recently?

The mainstream narrative is that it’s all about good behavior when cases go down — mask wearing and giving up our social lives for the greater good. And conversely, bad behavior must be what makes them go up. We talk about certain regions having the virus “under control,” as if falling cases are purely a matter of will-power. A sort of moral reasoning is filling in for evidence.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

It's nice that someone in the media picked up on something I've been saying here and elsewhere all along.

We are also facing a pandemic of cherrypicking Covid data to fit whatever their preferred political narrative is.

If Hollywood celebrities have been convinced it's all about masks and restaurant closings then surely it must be.

The media performance on this issue has been irresponsible. Little different than the Hollywood celebrities. Since one does not even see disconfirming evidence raised, one wonders if they even know it exists.

Instead its more stories about people who won't wear masks getting into fights in stores.

And let me state I am not "anti mask". I wear one because I figure it can't hurt. Masks are just one of the issues.

The real issue is there is a lot that we don't know. A real discussion should reflect that. A scientific discussion should certainly entertain disconfirming data.

It's a good rule of thumb that if your theory can't explain some data your theory is wrong.

 

[Phys251]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

It's nice that someone in the media picked up on something I've been saying here and elsewhere all along.

We are also facing a pandemic of cherrypicking Covid data to fit whatever their preferred political narrative is.

If Hollywood celebrities have been convinced it's all about masks and restaurant closings then surely it must be.

The media performance on this issue has been irresponsible. Little different than the Hollywood celebrities. Since one does not even see disconfirming evidence raised, one wonders if they even know it exists.

Instead its more stories about people who won't wear masks getting into fights in stores.

And let me state I am not "anti mask". I wear one because I figure it can't hurt. Masks are just one of the issues.

The real issue is there is a lot that we don't know. A real discussion should reflect that. A scientific discussion should certainly entertain disconfirming data.

It's a good rule of thumb that if your theory can't explain some data your theory is wrong.

Whether you get the coronavirus is not just a function of your own actions? It also depends on other people's actions? No ****! :roll:

But thank you for accidentally making the point that we need a nationwide mask mandate.

 

[Thoreau72]

An excellent article by Faye Blam at Bloomberg. I'm totally impressed by Bloomberg have such a truly fair and balanced piece.

I am pleasantly surprised to see them talk about herd immunity.

 

[George50]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

It's nice that someone in the media picked up on something I've been saying here and elsewhere all along.

We are also facing a pandemic of cherrypicking Covid data to fit whatever their preferred political narrative is.

If Hollywood celebrities have been convinced it's all about masks and restaurant closings then surely it must be.

The media performance on this issue has been irresponsible. Little different than the Hollywood celebrities. Since one does not even see disconfirming evidence raised, one wonders if they even know it exists.

Instead its more stories about people who won't wear masks getting into fights in stores.

And let me state I am not "anti mask". I wear one because I figure it can't hurt. Masks are just one of the issues.

The real issue is there is a lot that we don't know. A real discussion should reflect that. A scientific discussion should certainly entertain disconfirming data.

It's a good rule of thumb that if your theory can't explain some data your theory is wrong.

The article is poorly researched. Yes, we don’t know everything about the virus but we do know how to control it. Masks and social distancing are talked about the most because they are something everyone can do.

Controlling the virus basically requires slowing down the virus transmission rate to the point where on average each infected person infects less than one additional person. If you do that it is mathematically certain that the number of cases will go down.

There are many ways to slow the transmission like:

Masks
Social distancing
Lockdowns
Testing, quarantine and contact tracing
Business closings
Avoiding activities with large crowds

Different countries and states have employed different mixtures of the above, but they all help.

The article asks why Sweden’s caseload has plummeted, but the fact that they are asking tells us that they believe the popular myth that things are normal in Sweden. That is not true. Why the cases went down is not a mystery

Sweden does not mandate masks but the employ social distancing and they have now figured out that testing, quarantine and contact tracing REDUCES cases not increases cases. Unfortunately for the US, Trump has never grasped this.

“Sweden is tackling the COVID-19 pandemic through both legally binding measures and recommendations. The government and the Swedish Public Health Agency have taken a number of decisions involving a wide range of new regulations and recommendations that affect the whole of society, including people’s private lives. There is no full lockdown in force, but many parts of Swedish society have shut down.

