New York hospitalizations up 230%

5,771 Views | 51 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by SamHou
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/nyc-renews-plea-on-kids-and-vaccines-as-state-hospitalizations-soar-227-in-month/3210282/

More proof of seasonality with New York having a high vaccination rate, mask mandates, and compliance. This bug is probably here to stay. Look for other northern states to see increases with warmer weather.
DFWTLR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Probably here to stay? Is there anyone who thinks it isnt?
swagfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"No new universal mask mandate has been imposed in any of the tri-states or nationally. New York and New Jersey both strongly encourage masking in high-risk areas in alignment with CDC guidance, while Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont signed an executive order empowering cities and towns to reinstate mask mandates if they so choose. So far, Norwalk is one of the biggest cities in the state to do so."

You know for a fact they have high mask compliance? You doing a count?

Hospitalizations are 97% unvacced in New Jersey (doesn't say for New York in this article).

Anything else you want me to blow up in your post trying to prove your point?

Also I thought you don't care about all this?
hamean02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Salute The Marines said:

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/nyc-renews-plea-on-kids-and-vaccines-as-state-hospitalizations-soar-227-in-month/3210282/

More proof of seasonality with New York having a high vaccination rate, mask mandates, and compliance. This bug is probably here to stay. Look for other northern states to see increases with warmer weather.
their warmer weather is almost over. not sure what you mean by that.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DFWTLR said:

Probably here to stay? Is there anyone who thinks it isnt?

I think there is a significant amount of the public who think we can get rid of this virus, either through policy or technology. It's part of what I think the messaging has been difficult for many.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
swagfan said:

"No new universal mask mandate has been imposed in any of the tri-states or nationally. New York and New Jersey both strongly encourage masking in high-risk areas in alignment with CDC guidance, while Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont signed an executive order empowering cities and towns to reinstate mask mandates if they so choose. So far, Norwalk is one of the biggest cities in the state to do so."

You know for a fact they have high mask compliance? You doing a count?

Hospitalizations are 97% unvacced in New Jersey (doesn't say for New York in this article).

Anything else you want me to blow up in your post trying to prove your point?

Also I thought you don't care about all this?

You misunderstand when I say "I don't care". What I mean is that I won't be wearing a mask, social distancing, or any of the things that don't work. I will push vaccinations and encourage as many as I can to vaccinate. Why? Because vaccination works to protect people. It's the only thing we have that really works. And pushing the masks and other rules undermines vaccination and creates even more distrust and frustration.
Knucklesammich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think back In early 2020, during the two more weeks phase, there was an effort to eliminate the virus. I believe since last summer public health policy has been more about how to keep unchecked spread from happening.

Maybe we don't agree with all the policies and maybe some of them didn't work but that's a different discussion .


swagfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Salute The Marines said:

swagfan said:

"No new universal mask mandate has been imposed in any of the tri-states or nationally. New York and New Jersey both strongly encourage masking in high-risk areas in alignment with CDC guidance, while Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont signed an executive order empowering cities and towns to reinstate mask mandates if they so choose. So far, Norwalk is one of the biggest cities in the state to do so."

You know for a fact they have high mask compliance? You doing a count?

Hospitalizations are 97% unvacced in New Jersey (doesn't say for New York in this article).

Anything else you want me to blow up in your post trying to prove your point?

Also I thought you don't care about all this?

You misunderstand when I say "I don't care". What I mean is that I won't be wearing a mask, social distancing, or any of the things that don't work. I will push vaccinations and encourage as many as I can to vaccinate. Why? Because vaccination works to protect people. It's the only thing we have that really works. And pushing the masks and other rules undermines vaccination and creates even more distrust and frustration.


While I don't fully agree, I can certainly respect that perspective. We align on vacs.

Just go easy on the people that do choose to mask up. No reason to be like others on this board and **** on people for their choice. (Not saying you specifically are, just a general comment)

I'm also not in favor of mask mandates, but to say masks 100% don't work, is likely not accurate. I also can't say they 100% do work, as that is also likely not accurate. The truth is probably somewhere in between.

