Once again, your lack of reading comprehension is showing. Not shocking.
Merged Covid Megathread
- Thread starter kcbob79clone
- Start date
- Status
I’m glad. And probably better than the 473 people now hospitalized with Covid in Iowa. That’s a new all-time high!Thanks man. I’ll, no doubt, sleep well and in peace.
When correlated to confirmed cases as a percentage it isn’t.
New CDC report shows effectiveness of wearing masks and closing bars in stemming coronavirus
New data suggest public health mitigation techniques are critical to containing the coronavirus.
thehill.com
Honestly bars have to be a no brainerNew CDC report shows effectiveness of wearing masks and closing bars in stemming coronavirus
New data suggest public health mitigation techniques are critical to containing the coronavirus.
My bad, I was unaware that ones join date had any relevance towards your continual lack of understanding. My sincere apologies.
Are we at the 2.6 mile marker yet?
Indoor mask mandates reduce coronavirus infection rates by nearly HALF
A new study from Simon Fraser University looked at the impacts of mask mandates across Ontario, Canada, and found an average weekly reduction of 25% to 31% in new coronavirus cases.
LOL. More to do with the mask mandate changing and or modifying people’s behaviors than actually the wearing of mask.Indoor mask mandates reduce coronavirus infection rates by nearly HALF
A new study from Simon Fraser University looked at the impacts of mask mandates across Ontario, Canada, and found an average weekly reduction of 25% to 31% in new coronavirus cases.www.dailymail.co.uk
1. you didn’t read the article
2. it’s not peered reviewed
nice try.
Thanks so much, Argent. I will give that all the consideration it deserves.
They have tests for the flu and even though it's bacterial they test for strep.
Finding out you have it helps to not spread it.
Last edited:
Most of the businesses I've seen go under were on their way out anyway or were barely getting by...is it fair to look at it that way since the same approach is used for lives?
Many of the articles you have referenced have not been subjected to peer review including the one from the guy back in March. You clearly didn't read the article I posted, either, beyond reading the summary. If you actually care about this, take your own advice on these things and begin with an open mind instead of starting from a set opinion and finding information that supports it.
The last few pages seem to be a ******** of personal insults. I am assuming that would fit well in the cave.
That study's findings were not on masks, but that close contacts by living with a COVID + person or going to restaurants/bars were associated with contracting COVID. It stated that people that had positive COVID tests were twice as likely to have gone to restaurants/bars/coffee shops than people who tested negative. The argument is you can't effectively wear masks in those situations. It did not come to the conclusion that mask wearing is ineffective at preventing spread.
Finding out if you actually have it in enough viral load to actually be sick and/or contagious is very important too. Unfortunately, we're still catching a ton of cases where they aren't, because our testing is way, way too sensitive (85-90% of cases may not be either sick or contagious).
"Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California-Riverside, said she believes any test with a cycle threshold over 35 is too sensitive. "I'm shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive," she said.
And according to Mandavilli, a review conducted by the New York Times of three sets of coronavirus testing data from Massachusetts, Nevada, and New York found that up to 90% of patients in those data sets who tested positive for the coronavirus had very low viral loads.
Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, said of the Times review's results, "I'm really shocked that it could be that high—the proportion of people with high [cycle threshold] value results." He added, "Boy, does it really change the way we need to be thinking about testing.""
Coronavirus tests are extremely sensitive. (That could be a problem, experts say.)
The most commonly used type of coronavirus test in America could be generating positive results for people who might not be contagious, according to some public health experts—but the experts say that doesn't necessarily mean the country should be testing less, Apoorva Mandavilli reports for the...
Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. (Published 2020)
The usual diagnostic tests may simply be too sensitive and too slow to contain the spread of the virus.
Finding out if you actually have it in enough viral load to actually be sick and/or contagious is very important too. Unfortunately, we're still catching a ton of cases where they aren't, because our testing is way, way too sensitive (85-90% of cases may not be either sick or contagious).
"Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California-Riverside, said she believes any test with a cycle threshold over 35 is too sensitive. "I'm shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive," she said.
And according to Mandavilli, a review conducted by the New York Times of three sets of coronavirus testing data from Massachusetts, Nevada, and New York found that up to 90% of patients in those data sets who tested positive for the coronavirus had very low viral loads.
Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, said of the Times review's results, "I'm really shocked that it could be that high—the proportion of people with high [cycle threshold] value results." He added, "Boy, does it really change the way we need to be thinking about testing.""
Coronavirus tests are extremely sensitive. (That could be a problem, experts say.)
The most commonly used type of coronavirus test in America could be generating positive results for people who might not be contagious, according to some public health experts—but the experts say that doesn't necessarily mean the country should be testing less, Apoorva Mandavilli reports for the...www.advisory.com
Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. (Published 2020)
The usual diagnostic tests may simply be too sensitive and too slow to contain the spread of the virus.www.nytimes.com
Yeah if we could streamline to really know if someone's not contagious vs. their viral load that would make a difference.
Still, pretty sure at most work places, the general rule is if you have a fever, stay home. Someone could have a fever off and on for several days with a low viral load, and as contagious as that is, that disrupts the work place if in fact it does spread.
Also we're not sure if someone has had it, if they get re-infected, if they're infectious.
- Status