Life is not carrying on as normal in Sweden. Many people are staying at home and many have stopped travelling. This has had severe effects on Swedes as well as on the Swedish economy. Many businesses are folding. Unemployment is expected to rise dramatically. The Government has taken several measures to mitigate the economic effects and to stabilise the economy.

Sweden shares the same aim as all other countries: to protect the life and health of its population. Fundamentally, Sweden’s measures only differ from other countries in two regards: we are not shutting down schools for younger children or childcare facilities and we have no regulation that forces citizens to remain in their homes.”

Sweden’s response to COVID-19: “Life is not carrying on as normal”

“Sweden was slow to ramp up testing for any but the seriously ill and healthcare workers, but weekly numbers for tests have more than doubled since late may, putting the country in the same bracket as extensively testing nations such as Germany”

Every time you find an infected person and they quarantine, you are reducing the average transmission rate.

Access Denied


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ElChupacabra]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

It's nice that someone in the media picked up on something I've been saying here and elsewhere all along.

We are also facing a pandemic of cherrypicking Covid data to fit whatever their preferred political narrative is.

If Hollywood celebrities have been convinced it's all about masks and restaurant closings then surely it must be.

The media performance on this issue has been irresponsible. Little different than the Hollywood celebrities. Since one does not even see disconfirming evidence raised, one wonders if they even know it exists.

Instead its more stories about people who won't wear masks getting into fights in stores.

And let me state I am not "anti mask". I wear one because I figure it can't hurt. Masks are just one of the issues.

The real issue is there is a lot that we don't know. A real discussion should reflect that. A scientific discussion should certainly entertain disconfirming data.

It's a good rule of thumb that if your theory can't explain some data your theory is wrong.

Sure, and there are quite a few unknowns. The problem is how to deal with the impacts that affect citizens, and for that we tend to go with what we do know thus far. What's still up for debate is what would happen in a place like New York if things opened up fully with no restrictions; that kind of scenario would put Gabriela Gomes' scenario to the test. I certainly hope that's the case, but we have to be prepared if it isn't. So far some states have opened more cautiously than others, so the question in my mind is whether those policies and people's behavior were a driving force in the surge.

I've cited Britton's study in another thread because he was stating a lower percentage of the population would need to be exposed to reach some level of herd immunity, but when you start doing the math on a population the size of ours, it gets a bit scary.

 

[Drawdown]

When we were social distancing because go out and you die the cases were contained. When we decided that we could end social distancing just as long as you wear a mask cases exploded. Social distancing works. Masks do not.

 

[Helix]

fine the militant maskless a couple hundred a pop when they go out in public without a mask. fine the places that let them in a couple hundred a pop. if either refuses to pay, up it to thousands.

problem solved.

 

[diz]

The article is poorly researched. Yes, we don’t know everything about the virus but we do know how to control it. Masks and social distancing are talked about the most because they are something everyone can do.

Controlling the virus basically requires slowing down the virus transmission rate to the point where on average each infected person infects less than one additional person. If you do that it is mathematically certain that the number of cases will go down.

There are many ways to slow the transmission like:

Masks
Social distancing
Lockdowns
Testing, quarantine and contact tracing
Business closings
Avoiding activities with large crowds

Different countries and states have employed different mixtures of the above, but they all help.

The article asks why Sweden’s caseload has plummeted, but the fact that they are asking tells us that they believe the popular myth that things are normal in Sweden. That is not true. Why the cases went down is not a mystery

Sweden does not mandate masks but the employ social distancing and they have now figured out that testing, quarantine and contact tracing REDUCES cases not increases cases. Unfortunately for the US, Trump has never grasped this.

“Sweden is tackling the COVID-19 pandemic through both legally binding measures and recommendations. The government and the Swedish Public Health Agency have taken a number of decisions involving a wide range of new regulations and recommendations that affect the whole of society, including people’s private lives. There is no full lockdown in force, but many parts of Swedish society have shut down.

Life is not carrying on as normal in Sweden. Many people are staying at home and many have stopped travelling. This has had severe effects on Swedes as well as on the Swedish economy. Many businesses are folding. Unemployment is expected to rise dramatically. The Government has taken several measures to mitigate the economic effects and to stabilise the economy.

