Only 31 deaths of children under age 15 involving COVID-19. Common flu-related child deaths from 37 to 187 during regular flu season. Should Governors

[HarryStotle]

Seven studies have confirmed the benefit of universal masking in community level analyses: in a unified hospital system,38 a German city,39 a U.S. state,40 a panel of 15 U.S. states and Washington, D.C.,41,42 as well as both Canada43 and the U.S.44 nationally. Each analysis demonstrated that, following directives from organizational and political leadership for universal masking, new infections fell significantly. Two of these studies42,44 and an additional analysis of data from 200 countries that included the U.S.45 also demonstrated reductions in mortality. An economic analysis using U.S. data found that, given these effects, increasing universal masking by 15% could prevent the need for lockdowns and reduce associated losses of up to $1 trillion or about 5% of gross domestic product.42

I have read a few of those and they are very tenuous in their claims, amounting to: given what we know, and we know very little, it is probably better to wear a mask than not.

The very recent survey of the literature released in Sept 2020 concluded this:

Cloth masks are shown to have limited inward protection in healthcare settings where viral exposure is high but may be beneficial for outward protection in low-risk settings and use by the general public where no other alternatives to medical masks are available. During unprecedented times, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, when some organizations like the CDC are suggesting the general population to use cloth masks in public settings, further studies on cloth masks are imperative. The current data are not enough to guide clinical decision-making. Given that cloth masks are used when the supply of surgical masks is low, it is important to assess the true efficacy of cloth masks compared to not wearing any masks.

Efficacy and Use of Cloth Masks: A Scoping Review - PMC

 

[LeafByNiggle]

So you agree that placing a college professor on leave merely for using the term “China virus” is vicious nonsense?

It only sounds like nonsense when the only source you look at is campusreform.org. Here is the rest of the story from John Weidner, dean of the College of Engineering and Applied Science:

“As an isolated reference, the term ‘Chinese virus’ did not meet the threshold to be designated harassment,” Weidner said. “However, it did represent poor judgment, caused offense to members of our community, and distracted from the learning environment.”

Weidner said that Ucker also admitted that he engaged in “less than desirable conduct on other matters.”

He said the investigation by the Office of Equal Opportunity & Access indicates Ucker did violate the university’s non-discrimination policy based on failing to provide accommodation for a medical condition.

“I am keeping Professor Ucker on administrative leave for the duration of the semester as I contemplate his future with the college,” Weidner wrote. “I expect all CEAS faculty, staff and students to treat each other with dignity and respect.”

So, you see that merely using the term, “Chinese Virus” was not the thing that got the Prof. put on leave.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

That sword cuts in both directions, which is why solid evidential and replicable evidence should be the standard especially when such grave and serious measures are being implemented. But no such evidence is being offered by those in power to inflict the injurious measures.

Yes, evidence is offered, just not to you personally. The CDC is convinced of the evidence. That’s good enough for me, because I am not arrogant enough to think that my understanding of epidemiology is better than theirs.

Show where the CDC is “convinced of the evidence.”

You are relying on @Dan123’s post which provides links but those aren’t as compelling as you suppose.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

So you agree that placing a college professor on leave merely for using the term “China virus” is vicious nonsense?

It only sounds like nonsense when the only source you look at is campusreform.org. Here is the rest of the story from John Weidner, dean of the College of Engineering and Applied Science:

“As an isolated reference, the term ‘Chinese virus’ did not meet the threshold to be designated harassment,” Weidner said. “However, it did represent poor judgment, caused offense to members of our community, and distracted from the learning environment.”

Weidner said that Ucker also admitted that he engaged in “less than desirable conduct on other matters.”

He said the investigation by the Office of Equal Opportunity & Access indicates Ucker did violate the university’s non-discrimination policy based on failing to provide accommodation for a medical condition.

“I am keeping Professor Ucker on administrative leave for the duration of the semester as I contemplate his future with the college,” Weidner wrote. “I expect all CEAS faculty, staff and students to treat each other with dignity and respect.”

