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

Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

vitamindforall.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 118 posts

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#91

Post by 0-_-0 »

masonic wrote: post #76
jiofih wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cases are skyrocketing And comments like yours are one of the reasons. The study shows that masks do little to protect the wearer - which is kind of obvious as it’s not going to filter incoming air very efficiently, that has never been the purpose of surgical masks. They don’t protect against airborne pathogens and every medical professional knows it. You need a crítica mass for masks to start reducing transmission…

Can you point me to any data showing that random quality cloth masks even reduce coronavirus transmission ? The recent Kaiser San Jose case[0] where one worker infected 44+ fellow staff, all of whom were wearing masks, ... from inside a tree costume would seem to be a great counterexample. [0] https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/01/07/kaiser-san-jose-fined... Essentially everyone I see in the wild has been wearing masks…

Can you point me to a study showing the effectiveness of not touching one's face?

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#93

Post by m0llusk »

bpodgursky wrote: post #20
mark-r wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The HN crowd is fascinated by simple but effective "hacks". This appears to be one.

The rest of the world is fascinated by simple but effective "hacks" like wearing a mask. There are a lot of simple hacks that end up being real.

Both masks and Vitamin D are helpful and those at risk or in areas of great spread should consider both. This is similar to masks and face shields offering a multiplier effect. The big difference is that sufficient Vitamin D levels are strongly correlated with numerous metrics of good health including immune, metabolic, and muscle-skeletal system measures.

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#94

Post by stunt »

I have no way to judge. But I know the normal recovery rate for COVID19 is high. I also know a lot of patients are advised to take Vitamin-D supplement now. So it's hard to say if Vitamin-D is really helping or not without proper test on large group of patients with same validation methods that they use for vacines.

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#95

Post by jiofih »

irq11 wrote: post #65
jiofih wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the first link you mention: > we conclude that 20 d after becoming mandatory face masks have reduced the number of new infections by around 45% A later increase in infections does not invalidate statistical significance for earlier studies. It’s just math, not “an excuse”. You’ll never see the data for how many cases would have been recorded without the measures in place. You can see the full paper here: http://…

> A later increase in infections does not invalidate statistical significance for earlier studies. It’s just math, not “an excuse”. So your theory is that masks worked then , but stopped working now ? Convenient! > You’ll never see the data for how many cases would have been recorded without the measures in place. Well, yes, exactly...these are uncontrolled studies. Which is why they’re such garbage. You can see that…

No, the one from Jena was a controlled study, and they tried to exclude any biases like neighboring cities. It’s “synthetic” because you can’t create two equal cities and population to test, unfortunately.

Again, did you actually open and read the link? It’s pointless to discuss your feelings in place of the studies. You’re dismissing all of the data in that report based on.. what? Again, the increase in total cases tells you nothing about the efficacy of the measures. The controlled study does that.

Studies like these can be invalidated by further studies, or systematic reviews. They are not invalidated by popular feelings over news reports. Show me one of those statistically-backed rebuttals and I’ll believe you.

(The WaPo link was posted by yourself, most of those are self-reported. It’s good that you notice because it also weakens your own argument if you think about it)

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#96

Post by jfengel »

0-_-0 wrote: post #91
masonic wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point me to any data showing that random quality cloth masks even reduce coronavirus transmission ? The recent Kaiser San Jose case[0] where one worker infected 44+ fellow staff, all of whom were wearing masks, ... from inside a tree costume would seem to be a great counterexample. [0] https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/01/07/kaiser-san-jose-fined... Essentially everyone I see in the wild has been wearing masks…

Can you point me to a study showing the effectiveness of not touching one's face?

Or parachutes?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#98

Post by lern_too_spel »

irq11 wrote: post #63
lern_too_spel wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mechanism by which masks would reduce transmission has been repeatedly studied in a laboratory environment, so in the absence of a properly designed randomized control trial, the prior should be that it works. Instead, in this thread, you have cherry picked tortured data and used flawed methodologies to say that they don't work. Saying that there are similar poor studies on the other side does not update my prior…

I have “cherry picked“ nothing. That’s the data from the study. The researchers picked the start date, arbitrarily, to produce the outcome they liked. It’s obvious. By the way: there was a randomized controlled trial for masks and covid published just recently. They were able to detect no statistically significant protective effect: https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/vinay-prasad/89778

I was referring to other studies that cherry picked for your position you posted "in this thread," not that study that supposedly cherry picked for the pro-mask position.

The study you just linked to is an excellent example of using poor methodology to support your position. If a study is not powered to detect the expected change (for the mask wearer, which is expected to be very small) with full compliance, I would certainly not expect to get a statistically significant result with partial compliance. It did not attempt to measure the effect on transmission from the mask wearer to others at all.

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#99

Post by irq11 »

joshuamorton wrote: post #79
irq11 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A later increase in infections does not invalidate statistical significance for earlier studies. It’s just math, not “an excuse”. So your theory is that masks worked then , but stopped working now ? Convenient! > You’ll never see the data for how many cases would have been recorded without the measures in place. Well, yes, exactly...these are uncontrolled studies. Which is why they’re such garbage. You can see that…

> So your theory is that masks worked then, but stopped working now? This doesn't follow. It's completely believable that masks have continued to be effective at curbing spread by 40% continuously. However increased holiday travel, as well as colder weather and people hanging out more in doors caused an increase in spread that wasn't present in the summer.

So let me summarize:

Cases go down after mask mandate: proof that masks work!

Cases go up after mask mandate: masks still work!

This isn’t science.

Re: Over 100 Scientists and Doctors Call for Increased Vitamin D to Combat Covid-19

#100

Post by irq11 »

jfengel wrote: post #96
0-_-0 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point me to a study showing the effectiveness of not touching one's face?

Or parachutes? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/

Literally everyone thinks their favorite pseudoscientific theory is a parachute.

Calling something a parachute is not science. It’s just a pseudo-intellectual defense of superstition.

Post reply on HN