Sweden shares the same aim as all other countries: to protect the life and health of its population. Fundamentally, Sweden’s measures only differ from other countries in two regards: we are not shutting down schools for younger children or childcare facilities and we have no regulation that forces citizens to remain in their homes.”

Sweden’s response to COVID-19: “Life is not carrying on as normal”

“Sweden was slow to ramp up testing for any but the seriously ill and healthcare workers, but weekly numbers for tests have more than doubled since late may, putting the country in the same bracket as extensively testing nations such as Germany”

Every time you find an infected person and they quarantine, you are reducing the average transmission rate.

Access Denied


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think you are making the mistake of conflating "masks and social distancing" with "government mandates".

I really don't doubt that if we all stayed 50 feet away from every other person the disease would not spread very much. I don't see how a mask can hurt. I make an effort to avoid getting close to people except a very select few. However, I can observe in my own sphere of contacts there are many people who don't. In spite of the fact they are required to wear a mask in the grocery store by mandate!

What I think is unproven is whether things like mandating restaurants stay closed or that people must wear a mask in a grocery store has much effect.

When you shut bars you do not stop people from drinking together. When you wear a mask in a restaurant you do not stop a bunch of 22 year olds from having a party at a lake house.

My guess the reason you don't see a big drop in COVID cases when there is a mask mandate in grocery stores is this: unmasked people in grocery stores was not a large cause of the disease spreading

There just is not much evidence to suggest some of these government policies are much more than symbolic gestures.

Now we even have a case of a requirement to wear masks on video conferences. It's more the behavior of a mask worshipping cult than anything based on reason.

 

[JasperL]

When you shut bars you do not stop people from drinking together. When you wear a mask in a restaurant you do not stop a bunch of 22 year olds from having a party at a lake house.

Hope you don't mind me addressing just this part...

No, you don't stop people from drinking together, but what you do accomplish is keep those 'heterogeneous' groups apart. It's why I'm skeptical of the revised 'herd immunity' claims of as low as 40% or whatever. Sure when bars and plays and sporting events and travel and movies and all those places where we are close to people not in our normal group of people are closed, then it makes sense that the disease can spread and infect all the vulnerable in our little group, and as long as we don't change who we are in close contact, the spread slows.

But what happens when in September in a normal year I go to a UT football game with 100,000 people from all over the state, we tailgate for 3 hours together, then do the Vol walk where 10,000 jam the sidewalks to wish the team luck as they walk to the stadium, an hour later and we walk elbow to elbow on ramps up 6 flights to the upper decks, and sit elbow to elbow with people from every walk of life, ever social strata, black, white, urban, rural, east Tennessee, middle, upper east, west. So now those 'heterogeneous' groups that are normally separate and wouldn't cross pass in 50 years of normal living all DO cross paths in that one event, then return home bringing possible infection with us.

So, yeah, I can believe that as long as life is nowhere near normal and there are no concerts, ball games, movies, crowded bars, travel, airports, etc. that we can get 'herd immunity' at low levels, but then we have to account for how we mix in huge numbers in those events, and I've not seen discussion dealing with that.

My guess the reason you don't see a big drop in COVID cases when there is a mask mandate in grocery storest is this: unmasked people in grocery stores was not a large cause of the disease spreading

There just is not much evidence to suggest some of these government policies are much more than symbolic gestures.

Now we even have a case of a requirement to wear masks on video conferences. It's more the behavior of a mask worshipping cult than anything based on reason.

I mostly agree. What masks do is function as an outward sign of a population taking care to social distance, mostly. I suspect that masks won't do a lot of good when UT-Knoxville opens next week, because the kids aren't going to social distance and will gather in groups and even if they wear their masks - they won't IMO - we'll still see outbreaks almost immediately after opening. But it won't be masks, but that students just aren't going to go to college and 'social distance.' I doubt if I would at that age. My guess is I'd be at a poker table the first night back, then a party....

I do believe they help and wear mine pretty much every time I go out, but more important is when we have mask mandates in place, everyone's behavior changes and we're all a lot more careful.

 

[George50]

I think you are making the mistake of conflating "masks and social distancing" with "government mandates".