Of course I have my infectious disease doc in my ear about how shes never gotten one of those diseases in large part due to the mask she wears. She's also not wearing a cloth mask and d**k nosing it.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I know we harp on the government messaging and all that, but we also need to realize that psychology will play a big part in epidemiology moving forward. All these mitigation plans probably looked great on paper but they completely fail when applying them to real people. Especially when half the people in society already hate you because of the political party of the administration you work for.

I also think our government fails to see that being completely transparent and leveling with people from the start can go a long way.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Widespread public mask usage is always unhealthy, as they are never maintained broadly in a hygienic manner as needed. They're terrible for kids too, increased CO inhalation etc.

NY has obviously done a terrible job at mitigating this by getting as many folks out and about as possible during the summer.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Predictable goaltending on this thread. Cases must be going up because people aren't wearing masks. Because masks work and if masks aren't working it's because people aren't wearing masks because masks work.
wbt5845
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Let it rip. Those who want the protection of the vaccine have had ample opportunity to get it. Those who don't didn't.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GAC06 said:

Predictable goaltending on this thread. Cases must be going up because people aren't wearing masks. Because masks work and if masks aren't working it's because people aren't wearing masks because masks work.

I think the bigger news is that as much as people want to frame this as a Texas/Florida thing, we are about to find out that it's not.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If it takes off in blue states they'll just blame the red states and those damn anti vaxxers
El Chupacabra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wbt5845 said:

Let it rip. Those who want the protection of the vaccine have had ample opportunity to get it. Those who don't didn't.
As it should have been since day 1...not day 1 of the vaccine, but day 1 of the pandemic.
beerad12man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
swagfan said:

Salute The Marines said:

swagfan said:

"No new universal mask mandate has been imposed in any of the tri-states or nationally. New York and New Jersey both strongly encourage masking in high-risk areas in alignment with CDC guidance, while Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont signed an executive order empowering cities and towns to reinstate mask mandates if they so choose. So far, Norwalk is one of the biggest cities in the state to do so."

You know for a fact they have high mask compliance? You doing a count?

Hospitalizations are 97% unvacced in New Jersey (doesn't say for New York in this article).

Anything else you want me to blow up in your post trying to prove your point?

Also I thought you don't care about all this?

You misunderstand when I say "I don't care". What I mean is that I won't be wearing a mask, social distancing, or any of the things that don't work. I will push vaccinations and encourage as many as I can to vaccinate. Why? Because vaccination works to protect people. It's the only thing we have that really works. And pushing the masks and other rules undermines vaccination and creates even more distrust and frustration.


While I don't fully agree, I can certainly respect that perspective. We align on vacs.

Just go easy on the people that do choose to mask up. No reason to be like others on this board and **** on people for their choice. (Not saying you specifically are, just a general comment)

I'm also not in favor of mask mandates, but to say masks 100% don't work, is likely not accurate. I also can't say they 100% do work, as that is also likely not accurate. The truth is probably somewhere in between.

Of course I have my infectious disease doc in my ear about how shes never gotten one of those diseases in large part due to the mask she wears. She's also not wearing a cloth mask and d**k nosing it.

I think the reason that some of us go a little harsh on many that wear masks isn't because they are wearing a mask. It's because too many on the side of masking are trying to continue to push for mandates. This is where the vast majority of the fight/push back comes from. I don't care if someone masks up the rest of their life, so long as they don't push for any kind of mandate. It's happening in schools, now HEB is back to employees, etc. It will keep going if you don't have some fight back against it. All we ask for is choice.

My perspective? Masks are a highly ineffective tool when we have a highly effective solution in place. The solution? Herd immunity, via vaccination OR natural immunity. Odds say the average person is better off with vaccination, so the more the better, but both clearly count and are strong. So, at the end of the day, even if masks do work, at best, they merely delay herd immunity in my eyes.
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nortex97 said:

Widespread public mask usage is always unhealthy, as they are never maintained broadly in a hygienic manner as needed. They're terrible for kids too, increased CO inhalation etc.
I get it, people don't like wearing masks, but let's not make things up to validate not liking them. Your typical masks are perfectly safe for use in children.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:

nortex97 said:

Widespread public mask usage is always unhealthy, as they are never maintained broadly in a hygienic manner as needed. They're terrible for kids too, increased CO inhalation etc.
I get it, people don't like wearing masks, but let's not make things up to validate not liking them. Your typical masks are perfectly safe for use in children.
Please read up, Doc.

