Masks had no impact, full lockdown had no impact - Study of 30 countries finds

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

Of course all this cautionary wording  that those that keep harping on this is called "CYA" 

Indeed. Politicians do what they do, whether it is of benefit or not.

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Indeed. Do you think the NZ government is unaware of that study? They obviously disagree.

I have no idea on the NZ government but I think many will disagree and many will agree, this an an experiment in the making for all scientists, thats why me personally am still open to convincing conclusions with peer reviewed results that can then be used for policy making in future pandemics

[Greenside]

I suspect that proper evaluation of the precautions adopted by governments worldwide will not be possible for a long time yet, and even then there will be no "one size fits all" solution given the other variables that affect the outcome and how you judge it.

 

Personally, I think that the restrictions and their economic consequences are worth the price if they have bought enough time to avoid overwhelming the available healthcare resources and allow societies to establish a new norm in some kind of ordered way.  Maybe what's happening in Brazil will shed light on a different approach....

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

So it's kind of funny isn't it, all those people who thought they were smarter than everyone else by putting a rag on their mouth now have to face up to the reality that they were wrong all along.

 

Unsurprisingly I see some are having a bit of difficulty with this.

 

Delicious.

I like it too.

Interesting that while they bring up every objection they can, they can't prove your research wrong. It's all just opinion.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I have no idea on the NZ government but I think many will disagree and many will agree, this an an experiment in the making for all scientists, thats why me personally am still open to convincing conclusions with peer reviewed results that can then be used for policy making in future pandemics

Yes, I can see that, you're very open, a study of 30 countries has just concluded that wearing face masks has no impact on transmission or death rates but you still cling to the belief in face masks.

 

Clearly you're very open to new evidence.

 

Not.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

I have no idea on the NZ government but I think many will disagree and many will agree, this an an experiment in the making for all scientists, thats why me personally am still open to convincing conclusions with peer reviewed results that can then be used for policy making in future pandemics

The official position of the NZ government is that it has no position one way or the other. I assure you that if there existed the slightest shred of actual real evidence that mask wearing prevented transmission of Corona we'd all be wearing one by now.

[jvs]

I have not read all of the responses,i usually do but from what i did read i get  that nobody knows

100% for certain they work or not.

Here is my question,isn't a mask something like a condom?

You should only use it once and use it the right way?

I use condoms only once but i have been wearing the same mask for over a month.

Stupid?Maybe but i am on the side of people who do not believe they work,i just wear it where i

have to and i comply with the rules(sort of)

We are all going to be infected with this sooner or later unless there is a vaccine soon!!

Being in contact with fewer people does reduce your chances of contracting the virus(for now)

Just look around you what is really happening,rules and regulations look and sound fine but is it really that way when you are out and about?

It is impossible in a society to be isolated from what is going around.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

11 minutes ago, Logosone said:

stay at home social distancing do NOT work,

 

In the above comment, you correctly describe one of the authors' conclusions.

 

But in your prior post, you mischaracterized their conclusion by leaving out the "stay at home" element and making it sound like they didn't support any social distancing:

 

22 minutes ago, Logosone said:

full lockdowns and social distancing did not work.

 

As as been clearly shown above, they did in fact find that SOME forms of social distancing did in fact work.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I like it too.

Interesting that while they bring up every objection they can, they can't prove your research wrong. It's all just opinion.

The funniest part is that they cling to the tiniest most insignificant shreds and straws, anything but have to acknowledge that full mandatory lockdown and wearing face masks was silly, wrong and totally ineffectual.

 

Witness how they ignore the CLEAR data from a study that looked at 30 countries and instead focus on some CYA qualifications as if that were the main research. You can't make it up.

 

Not one, not ONE of those who doubt the study has actually looked at the substance of the data in the study itself, they only look at qualifications waffle because of course that suits their wrong position, whereas the data would prove them wrong.

[Logosone]

1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

In the above comment, you correctly describe one of the authors' conclusions.

 

But in your prior post, you mischaracterized their conclusion by leaving out the "stay at home" element and making it sound like they didn't support any social distancing:

 

 

As as been clearly shown above, they did in fact find that SOME forms of social distancing did in fact work.

No, you're obviously incapable of understanding what "full lockdown" means, it means ALL the mandatory lockdown measures such as the UK implemented, including stay-at home social distancing. Unfortunately the stay-at home social distancing measure has been clearly shown to have no impact on transmission or death rates whatsoever.