I really don't doubt that if we all stayed 50 feet away from every other person the disease would not spread very much. I don't see how a mask can hurt. I make an effort to avoid getting close to people except a very select few. However, I can observe in my own sphere of contacts there are many people who don't. In spite of the fact they are required to wear a mask in the grocery store by mandate!

What I think is unproven is whether things like mandating restaurants stay closed or that people must wear a mask in a grocery store has much effect.

When you shut bars you do not stop people from drinking together. When you wear a mask in a restaurant you do not stop a bunch of 22 year olds from having a party at a lake house.

My guess the reason you don't see a big drop in COVID cases when there is a mask mandate in grocery stores is this: unmasked people in grocery stores was not a large cause of the disease spreading

There just is not much evidence to suggest some of these government policies are much more than symbolic gestures.

Now we even have a case of a requirement to wear masks on video conferences. It's more the behavior of a mask worshipping cult than anything based on reason.

Wearing masks in grocery, or any stores helps. Shutting bars helps, yes some will gather in private parties but many more would have gathered if bars were open. Shutting or limiting the number of people in restaurants helps. Mandates make the mask wearing more universal and that helps. All of these actions help to reduce the frequency of transmission. They are all additive to each other.

If you take all these actions and a bunch of others and you start picking at them and say each one doesn’t help much so why do it then you are missing the point. The point is that we need to take a number of actions and do each one as well as we can and when we add them all up what we are doing will help a lot.

Every single action reduces transmission which reduces new cases which reduces deaths. If we can get to the point where on average each infected person transmits the virus to less than one person then it is mathematically certain that the number of new cases will decline. If we can get to that tipping point and stay there then over a relatively short time our new cases will decline to a very few like the rest of the developed world has been able to do. We don’t have to be perfect to get there but we need to try harder than we are.

Wearing a mask on a video conference if no one else is around doesn’t in and of itself reduce transmission. So that seems like a stretch to me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Thoreau72]

The article is poorly researched. Yes, we don’t know everything about the virus but we do know how to control it. Masks and social distancing are talked about the most because they are something everyone can do.

Controlling the virus basically requires slowing down the virus transmission rate to the point where on average each infected person infects less than one additional person. If you do that it is mathematically certain that the number of cases will go down.

There are many ways to slow the transmission like:

Masks
Social distancing
Lockdowns
Testing, quarantine and contact tracing
Business closings
Avoiding activities with large crowds

Different countries and states have employed different mixtures of the above, but they all help.

The article asks why Sweden’s caseload has plummeted, but the fact that they are asking tells us that they believe the popular myth that things are normal in Sweden. That is not true. Why the cases went down is not a mystery

Sweden does not mandate masks but the employ social distancing and they have now figured out that testing, quarantine and contact tracing REDUCES cases not increases cases. Unfortunately for the US, Trump has never grasped this.

“Sweden is tackling the COVID-19 pandemic through both legally binding measures and recommendations. The government and the Swedish Public Health Agency have taken a number of decisions involving a wide range of new regulations and recommendations that affect the whole of society, including people’s private lives. There is no full lockdown in force, but many parts of Swedish society have shut down.

Life is not carrying on as normal in Sweden. Many people are staying at home and many have stopped travelling. This has had severe effects on Swedes as well as on the Swedish economy. Many businesses are folding. Unemployment is expected to rise dramatically. The Government has taken several measures to mitigate the economic effects and to stabilise the economy.

Sweden shares the same aim as all other countries: to protect the life and health of its population. Fundamentally, Sweden’s measures only differ from other countries in two regards: we are not shutting down schools for younger children or childcare facilities and we have no regulation that forces citizens to remain in their homes.”

Sweden’s response to COVID-19: “Life is not carrying on as normal”

“Sweden was slow to ramp up testing for any but the seriously ill and healthcare workers, but weekly numbers for tests have more than doubled since late may, putting the country in the same bracket as extensively testing nations such as Germany”

Every time you find an infected person and they quarantine, you are reducing the average transmission rate.

Access Denied


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The article is not poorly researched, it is very well researched.

You don't like it because it contradicts your world view.

 

[d0gbreath]

All people are adverse to admitting that they don't know something. Experts times ten.

