Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 432 posts

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#141

Post by WheelsAtLarge »

gfodor wrote: post #3

> Travel bans are not evidence-based: It may seem like travel bans for individual countries are a necessary step, but I cannot stress enough that they do not work. This one point compromised the article for me. The standard for “working”, like all measures, is to slow down the spread. We all know travel bans got a bad name because you-know-who proposed them. But all countries imposed travel bans and we ought to be co…

Travel bans slow down the spread only if they are done for all travelers. The piece meal approach done by many countries where only certain countries are banded do little to stop the spread. The virus spreads too quickly and eventually it will come in via the travelers that are allowed to come in. Testing and retesting is probably the only way to slow it down other than a complete band on travelers.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#143

Post by cassonmars »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #90
timr wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Cite the evidence. Editorials and commentaries don't count. All of the good evidence (RCTs) on masks is extremely marginal, at best, and there hasn't been a single RCT I'm aware of that showed any effect of the other interventions. https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/do-masks-reduce-risk...

Surprisingly, masks with poor filtration underperform at filtering. Show a study that demonstrates the ineffectiveness of an N95.

Most people aren’t wearing N95s, and to my understanding, no jurisdiction has a mask policy that requires them.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#144

Post by CorrectHorseBat »

bmeski wrote: post #55
tgv wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you going to tell those 12000 people: sorry, but you need to die for my exceptionally limited view of economy?

Yes. How many people die in car accidents each year?

In Sweden? ~300 [1], so about 40 years worth of traffic accidents.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/438009/number-of-road-de...

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#146

Post by coolso »

gfodor wrote: post #3

> Travel bans are not evidence-based: It may seem like travel bans for individual countries are a necessary step, but I cannot stress enough that they do not work. This one point compromised the article for me. The standard for “working”, like all measures, is to slow down the spread. We all know travel bans got a bad name because you-know-who proposed them. But all countries imposed travel bans and we ought to be co…

- "Travel bans don't work": supports banning the unvaccinated from traveling to particular establishments, supported preventing anyone from traveling pretty much anywhere during the first lockdown stages last year

- "Walls don't work": closes and locks door when entering own home, probably has walls in house too

- "Ivermectin is horse paste": is actually not good for COVID, but is on the WHO list of essential medicines and has saved countless lives and has a side effect profile that's tamer than most of the antibiotics that most US doctors will prescribe as a precautionary measure for a multitude of things

The more they BS-us, the less we listen. Is that what they really want?

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#147

Post by nradov »

jljljl wrote: post #63
bingohbangoh wrote: post #2

Does anybody think these variants will ever stop? I hate, __hate__ this constant fear of a lockdown. Hell, a good part of europe is in lockdown right now. I get that the lockdown is being haphazardly enforce for those countries who've decided on it but I dislike these even being rules on the books. Leave me the hell alone! If we couldn't overcome it after a year of lockdowns, why is this gonna be the time it changes?…

I don’t understand the recent celebrating of Florida’s COVID performance — in September, after vaccinations and treatment options were widely available, Florida was losing more than 300 people per day to COVID. They went from ~25th in the nation for COVID Deaths per capita to 8th worst since the pandemic started. That “just surviving” came at a huge cost of lives.

Florida has a higher proportion of elderly residents at higher risk. When you adjust for demographics the death rate in Florida is about average for the USA.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#148

Post by Klinky »

timr wrote: post #91
titzer wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but they do reduce the viral load by 30-50% I think the effect is much larger than that, but yes, absolutely. This is an important point that is constantly lost in the public discourse. We realize there's a big difference in dosage with poisons and radiation, but it's the same with viral infections; viruses do take time to replicate, so having a low initial exposure can give the immune system to ramp up sooner, bef…

All current evidence is that masks have a minor effect, measured in tiny fractions of a percent. https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/do-masks-reduce-risk ... To date, I'm aware of no study that has quantified a difference in infection, hospitalization or death that is attributable to travel bans.

Vinay Prasad seems to be a contrarian who recently compared the US COVID-19 policies to Hitler's Germany[1]. In the article you linked, he's citing his own study on cloth masks. Most would agree that cloth masks are the least effective masking option at stopping viral spread. Cloth masking is just the easiest target to attack in an anti-mask agenda. He also implies doctor's have inherent bias against HCQ and Ivermectin, while being pro-mask.

Basically the dude has his own biases and agenda here, and the study he cites isn't a definitive nail against mask wearing.

1. https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/how-democracy-ends

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#149

Post by ipaddr »

bingohbangoh wrote: post #12
Denvercoder9 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Leave me the hell alone! As long as that makes essential things such as grocery shopping more dangerous for others, such as myself, no.

Ok, then when does this end? I'm all ears!

It will be over if we go inside and plug into a matrix like world. That was the missing piece from the first lockdown. Mass VR simulating our world.

Re: New Concerning Variant: B.1.1.529

#150

Post by actually_a_dog »

timr wrote: post #121
actually_a_dog wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, that's not what you want to measure. You want to measure whether an intervention works if people adhere to the protocol. Again, as I asked you in another comment, would you expect masks to work if people don't wear them?

> that's not what you want to measure. You want to measure whether an intervention works if people adhere to the protocol. No, you want to measure if an intervention works if you do everything reasonable to enact it. You don't get to invent an alternate reality where people are 100% compliant and there are chocolate rivers and gumdrop trees. Otherwise, I have the perfect diet plan that will end all obesity, worldwide…

No, these are not public policy studies. These are medical studies. Do they measure the effectiveness of an experimental medication on people who stop taking it? No. If I were to measure things as you propose, I guarantee you I could conduct a huge study showing that exercise doesn't make people healthier, just because most people won't adhere to an exercise program. That has no bearing on the effectiveness of the intervention.

The point of these studies is to show people that the intervention works if people do it. And, yes, there are public policy studies showing that mask mandates don't work, but that doesn't mean they don't work for the people actually wearing them. It just means people who refuse are cutting their noses off to spite their faces. As noted in another comment, this isn't the beginning of the Third Reich, and should not be controversial at all.

Post reply on HN