I agree. Another way to say it is the mandates are not working to prevent the spread of the virus in LA.
I believe they have certainly helped. I can't imagine LA if nothing had been done.Gumby said:
I agree. Another way to say it is the mandates are not working to prevent the spread of the virus in LA.
bay fan said:I believe they have certainly helped. I can't imagine LA if nothing had been done.Gumby said:
I agree. Another way to say it is the mandates are not working to prevent the spread of the virus in LA.
nortex97 said:
NPI's really have no statistically significant impact on the spread of the virus.
Notacoronabro said:
https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1338974424519692288?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
All 3 had different NPIs. All 3 moved in tandem.
Notacoronabro said:
It proves that all variables proposed have negligible impact on the outcome.
The question is what NPIs work? We've got 9 months of data now. Would be great if you could provide proof they work rather than claim the variables just aren't calibrated right.
pocketrockets06 said:
Seasonal flu with the level of existing immunity and flu shots has an R0 of like 1.5ish. With the NPIs in effect, that's been dropped to something less than 1.
Covid has an R0 of like 2.5 -3. The estimated Rt during the recent waves has been in the 1.3-1.7 range in almost every state. Only in the very first waves before lockdowns did it get to that 3ish range. What we can basically say is that NPIs have some effect but we're not sure which ones and in what combo work the best.
Gumby said:
Compare Florida to California and see what it looks like. Most cities in Florida have dropped all NPIs. Florida should be skyrocketing past every state that is using NPIs.
Notacoronabro said:
You cannot reason with this logic.
NPI measures, cases go down - WE WON!
NPI measures, cases go up - NOT TRYING HARD ENOUGH
No NPI measures, cases go up - WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER
No NPI measures, cases go down - Silence.
cone said:
what exactly isn't reasonably equivalent?
climate?
Gordo14 said:Notacoronabro said:
You cannot reason with this logic.
NPI measures, cases go down - WE WON!
NPI measures, cases go up - NOT TRYING HARD ENOUGH
No NPI measures, cases go up - WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER
No NPI measures, cases go down - Silence.
See again, you know you can't actually challenge the substance of what I said so you're resorting to the lowest common denominator. Build me a model that shows cases uneffected by human interaction and prove it's validity and you might have a case that NPIs don't affect transmission rates. Those post is evidence that you don't care to understand how or why this works, but by God you have an opinion.
pocketrockets06 said:
I mean I guess if the flu and RSV data doesn't prove it for you, I'll just concede that COVID is the one respiratory virus where the NPIs have zero effect.
As an engineer, I'm having a tough time detecting a pattern on that one. Lol.Notacoronabro said:
You mean like this?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-death-rate-vs-population-density?time=latest
Gordo14 said:cone said:
what exactly isn't reasonably equivalent?
climate?
We can start with population density and number of people per household. There's a reason L.A. is getting hit particularly bad.
I suspect there are far more multi generational households and much smaller living spaces based upon cost of living in LA as oppose to Florida. More people, smaller spaces = not a good combination.Gumby said:As an engineer, I'm having a tough time detecting a pattern on that one. Lol.Notacoronabro said:
You mean like this?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-death-rate-vs-population-density?time=latest
I do agree with the poster that stated that multiple variables are involved. It's not just population density, weather, public transit, but also demographics, population health, access to medical care, etc.
Florida is much older than California and has several high density cities. Also, California and L.A. in particular is known for their terrible public transit that no one uses. So one would think Florida would be in far worse shape even if they had more restrictive NPIs than California. Since that is not the case, I think an objective person should question the NPIs being used in L.A. and their actual utility in managing COVID.
bay fan said:I suspect there are far more multi generational households and much smaller living spaces based upon cost of living in LA as oppose to Florida. More people, smaller spaces = not a good combination.Gumby said:As an engineer, I'm having a tough time detecting a pattern on that one. Lol.Notacoronabro said:
You mean like this?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-death-rate-vs-population-density?time=latest
I do agree with the poster that stated that multiple variables are involved. It's not just population density, weather, public transit, but also demographics, population health, access to medical care, etc.
Florida is much older than California and has several high density cities. Also, California and L.A. in particular is known for their terrible public transit that no one uses. So one would think Florida would be in far worse shape even if they had more restrictive NPIs than California. Since that is not the case, I think an objective person should question the NPIs being used in L.A. and their actual utility in managing COVID.
There is a lot of data studying NPI implementation, and it's impact on both the flu, and the incidence rate/mortality rate for covid. But again, some people now are so traumatized by covid/2020, they have a religious belief in various NPI actions efficacy, and will not accept any contrary evidence (cognitive dissonance).CowtownEng said:nortex97 said:
NPI's really have no statistically significant impact on the spread of the virus.
Perhaps, but it's difficult to know as there are no historical data for reference. Doesn't the absolutely non-existent flu season offer some evidence that societal changes do impact the transmission rates of a virus?
nortex97 said:
Here is just one paper (from the many at the above link) studying the regression analysis of lockdowns and covid death rates. Notice the discussion, but there is not a good case for causality, period.
nortex97 said:
For the flu, it goes back some time, and I just don't think the CDC, WHO, and NIH are all wrong suddenly;
CDC nonpharaceutical measures for pandemic influenza in nonhealthcare settings
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0995_article
Excerpt: "Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza."
Quote:
WHO the likely disadvantages of the use of mask by healthy people in the general public include:
potential increased risk of self-contamination due to the manipulation of a face mask and subsequently touching eyes with contaminated hands; (48, 49) potential self-contamination that can occur if nonmedical masks are not changed when wet or soiled. This can create favourable conditions for microorganism to amplify; potential headache and/or breathing difficulties, depending on type of mask...
https://www.who.int/.../advice-on-the-use-of-masks-in-the...
Quote:
NIH "Cloth masks are dangerous, may increase risk of infection, NIH published clinical study from New Zealand" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420971/
Quote:
"New England Journal of Medicine: Outside of hospitals, masks do not work"
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372