 

[VySky]

Whether you get the coronavirus is not just a function of your own actions? It also depends on other people's actions? No ****! :roll:

But thank you for accidentally making the point that we need a nationwide mask mandate.

No we don't. I take it you live in a free state still? You can still wear a mask even if your Governor says you don't have too

 

[VySky]

All people are adverse to admitting that they don't know something. Experts times ten.

As Ronnie said ....... they know so much that isn't so...

 

[d0gbreath]

As Ronnie said ....... they know so much that isn't so...

I thought Ronnie said: "Be my little baby."

 

[NWRatCon]

The article is not poorly researched, it is very well researched.

You don't like it because it contradicts your world view.

"No it's not!"
"Yes, it is!"
"I'm right, you're wrong, times infinity!"
Seriously?

 

[NWRatCon]

The number of fallacious leaps of logic and misinterpretations of data in the OP are too extensive to catalog. The sentiment is not wrong - we should follow the data - but the analysis is. As has been pointed out, this is a multifaceted issue. MANY different factors affect the spread of the virus, including the virulence of the virus itself.

How a virus spreads through a population is pretty well known. The transmissibility of a virus is called R0 - or "R naught". R0 is not an immutable characteristic, however. As George50 and others have noted, taking actions individually and socially has a huge impact on the transmission of the virus throughout the population:

Controlling the virus basically requires slowing down the virus transmission rate to the point where on average each infected person infects less than one additional person. If you do that it is mathematically certain that the number of cases will go down.

There are many ways to slow the transmission like:

Masks
Social distancing
Lockdowns
Testing, quarantine and contact tracing
Business closings
Avoiding activities with large crowds

The main defect of the OP is attributing changes to other factors without determination of causation. THAT is sloppy science. There are a lot of "causal leaps" taken, and some sloppy thinking in the transitions. The disease itself is still actively moving through a very complicated network of contacts. Every single contact has the opportunity to be part of a transmission. Indeed, individual contacts may not result in effective transmission, but multiple contacts might. Say, for example, it takes 100 "germs" to make an effective transmission. You may only get 15 from one contact... and not catch the virus. But if you have 30 contacts, and each of them AVERAGES 15 germ transmissions, you will likely contract the disease. It has to do with viral load.

There are such things as natural immunity, and relative disease immunity (the technical term is eluding me) - that is, having developed antibodies to a closely-enough related virus to have developed antibodies. We don't yet know how SARS-CoV-2 antibodies work, yet, so we don't know a) whether having a related exposure provides some immunity, b) having had a confirmed exposure provides immunity, c) how long such immunity persists, and d) if a vaccine CAN be developed to provide sufficient immunity. Without knowing these things, determining how much infection is required to reach "herd immunity" is purely speculative.

What we do know is

Other types of coronaviruses appear to cause some immunity. Studies show that people are protected against the coronaviruses that cause the common cold for up to a year after an infection. And our bodies have antibodies against the SARS coronavirus for up to 4 years.

Most people who've recovered from COVID-19 do make antibodies against the virus. But so far, there's no evidence that this will protect them against the virus if they're exposed to it again.

In South Korea, more than 160 people tested positive again after they had recovered from COVID-19. In China, 5%-10% of people tested positive again after they'd recovered, according to news reports. It's not clear whether:

These people got infected again
The virus reactivated in their bodies after being quiet for a while, or
The test results were flawed

Coronavirus Immunity and Reinfection (WebMD). Herd immunity estimations are all based upon "assumptions". Different assumptions yield different results. As with all scientific determinations, "garbage in = garbage out". We don't know enough yet to determine which of the various assumptions are garbage.

Coronavirus in Context: Lessons Learned from 5 Million Confirmed Cases (WebMD)

 

[Peter King]

fine the militant maskless a couple hundred a pop when they go out in public without a mask. fine the places that let them in a couple hundred a pop. if either refuses to pay, up it to thousands.

problem solved.

It may be radical, but if it solves the problem of daily 50 to 60 thousand new infections (with the hospitalizations and deaths that come with it, not to mind the long term devastating effect even the surviving patients have to go through) going into the 100 thousand new cases when schools and normal live is being pushed open without having the virus under control. Well then maybe a Biden plan for 3 months of mandatory masks is the least of the evils the US could choose.