 

So the only mischaracterization going on here is yours, of my posts.

 

I have posted the full article, the full research so people can make their own minds up. Obviously some people can understand the study. Others can't. Such is life.

 

However, be clear that:

 

Stay at home social distancing has been shown to have no effect on transmission and death figures.

 

Wearing masks has been shown to have no effect on transmission and death figures.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Witness how they ignore the CLEAR data from a study that looked at 30 countries and instead focus on some CYA qualifications as if that were the main research. You can't make it up.

 

From the actual study. Even the authors acknowledge the face mask issue remains a subject for debate:

 

Quote

Our findings on facemasks or coverings are perhaps counterintuitive especially given the strong debate on their use. In a recent systematic review we concluded that the evidence in favour of face mask use outside of hospital was weak.26 On the other hand a recent modelling study concluded that community facemask use could reduce the spread of COVID-19.27

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Wearing masks has been shown to have no effect on transmission and death figures.

 

From the study:

 

Quote

Our results on face coverings should be considered to be preliminary because the use of coverings was recommended or required only relatively late in the epidemics in each European country. The results for face covering are too preliminary to inform policy but indicates that face covering as an intervention merits close monitoring.

 

I'd rather rely on what the authors actually wrote vs your mischaracterized version of it.

 

[Logosone]

5 minutes ago, jvs said:

I have not read all of the responses,i usually do but from what i did read i get  that nobody knows

100% for certain they work or not.

Here is my question,isn't a mask something like a condom?

You should only use it once and use it the right way?

I use condoms only once but i have been wearing the same mask for over a month.

Stupid?Maybe but i am on the side of people who do not believe they work,i just wear it where i

have to and i comply with the rules(sort of)

We are all going to be infected with this sooner or later unless there is a vaccine soon!!

Being in contact with fewer people does reduce your chances of contracting the virus(for now)

Just look around you what is really happening,rules and regulations look and sound fine but is it really that way when you are out and about?

It is impossible in a society to be isolated from what is going around.

 

Yes, we actually know for certain that the wearing of face masks has no effect on transmission or death figures.

 

We know this because a study of various universities and the London Schoool of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has looked at the data of 30 countries and compared the effectives of various measures, including wearing face masks.

 

Wear a face mask if you want, but it has no effect.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

8 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Yes, I can see that, you're very open, a study of 30 countries has just concluded that wearing face masks has no impact on transmission or death rates but you still cling to the belief in face masks.

 

Clearly you're very open to new evidence.

 

Not.

The study you keep referring to has stated very clearly that its experimental and to use caution. In other words if you're prepared to fall hook line and sinker for it as is before being peer reviewed then I would say that you are the one who is not open to other studies.

 

For me, I'll let you make your own conclusions on what I'm open to as you clearly have ignored what I stated.

 

 

[Phulublub]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The virus kills, apparently, mainly the old with underlying health problems

Weekly ONS figures for UK appear to disprove that theory.

 

Ages 15-44

 

 

 

[ianezy0]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Which was official NZ position at the start of all this.

I've been saying that all along, but some posters oppose and demand everyone wear one.

Are they now going to admit they had no grounds for demanding everyone wear one? I'm not holding my breath.

Not based on one post from a country at the top of the list of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Edited May 8, 2020 by ianezy0

[thaibeachlovers]

10 minutes ago, jvs said:

You should only use it once and use it the right way?

Depends on the mask, but yes. Once a mask like most use gets wet from exhaled breath it no longer works. Only good for reducing the chance an infectious person transmits it, but that's if they are coughing or sneezing.

Masks that allow exhaled air out the sides are useless at preventing virus escaping. That's most masks in use.

 

[Logosone]

1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

From the study:

 

 

I'd rather rely on what the authors actually wrote vs your mischaracterized version of it.

 

From the study:

 

"We found that closure of education facilities, prohibiting mass gatherings and closure of some nonessential businesses were associated with reduced incidence whereas stay at home orders, closure of all non-businesses and requiring the wearing of facemasks or coverings in public was not associated with any independent additional impact."

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260v1.full.pdf

 

So if you're relying on what the authors actually wrote why are you not relying on the above?

 

Is it because you are intent on misrepresenting and distorting the research and my own posts?

 

The authors clearly say:

 

"...the wearing of facemasks or coverings in public was not associated with any independent additional impact"

 

But you're not relying on that part then, I assume?

 

Seems a bit selective, and well, distorting.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

We can go round and round about this, and I'm not going to do that.

