goatman
10 MW
one nice thing about social distancing in the check-out lanes. ive lost the urge to throw an elbow at people for standing too close
sn0wchyld said:Perhaps then you can explain why parts of northern europe, with mask wearing rates at or below 10%, have the same (or perhaps less) rates of death and case rate than other parts of the EU (or USA for that matter) despite those having rates above 90%?
Simple. Mask rates aren't above 90% in the US. Only 44% of US citizens say they regularly wear a mask outside their home. 27% of republicans are proud to say they never, ever wear a mask.sn0wchyld said:Perhaps then you can explain why parts of northern europe, with mask wearing rates at or below 10%, have the same (or perhaps less) rates of death and case rate than other parts of the EU (or USA for that matter) despite those having rates above 90%?
Absolutely. They are one part of the formula that includes distancing, moving things outdoors, better hygiene, contact tracing and testing/quarantining. They are a big part of it though.It doesn't prove they're ineffective, but that they are at the very least, not primary in preventing spread/death, and that there's almost certainly other factors involved in their efficacy (such as quality of mask, method of use, etc etc etc).
Masks are most effective at stopping you from spreading your own viruses. If you touch the mask saturated with your own flora you will not become infected with a new virus, since you already have it.It may reduce aerosoles for instance, but if you touch the mask even once then dont disinfect before touching anything else then your efficacy just dropped dramatically (How often do you think people are doing that? )
?? Almost no one dies directly from COVID-19 as a primary cause. They die from the pneumonia it creates, or the organ failure it causes, or the blood clots it causes. (Which is why people who are risk for pneumonia are much more likely to die.)methodology on categorisation is also worthy of discussion... ie died with or from?
Dauntless said:However, I can assure you that much of northern Europe is, in fact, COLD. When a person coughs or sneezes, said emissions face a sudden temperature drop, in fact they freeze and become heavier than air. If the sudden impact with the ground doesn't kill those buggers, the cold will. On the off chance some of it survives until a thaw, they are trapped on the ground until trampled under foot.
nicobie said:Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds?
It's a masterpiece of stupid! It's stupid in half a dozen ways. It's not even intelligent enough to be wrong.nicobie said:Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds?
Matt Gruber said:cv19 is looking for me
thanks :thumb:nicobie said:Happy birthday Matt.
Stay safe.
markz said:We all know who bears responsibility for the pandemic virus.
Skorohod said:markz said:We all know who bears responsibility for the pandemic virus.
I wonder, what happened to markz? It's literally a month since he posted on ES last time...
nicobie said:I always thought he was just another one of Daunty's creations like the guy who was supposedly building a house out in the sticks.
I apologize in advance if by chance I'm wrong.
"Simple. Mask rates aren't above 90% in the US."JackFlorey said:Simple. Mask rates aren't above 90% in the US. Only 44% of US citizens say they regularly wear a mask outside their home. 27% of republicans are proud to say they never, ever wear a mask.sn0wchyld said:Perhaps then you can explain why parts of northern europe, with mask wearing rates at or below 10%, have the same (or perhaps less) rates of death and case rate than other parts of the EU (or USA for that matter) despite those having rates above 90%?
Absolutely. They are one part of the formula that includes distancing, moving things outdoors, better hygiene, contact tracing and testing/quarantining. They are a big part of it though.It doesn't prove they're ineffective, but that they are at the very least, not primary in preventing spread/death, and that there's almost certainly other factors involved in their efficacy (such as quality of mask, method of use, etc etc etc).
Masks are most effective at stopping you from spreading your own viruses. If you touch the mask saturated with your own flora you will not become infected with a new virus, since you already have it.It may reduce aerosoles for instance, but if you touch the mask even once then dont disinfect before touching anything else then your efficacy just dropped dramatically (How often do you think people are doing that? )
?? Almost no one dies directly from COVID-19 as a primary cause. They die from the pneumonia it creates, or the organ failure it causes, or the blood clots it causes. (Which is why people who are risk for pneumonia are much more likely to die.)methodology on categorisation is also worthy of discussion... ie died with or from?
But if someone is shot by a criminal and dies of blood loss, we still call it death by gunshot wound - even if the primary cause of death is exsanguination.
?? You claimed that the US is seeing mask utilization "rates above 90%." That is untrue. Hence, your observation that the US is seeing higher infection rates even though we are seeing mask utilization rates above 90% is incorrect.sn0wchyld said:This doesn't address my point at all - if mask rates vary so much, and masks are 'a big part of it' then why such variant outcomes, that dont correlate with mask rates, suggesting a lack of any causal relationship?
"They are a big part of it though."
Then again why such a poor correlation in otherwise 'similar' countries (relatively speaking)?
Yes, you have to use a good mask and use it properly. (As is true with handwashing, distancing, staying home when you are sick etc.)Alot of masks only reduce the droplet/aerosol rate by a few %... so it wouldn't take much in the way of poor behaviour/etiquette and fitment to negate/reverse this small gain.