So, you see that merely using the term, “Chinese Virus” was not the thing that got the Prof. put on leave.

What was, then? Spell it out.

What exactly was the “poor judgment, caused offense to members of our community?”

Or the “less than desirable conduct on other matters?”

Sounds like vague determinations that someone found something he did offensive. Hardly clinches a finding that he did something to be suspended for.

But if course, that is good enough for those who positively want to see justification because of their own leftist progressivist bias - which I find offensive. Will my reporting my personal offense get people suspended?

I don’t think it should, but some here buy that standard wholeheartedly.

 

[HarryStotle]

An economic analysis using U.S. data found that, given these effects, increasing universal masking by 15% could prevent the need for lockdowns and reduce associated losses of up to $1 trillion or about 5% of gross domestic product.42

I found this study interesting in the bold claim made about it, so I read it. Here is a part of the summary…

Thus, the upshot of our analysis is that a national face mask mandate could potentially substitute for renewed lockdowns that would otherwise subtract nearly 5% from GDP. It is important to recognize that this estimate is quite uncertain because it is based on a number of statistical relationships that are all measured with error. Despite the numerical uncertainty, however, our analysis suggests that the economic benefit from a face mask mandate and increased face mask usage could be sizable.

In other words, best guess, not sound evidence.

A bunch of ad hoc analyses rushing to bolster political policy by tenuous conclusions about supposed “benefits.”

I asked for conclusive evidence.

What it doesn’t factor in are the “associated losses” vis a vis GDP that lockdowns are actually causing which very likely will dwarf any shot in the dark guesses about savings from masks.

Edit: A further observation…

The statement/claim that “a national mask mandate could potentially substitute for renewed lockdowns” appears to forget that there has been no substitution because wearing of masks has been ineffective in controlling the spread.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

What was, then? Spell it out.

I repeat:
He said the investigation by the Office of Equal Opportunity & Access indicates Ucker did violate the university’s non-discrimination policy based on failing to provide accommodation for a medical condition.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

Uh huh. Using a term the student doesn’t approve of is considered discrimination? That, my friend, is silly.

Not my impression. I doubt that was the "discrimination ". That is my point. I suspect he didn’t provide appropriate accommodations for a student with covid or affected by covid, and that is what he got dinged for.

There is more to this story, obviously, than what was reported.

And your “suspicions” are proof of that despite that you knew nothing of the story until five minutes ago?

 

[HarryStotle]

Office of Equal Opportunity & Access

Right, no biases there. The Department of Victimology will determine fault in the same way that #believeallwomen determined Kavanaugh to be guilty of something.

 

[JMMJ]

Did I say it was proof? I used to work in academia. Saw it all the time.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Office of Equal Opportunity & Access

Right, no biases there. The Department of Victimology will determine fault in the same way that #believeallwomen determined Kavanaugh to be guilty of something.

Denigrating a legitimate and needed office for no good reason other than it conflicts with your ideology.

 

[Dan123]

In other words, best guess, not sound evidence.

All predictions of the future are best guesses.

What it doesn’t factor in are the “associated losses” vis a vis GDP that lockdowns are actually causing which very likely will dwarf any shot in the dark guesses about savings from masks.

Oh I see, only you’re allowed to make best guesses.

And you can do so with zero evidence, while criticizing actual studies for not having vast amount of evidence on a recent phenomenon.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

LeafByNiggle:

Office of Equal Opportunity & Access

Right, no biases there. The Department of Victimology will determine fault in the same way that #believeallwomen determined Kavanaugh to be guilty of something.

Denigrating a legitimate and needed office for no good reason other than it conflicts with your ideology.

Bloated and contrived bureaucracy that contrives misdeeds in order to justify its existence. That, besides hyper-inflating the cost of higher education to place an entire generation of students in debt for a lifetime.

There has to be a place for all of those gender and women studies graduates so the departments will at least have a modicum of justification, no matter how tenuous.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

In other words, best guess, not sound evidence.

