Will you get vaccinated against COVID once it's available?

[G1911]

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Specific criticisms please.

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

Abstract

The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission characteristics, source control, wearer protection, sociological considerations, and implementation considerations. A primary route of transmission of COVID-19 is via respiratory particles, and it is known to be transmissible from presymptomatic, paucisymptomatic, and asymptomatic individuals. Reducing disease spread requires two things: limiting contacts of infected individuals via physical distancing and other measures and reducing the transmission probability per contact. The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts. Public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high. Given the current shortages of medical masks, we recommend the adoption of public cloth mask wearing, as an effective form of source control, in conjunction with existing hygiene, distancing, and contact tracing strategies. Because many respiratory particles become smaller due to evaporation, we recommend increasing focus on a previously overlooked aspect of mask usage: mask wearing by infectious people (“source control”) with benefits at the population level, rather than only mask wearing by susceptible people, such as health care workers, with focus on individual outcomes. We recommend that public officials and governments strongly encourage the use of widespread face masks in public, including the use of appropriate regulation.

Also.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

[Republicaninmass]

When the hysteria and anxiety around getting the disease is 99% WORSE than the disease itself, there is some sort of disconnect. I'm talking in the low risk category. People under 60 with no comorbidities.

Could have been Cuomo/deblasio, here in NY and their:


"It's like fighting air, we cant control it" comment

Call for 50,000 ventilators

Call for aircraft carrier and javits center to be used as hospitals.

People didnt use their common sense. They wore masks outside because they were told to. Many looked down on others as "doing the wrong thing for the country". Now CDC says it fine. Well actually there was never a risk of contracting it outside. There was 100 cases attributed to a Singaporean construction site that were miscatagorized.

Believe half of what you see and none of what you read or hear. Rely on what you know to be true. The same thing happened in 1918 and we didnt understand the science behind, but we've acted the same. Wait until these roaring 20s pass, to see how we really fared.

[Peter_Spaeth]

How would I "know what is true" about a complex (and novel) infectious disease, when I am not a scientist by training?

It's sure easy to be smarter than other people with the benefit of hindsight.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How would I "know what is true" about a complex (and novel) infectious disease, when I am not a scientist by training?

Conversely, we were told from the very beginning to listen to the experts. How can one be an expert in something for which very little is known? The "experts" (WHO) told us there was no evidence of human to human transmission of Covid. So how do you determine what you believe and what you don't?

[Eric72]

Question for the people who resist wearing masks around others:

When you sneeze or cough, do you cover your mouth? Why or why not?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Question for the people who resist wearing masks around others:

When you sneeze or cough, do you cover your mouth? Why or why not?

I wear a mask most of the time, but I'll answer the question. When I sneeze? Yes, and I turn my head away from others as well. When I cough? No.

[G1911]

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

What ill motive do you ascribe to this group of scientists and statisticians around the world?

 View ORCID ProfileJeremy Howard, Austin Huang,  View ORCID ProfileZhiyuan Li,  View ORCID ProfileZeynep Tufekci, Vladimir Zdimal,  View ORCID ProfileHelene-Mari van der Westhuizen,  View ORCID ProfileArne von Delft,  View ORCID ProfileAmy Price, Lex Fridman,  View ORCID ProfileLei-Han Tang,  View ORCID ProfileViola Tang,  View ORCID ProfileGregory L. Watson,  View ORCID ProfileChristina E. Bax,  View ORCID ProfileReshama Shaikh,  View ORCID ProfileFrederik Questier, Danny Hernandez,  View ORCID ProfileLarry F. Chu,  View ORCID ProfileChristina M. Ramirez, and  View ORCID ProfileAnne W. Rimoin


afast.ai, San Francisco, CA 94105;


bData Institute, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94105;


cWarren Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, RI 02903;


dCenter for Quantitative Biology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China;


eSchool of Information, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599;


fInstitute of Chemical Process Fundamentals, Czech Academy of Sciences, CZ-165 02 Praha 6, Czech Republic;


gDepartment of Primary Health Care Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, United Kingdom;


hTB Proof, Cape Town 7130, South Africa;


iSchool of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town 7925, South Africa;


jAnesthesia Informatics and Media Lab, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305;


kDepartment of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139;


lDepartment of Physics, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China;


mComplex Systems Division, Beijing Computational Science Research Center, Beijing 100193, China;


nDepartment of Information Systems, Business Statistics and Operations Management, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong SAR, China;


oDepartment of Biostatistics, Jonathan and Karin Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095;


pPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104;


qData Umbrella, New York, NY 10031;


rTeacher Education Department, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Brussels, Belgium;


sOpenAI, San Francisco, CA 94110;


tDepartment of Epidemiology, Jonathan and Karin Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095

[Peter_Spaeth]

Your appeal to authority mantra is a straw man by the way. I am not suggesting anything is true simply because someone in authority said it is. By your logic nobody could ever cite to any study.

[G1911]

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

No, an appeal to authority is a fallacy. Claiming it is not is a straw man.

It is a logical fallacy in the abstract I agree, but I am not appealing to authority. I am citing the CONTENT of the study and asking why you disagree with its apparent conclusions. Certainly one can consider the credentials of the authors as supporting the conclusions without being guilty of a naked appeal to authority argument.

If you say something and I point out it's inconsistent with Einstein's theory of relativity, have I only appealed to authority?

[G1911]

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I do not claim the special ability to read minds and know a persons motive, but I do claim to be able to see science's take in through early March, 2020 and in late March 2020 and see the complete 180 without any new data, or use of control groups (kind of a key part of actual science). I also claim to be able to look at the state figures and see that mask-heavy states are not doing better. I'd love for you to be able to explain to me why science was incorrect until late March, 2020. Talk about straw mans....

Yes controls are always preferable but sometimes not practical.

Science changes constantly, and at least reading the article suggests they did a really deep dive and critical reexamination of the data. If there was bias, financial self-interest, etc. that would certainly be a factor to consider, but I don't see that.

[G1911]

.