There's a lot of data out there;

Quote:

Both papers focused on the negative effects of high concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) children inhale when wearing masks for prolonged periods.

The first study published June 2021 in JAMA Pediatrics involved a clinical trial in Germany with 45 volunteers from both genders. The volunteers aged between six and 17 years old were made to wear masks. Researchers then measured the levels of CO2 under the children's masks.

Estimates showed that children forced to wear face coverings while in school do so for an average of 4.5 hours. The researchers discovered that CO2 levels under children's face masks after just three minutes of being worn exceeded levels deemed unacceptable by the German Environment Agency. They also found that the amount of CO2 inhaled by the child with the lowest CO2 level was three times higher than the agency's 2,000 parts per million (ppm) limit. Furthermore, the air measured from one seven-year-old child had a CO2 concentration of 25,000 ppm.

The study noted that CO2 building up in the dead-space volume of the masks can lead to hypercapnia or too much CO2 in the bloodstream. It pointed out that "most of the complaints reported by children" such as irritability, headache and reluctance to go to school "can be understood as consequences of elevated [CO2] levels in inhaled air."

The second study published April 2021 in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) looked at 65 papers about face masks. Of these papers, 44 pointed out the significant negative effects of face coverings. Thirty of the 44 studies related to both surgical and N95
masks, while only 10 pertained to face masks made of fabric.

The April 2021 IJERPH study noted that masks "also present an inhibition to habitual actions" such as eating, drinking, touching, scratching and cleaning the otherwise uncovered part of the face. It added that a face covering "is consciously and subconsciously perceived as a permanent disturbance, obstruction and restriction."
This isn't a drill, any longer. It's impacting societies/kids long-term.
Fenrir
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, masks don't have to cause physical harm to damage children, especially young children. We should focus on all the development challenges that forcing masks on them causes especially considering the depths to which school age children were harmed developmentally last year has started to become clearer.
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I read that JAMA Pediatrics paper cover to cover, and my first thought was, "how the hell did this get past peer review?"...It was subsequently retracted. The main issues being they didn't actually test the children for CO2 retention, by you know, doing a blood gas which is the only validated means of definitively determining CO2 retention.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:

I read that JAMA Pediatrics paper cover to cover, and my first thought was, "how the hell did this get past peer review?"...It was subsequently retracted. The main issues being they didn't actually test the children for CO2 retention, by you know, doing a blood gas which is the only validated means of definitively determining CO2 retention.
If a Dr., your first duty is to 'do no harm.'

I posted two links based on a 10 second search. The psychological and physiological impacts of making kids wear these all day are significant, is my conclusion. Dismissing one cite as "well I don't think it should have been peer review approved" is not a mature/adequate response. If anything, I'd suspect the politics involved are toxic.

Given your attitude, I certainly wouldn't trust your judgment to treat my kids/family. Not gonna go further here as this is the wrong forum and I won't get banned for being too honest.

Have a nice day.
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I dismissed it because it is an absolutely terrible study. But don't take my word for it, take the word of the journal that published it, and subsequently retracted it.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2782288
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
murphyag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was in NYC for work three weeks ago for 5 days. I'd say the mask usage was probably 50/50 when I was out doing stuff after work. ETA- I was surprised. I figured it would be more like 70/30.
gunan01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Jesus Christ, you got absolutely destroyed by facts. Probably time to just go back to Forum 16 so you can spew more bs to your fellow right wing comrades.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
gunan01 said:

Jesus Christ, you got absolutely destroyed by facts. Probably time to just go back to Forum 16 so you can spew more bs to your fellow right wing comrades.


Well, and of course we know that CO and CO2 are the same thing, right?

And, of course, since masks can't keep out virus particles, they can obviously retain 3 atom gases, right?
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Agsrback12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DFWTLR said:

Probably here to stay? Is there anyone who thinks it isnt?


Right?! We would need a vaccine, like MMR, that doesn't allow infection and eliminates the virus. Not this mRNA allowing the virus to continue to run through people and spread.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
gunan01 said:

Jesus Christ, you got absolutely destroyed by facts. Probably time to just go back to Forum 16 so you can spew more bs to your fellow right wing comrades.