All predictions of the future are best guesses.

What it doesn’t factor in are the “associated losses” vis a vis GDP that lockdowns are actually causing which very likely will dwarf any shot in the dark guesses about savings from masks.

Oh I see, only you’re allowed to make best guesses.

And you can do so with zero evidence, while criticizing actual studies for not having vast amount of evidence on a recent phenomenon.

I am not trying to shut down the economic well-being of the world. My guesses are quite benign in their impact by comparison to the guesses of those in power.

 

[Dan123]

My guesses are quite benign in their impact by comparison to the guesses of those in power.

Those results are backed by several studies including looking at results in 200 countries. But it doesn’t impress you, so it’s a ‘guess’.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Bloated and contrived bureaucracy that contrives misdeeds in order to justify its existence. That, besides hyper-inflating the cost of higher education …

You are talking about the office that enforces the Americans with Disabilities Act, for one thing. In this case the office was commenting on the requirement to make accommodations for students with medical conditions - in this case, having to quarantine because of association with a known infected covid-19 friend. I see you like to drag in irrelevant things you think this office is also doing, but they are irrelevant when considering whether the Prof was right in not giving the student proper consideration for his reason for missing the assignment. But sure, try to deflect to gender studies.

 

[HarryStotle]

Have YOU read them with a critical eye? I am guessing not.

 

[Freddy]

I have to keep reminding myself that all this sound and fury is being expelled because there is sometimes a requirement to wear a mask.

If only we could think of a country that mandated wearing masks in certain conditions and where areas were locked down where there were clusters of the virus and where contact tracing is done constantly and they need to supply contact details when using bars and restaurants etc and where schools were closed as necessary and free testing was locally available to all and working from home where possible was the norm and people self quaranteened if there was any doubt about their health and travel between states was restricted and no overseas travel was allowed and group limits were imposed and the vast majority of its citizens knuckled down and accepted the curtailment of their everyday freedoms for the good of their family, friends, workmates and fellow countrymen and women and see if that actually did some good.

Oh, in passing, Australia had 9 cases in the last 24 hours. And I believe that a couple of American pilots accounted for some of those. We’re about back to normal down here. How’s it going where you are, Harry?

 

[Dan123]

Have YOU read them with a critical eye? I am guessing not.

I read the abstract/conclusions for several. But let’s grant your point in the most favorable light.

Let’s say I read every single one several times, and that at the end of it I’ve concluded the studies are junk, huge leaps of logic, complete guesswork. What next? This is where I think the source of you and me being on the opposite side of a lot of issues stems from.

I’m not an epidemiologist.
I’m not a virologist.
I don’t have a degree in public health.
I have no medical training of any kind, not even in CPR or first aid.
My conclusion goes against that of major public health organizations around the entire planet.

So it could be that I, with no training in any relevant field, have outsmarted the global public health community, seen through their falsehoods and am only left with the task of discerning malice from incompetence … or it could be that maybe the experts know something I don’t know.

I see the latter as being much more likely.

Do you have specific training that you feel makes your conclusions more likely to be valid than the global community of experts?

 

[Freddy]

Here’s an interesting take on tbe differences between the attitudes in the US and Austalia by an epidemiologist. Arriving in the US from Australia during Covid was like walking through the looking glass | Abby Bloom | The Guardian

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I’m not an epidemiologist.
I’m not a virologist.
I don’t have a degree in public health.
I have no medical training of any kind, not even in CPR or first aid.
My conclusion goes against that of major public health organizations around the entire planet.

So it could be that I, with no training in any relevant field, have outsmarted the global public health community, seen through their falsehoods and am only left with the task of discerning malice from incompetence … or it could be that maybe the experts know something I don’t know.

I see the latter as being much more likely.

Excellent point! Another way of saying it is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. And the claim that I know something that all the experts at the CDC do not know is certain an extraordinary one. And in case anyone one is thinking of this as the next argument, the claim that all the experts at the CDC are corrupt and lying is also an extraordinary claim.