 

Once again, you fail to include the very next sentence of their language where they go onto to say their mask findings are too preliminary and should not be the basis for public policy decisions.

 

If you're gonna quote them, quote the WHOLE comment in context.

 

[Bkk Brian]

15 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The funniest part is that they cling to the tiniest most insignificant shreds and straws, anything but have to acknowledge that full mandatory lockdown and wearing face masks was silly, wrong and totally ineffectual.

The epicenter of the pandemic in Wuhan, how do you feel the spread would have gone if they had not locked down and had a compulsory use of facemasks? 

[Logosone]

21 minutes ago, Greenside said:

Personally, I think that the restrictions and their economic consequences are worth the price if they have bought enough time to avoid overwhelming the available healthcare resources and allow societies to establish a new norm in some kind of ordered way.  

Keep living that fantasy but of course we know now that the full lockdown UK style has not caused any reduction in transmission. The data of 30 countries, including the UK, has just been analysed. The stay-at-home lockdown had no effect on transmission rates, nor indeed death rates.

 

 

[steelepulse]

2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

We can go round and round about this, and I'm not going to do that.

 

Once again, you fail to include the very next sentence of their language where they go onto to say their mask findings are too preliminary and should not be the basis for public policy decisions.

 

If you're gonna quote them, quote the WHOLE comment in context.

 

That's called CYA, or spelled out Cover Your Ass.  

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, Phulublub said:

Weekly ONS figures for UK appear to disprove that theory.

 

Ages 15-44

 

 

 

If I read it right that's 100 Corona deaths in a week for everyone 15 to 44. That's out of 66 million people. That many would probably die on the roads if people were allowed to be on the roads.

[jvs]

7 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Wear a face mask if you want, but it has no effect.

Like i said i do not believe they work but i am not alone in this world and if every one

around me is wearing a mask i do so also.

Not wearing one is being frowned upon and may even get you some angry responses.

Not believing a mask works or being and acting ignorant is something else again.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

The epicenter of the pandemic in Wuhan, how do you feel the spread would have gone if they had not locked down and had a compulsory use of facemasks? 

Do we actually know the truth about Wuhan?

[teatime101]

3 hours ago, Logosone said:

A study by several universities and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine examined the effect of policies in 30 countries and found that wearing masks made no difference, and the UK's full lockdown made no difference, after analysing the results of policies put in place in 30 countries.

Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 in Europe: a quasi-experimental study

 View ORCID ProfilePaul Raymond Hunter, Felipe Colon-Gonzalez,  View ORCID ProfileJulii Suzanne Brainard, Steve Rushton

doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260 

This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice.

....

Let's read that last bit again.

It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice.

Report here:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260v1

Edited May 8, 2020 by teatime101

[KhunBENQ]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

The epicenter of the pandemic in Wuhan, how do you feel the spread would have gone if they had not locked down and had a compulsory use of facemasks? 

So nice of our Chinese friends after weeks of lying and cover up, arresting informants.

Lying that human to human infection is not proven just to be able to import protection suits and masks.

Really nice they are.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

That's called CYA, or spelled out Cover Your Ass.  

 And yet the study authors didn't extend that same cautionary limitation to the other findings. They did it only for their face mask findings. And they explained exactly why...

 

Quote

Our results on face coverings should be considered to be preliminary because the use of coverings was recommended or required only relatively late in the epidemics in each European country.

 

Quote

Face covering interventions varied hugely between countries: most made face covering voluntary and some only suggested it in specific settings.

 

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

We can go round and round about this, and I'm not going to do that.

 

Once again, you fail to include the very next sentence of their language where they go onto to say their mask findings are too preliminary and should not be the basis for public policy decisions.

 

If you're gonna quote them, quote the WHOLE comment in context.

 

EVERY study you will ever read will conclude with "we need more data" it means nothing.

 

The meaningful part of this study is precisely the data which they analyse, not the CYA waffle. If you look at the data clearly the wearing of masks has had no impact whatsoever on transmission or death figures. None.

 

And the authors say that clearly. However, you quote only selective the fluff and not the actual data of the study. And you have the nerve to tell me to quote the whole comment, when all you do is pick out selective garnishing but not the main course. I have quoted the whole article, the whole study. You have not.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

We can go round and round about this, and I'm not going to do that.

I can certainly agree with that.

I'm going to go with the NZ government position and not wear one, unless they change their mind.