 

[Peter King]

FYI, I don't like masks either, but as someone who is at risk, I would prefer masked living to NO living. Or hospital living for that matter.

For example normally I need to go to the sleep clinic to check back on my CPAP use as I have sleep apnea, but a few weeks back they called me for an appointment in the fall, but they had already decided to not hold in person appointments so it will be an appointment over the phone. And I must say I was relieved. These are in and out appointments for me, just stating my sleep has been good, reading out my CPAP data and then see you in 1 or 2 years.

I have been out of this house once this year to get my car checked over for my annual periodical check (mandatory to prevent, or attempt to prevent, dangerous cars being on the road). I also went to Germany to do some shopping and fuel up the car and I must say, most people there and in Dutch shops were masked or keeping socially distant.

One supermarket was closed by order of the safety area where it is situated because he ignored covid rules and even after getting fines he still kept pretending nothing was wrong, so now he is closed. But he has a very easy way out, take covid rules seriously and employ them and he can be open as soon as Monday or Tuesday. He was very angry that he was being closed by the police and made a great stink about it, but all he had to do was be smart and nothing like the closure would have ever been necessary.

Normally Universities in the Netherlands are holding their pledge week and introduction weeks around this time, but most universities and fraternities have decided to not hold introduction week or pledge week to not become super spreader events.

Like I posted in my own thread, KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) rules should apply:

wash your hands often (always have hand sanitizer on my when I leave the house or when I pick up a package a delivery service has brought socially distant)
keep socially distant as much as possible, work from home if possible

and WEAR A MASK outside of your own home.

 

[Lursa]

Mostly garbage article. For example:

There are some weird things going on in the coronavirus data. It’s curious that cases dropped so fast, and have stayed pretty low, in the spring hot zones — New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. And why did cases remain so low in Idaho and Hawaii until recently?

But why, then, have cases plummeted in Sweden, where mask wearing is a rarity?

All easily explained by science. There's no mystery in any of those things, they've been answered.

Author is poorly informed/did very poor research.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[HennyBogan]

Whether you get the coronavirus is not just a function of your own actions? It also depends on other people's actions? No ****! :roll:

But thank you for accidentally making the point that we need a nationwide mask mandate.

Isn’t a mask mandate up to the Governors of each state?

 

[Thoreau72]

"No it's not!"
"Yes, it is!"
"I'm right, you're wrong, times infinity!"
Seriously?

You are so right!

Sometimes in life it is important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong.

The anxiety and hysteria in this country over an engineered virus is amazing. The Swedes are so lucky to have honest leaders.

 

[NWRatCon]

You are so right!

Sometimes in life it is important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong.

The anxiety and hysteria in this country over an engineered virus is amazing. The Swedes are so lucky to have honest leaders.

isNOT!

 

[Jay59]

One thing about this article seems to be flying under the radar. It's this line.

So far, antibody tests show only some 10-20% of the U.S. population has had the disease.​

Picking the middle, that means that 50 million people (49.5 if you want to be picky) have had the disease. The is not speculation. It is established from blood chemistry. Thus, mortality is 172.6/50,000 = .00342 = 0.342% instead of the reported 3.12%.

 

[diz]

Hope you don't mind me addressing just this part...

That's ok, I'm going to do the same thing, because in large part we don't seem to disagree...

I do believe they help and wear mine pretty much every time I go out, but more important is when we have mask mandates in place, everyone's behavior changes and we're all a lot more careful.

I'm going to highlight one word in there that I find to be *obviously* and significantly wrong. You seem to be operating from the belief that other people process the world like you do.

I probably actually do process the world something like you do, but I learned long ago that most people are not like me. They are not thoughtful and responsible. Or if they are thoughtful, they put different weights on things when they apply their thought.

There are people who got to house parties and beach parties and lake house parties regardless of whether we post 1000s of youtube videos of people shrieking at someone not wearing a mask in a park.

There's a reason why the data does not support the argument "mask mandates slow the spread fo cover significantly". I'm not sure exactly what the reason is, but I'm not going to ignore the disconfirming data. I obviously have my suspicions, and those suspicions are that mask mandates are not actually reducing the behavior that *actually* spreads COVID much.