Hey look, someone else that sees F16 hiding behind every scary shadow
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:

I dismissed it because it is an absolutely terrible study. But don't take my word for it, take the word of the journal that published it, and subsequently retracted it.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2782288
Show me, Mr. Facts, the correlation between cases and hospitalizations/deaths, vs. mask usage. Thank you sir.

BTW, that retraction was due to skepticism (politics), not facts/statistics. Nor was it to the only article/analysis I linked. Thx for playing.
Bruce Almighty
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
People are going to believe what they want to believe and nothing will ever make them change their mind.
AggieMPH2005
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There is a whole branch of public health study related to this it's called Social and Behavioural Health.

Also there is nothing new about the public and even professionals not trusting data and experts and causing outbreaks to continue.

Read about Ignaz Semmelweis and his study on hand washing or John Snow and the London cholera outbreak.

In the meantime my colleagues are scrambling for ICU nurses to take patients in the ER because all their beds are full of unvaccinated COVID patients. I can't transfer a critical patient to a higher level of care anywhere in the city right now. It's tough out there all over not just New York or Texas or Florida. 18 months into this and
I still wish we could find more productive things to do besides argue over masks.
uesAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Makes sense, after about 7PM half the people on the subway has a mask and all of the restaurants and **** are (thankfully) packed.

Unfortunately NY is only 58% fully vaccinated.
Knucklesammich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nortex97 said:

Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:

I dismissed it because it is an absolutely terrible study. But don't take my word for it, take the word of the journal that published it, and subsequently retracted it.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2782288
Show me, Mr. Facts, the correlation between cases and hospitalizations/deaths, vs. mask usage. Thank you sir.

BTW, that retraction was due to skepticism (politics), not facts/statistics. Nor was it to the only article/analysis I linked. Thx for playing.


I think it would be impossible to do that analysis unless we polled every person who came into the hospital and asked about mask usage and then trusted the answer.

As far as i can tell Most mask mandates in the US are not enforced at scale for any real duration. Same for mandates against mandates.

I think we spend far too much time arguing about something that at this point isn't really that enforced as far as I can tell outside of a few schools and employees mandating (but hey it's your choice to work there).
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nortex97 said:

Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:

I dismissed it because it is an absolutely terrible study. But don't take my word for it, take the word of the journal that published it, and subsequently retracted it.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2782288
Show me, Mr. Facts, the correlation between cases and hospitalizations/deaths, vs. mask usage. Thank you sir.

BTW, that retraction was due to skepticism (politics), not facts/statistics. Nor was it to the only article/analysis I linked. Thx for playing.

Where in any of this discussion were you and I talking about mask efficacy? Seems like a bizarre non sequitur.

Also interesting how your first inclination is to blame "politics" for the paper retraction without any evidence for this and completely ignoring the specific concerns brought up by the journal it was published in. Not everything in life is about politics.

As for the other paper, I don't have time to read 60+ studies regarding a topic any nurse or physician knows to be a non-issue (mask safety). Myself as well as my colleagues wear masks and N95s sometimes >14 hours in a day without any ill effect, outside of a bit of discomfort. We get it, you don't like masks, but let's not make silly arguments about how they are dangerous. If that were the case, we would have healthcare workers dropping like flies.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:

nortex97 said:

Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:

I dismissed it because it is an absolutely terrible study. But don't take my word for it, take the word of the journal that published it, and subsequently retracted it.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2782288
Show me, Mr. Facts, the correlation between cases and hospitalizations/deaths, vs. mask usage. Thank you sir.

BTW, that retraction was due to skepticism (politics), not facts/statistics. Nor was it to the only article/analysis I linked. Thx for playing.

Where in any of this discussion were you and I talking about mask efficacy? Seems like a bizarre non sequitur.

Also interesting how your first inclination is to blame "politics" for the paper retraction without any evidence for this and completely ignoring the specific concerns brought up by the journal it was published in. Not everything in life is about politics.

As for the other paper, I don't have time to read 60+ studies regarding a topic any nurse or physician knows to be a non-issue (mask safety). Myself as well as my colleagues wear masks and N95s sometimes >14 hours in a day without any ill effect, outside of a bit of discomfort. We get it, you don't like masks, but let's not make silly arguments about how they are dangerous. If that were the case, we would have healthcare workers dropping like flies.
Thank you for confirming you have no correlation between mask usage and cases/deaths/hospitalizations. Not sure why that is a matter you haven't pondered, but it doesn't imply healthcare workers should be dropping like flies. You're not a hero for wearing a mask at work, lot's of us have.

Moreover, it's not about who wears what type in a hospital/operating room, it IS about widespread public masking and in particular kids. If it's not efficacious, we need to stop doing it. It is not. You may not like the feedback, but it is real.

Quote:

A new study, involving over 25,000 school-aged children, shows that masks are harming schoolchildren physically, psychologically, and behaviorally, revealing 24 distinct health issues associated with wearing masks.

The health issues and impairments observed in this study were found to affect 68% of masked children who are forced to wear a face covering for an average of 4.5 hours per day. The study also includes 17,854 health complaints submitted by parents.

Some of the health issues found in the study include: increased headaches (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), drowsiness or fatigue (37%), malaise (42%), and nearly a third of children experience more sleep issues than they had previously and a quarter of children developed new fears.

Though these results are concerning, the study also found that 29.7% of children experienced shortness of breath, 26.4% experienced dizziness, and hundreds of the participants experiencing accelerated respiration, tightness in chest, weakness, and short-term impairment of consciousness.

The study authors noted the lack of unbiased research on this topic:
Quote:

"There are no manufacturer-independent studies on the use of masks for children and adolescents that are certified as medical products for occupational safety in professional applications. In addition, due to the unknown materials used, there are no findings on the potential protective effects or side effects of the often home-made 'everyday masks' worn by the majority of children. In view of the ongoing measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic, and in particular the varying obligations for children and adolescents to wear masks in school over a longer period of time, there is an urgent need for research."


More;

Quote:

The mask mandates are especially cruel to young children. Adults are supposed to ease their fears, to reassure them that monsters aren't hiding under the bed. Instead, we're frightening them into believing they're being stalked by invisible menaces lurking in the air. A year of mask-wearing will scar some of them psychologicallyand maybe physically, too, according to a team of Italian professors of plastic surgery, who warn that the prolonged pressure from the elastic straps could leave young children with permanently protruding ears. By hiding teachers' lips and muffling their speech, mask-wearing makes it harder for young children to develop linguistic skills and prevents children with hearing impairments from lip reading. Unable to rely on facial cues, teachers and students of all ages are more likely to misinterpret one other, a particularly acute problem for children on the autism spectrum. How are children supposed to develop social skills when they can't see one another's faces, sit together, or play together?

Researchers from the University of Witten/Herdecke in Germany have catalogued other problems. They established an online registry for parents to report on the side effects of mask-wearing. Among the nearly 18,000 parents who chose to respond (not a random sample, obviously), more than half reported that the masks were giving their children headaches and making it difficult for them to concentrate. More than one-third cited other side effects: increased reluctance to go to school, unhappiness, malaise, impaired learning, drowsiness, and fatigue.


So, bad for kids, as I stated. Then you've decided there aren't good studies to your standards/it's irrelevant if widespread mask usage impacts on cases. Here's the deal; it matters because we shouldn't be doing it on a widespread basis at all if it doesn't work, and certainly not for kids. That you don't care or consider it a non sequitur is pretty pathetic. Again, 'do no harm.' Something about oaths and caring about what you are professionally advocating for.

https://reason.com/2021/05/27/study-mask-mandates-didnt-help-slow-spread-of-covid-19/

https://teamtuckercarlson.com/news/52-charts-show-mask-mandates-have-no-effect-on-covid-cases/

It's not politics, you're right, we have the data and know it doesn't work.
SamHou
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Do you even click on the links you post or just copy and paste from sources? I click on one of them that mentioned a study about physiological harms from mask wearing and there was a giant warning message:

Quote:

EDITORIAL NOTE:
This study is based on a survey regarding the adverse effects of mask wearing in children. Due to multiple limitations, this study cannot demonstrate a causal relationship between mask wearing and the reported adverse effects in children. Most of the respondents were parents, and the survey was distributed preferentially in social media forums that, according to the authors, "criticize the government's corona protection measures in principle". The limitations of the study include sampling bias, reporting bias, and confounding bias as well as lack of a control group. The use of masks, together with other precautionary measures, significantly reduces the spread of COVID-19 and is considered safe for children over the age of two years old.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.