General Discussion/Q&A on Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[andye]

One of the problems I see is that many people want a guarantee (hence the concern about asymptomatic spreading) when public health interventions (ed: now in a vaccinated population) are about risk reduction.
Wearing an effective mask if you have symptoms and are not able to isolate is pretty reasonable.
Wearing an ineffective mask just because there is a small chance of transmission has been largely rejected as an unreasonable imposition by the (generally caring) public.
People at risk (or worried) should be encouraged to minimise that by wearing an effective N95 mask whenever they can't isolate.
People in high-risk jobs (eg aged care) are already asked to wear masks (and these should be N95s IMO). People could apply that to visiting at risk loved ones.

 

[drron]

And the new drugs such Paxlovid. Of course Joe Biden got a Paxlovid rebound infection a few days after recovering from his initial Covid infection.

 

[nutwood]

Another study on problems with masks.

The Foegen effect: A mechanism by which facemasks contribute to the COVID-19 case fatality rate - PubMed

Extensive evidence in the literature supports the mandatory use of facemasks to reduce the infection rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, which causes the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, the effect of mask use on the disease course remains controversial. This study...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

That's really interesting. If I'm understanding correctly, they are effectively saying that if your mask collects a dose of Covid, you are then breathing in small quantities for a period of time versus getting a lungful that you promptly exhale.
I must confess that although I'm against mask mandates, I take one when I travel and wear it through security and anywhere else where I'm forced to crowd in. Given the choice, I would wear one for boarding but wouldn't be bothering on the plane, once everyone is seated. Seems to me that when you're face to face with people in the security zig zag and they're laughing coughing or screaming, according to temperament, even an ineffectual screen is better than nothing.

 

[TheRealTMA]

That's really interesting. If I'm understanding correctly, they are effectively saying that if your mask collects a dose of Covid, you are then breathing in small quantities for a period of time versus getting a lungful that you promptly exhale.
I must confess that although I'm against mask mandates, I take one when I travel and wear it through security and anywhere else where I'm forced to crowd in. Given the choice, I would wear one for boarding but wouldn't be bothering on the plane, once everyone is seated. Seems to me that when you're face to face with people in the security zig zag and they're laughing coughing or screaming, according to temperament, even an ineffectual screen is better than nothing.

This is more of the same from the anti-mask OP. Personally I believe the article and the supposed conclusions are rubbish science. The problem with a certain anti-mask members putting such articles on AFF is that most of them are statistical analyses which by definition are open to interpretations and difficult for lay people to understand, and IMHO, they are very misleading. I recommend that you check the voracity of such posted links.

Especially in this case where the only author names the supposed "effect" after himself. He seems to never have publisch any other "research".

The Fögen Effect Masks a Big Methodological Issue

Have you heard of the Fögen effect, alternatively spelled “Foegen?” It is the idea, or so goes the claim, that wearing a mask could make COVID-19 more severe. And you might be tempted to take it seriously because it has a very scientific-sounding name. Surely, if this mechanism of action has...

www.mcgill.ca

"
Take-home message:
- The Fögen effect, named by and after Dr. Zacharias Fögen from Germany, is the assertion that wearing a mask can make a disease like COVID-19 worse by making the viral particle smaller as its water content dries up on the mask
- It is based on a deeply flawed analysis of data from the American state of Kansas and it goes against better evidence we have on mask wearing
- The Fögen effect is being used by people opposed to public health measures, like Joe Mercola, and is in keeping with their anti-mask rhetoric"

 

[nutwood]

This is more of the same from the anti-mask OP.

I'm not the OP and I'm not anti-mask? I've posted very little on the topic of masks because I don't have a strong opinion.
What I do have a strong opinion on is that we have squandered opportunities by favouring regulation over education and now we see the riduculous situation where mask wearing has become politicised.

 

[TheRealTMA]

I'm not the OP and I'm not anti-mask? I've posted very little on the topic of masks because I don't have a strong opinion.
What I do have a strong opinion on is that we have squandered opportunities by favouring regulation over education and now we see the riduculous situation where mask wearing has become politicised.

No I was not referring to you, obviously, since you are not the OP, but to the poster of the original link. But let's not add politics to this. AFF has too many such rubbish science posts which no one seems to check for reality before posting and moderators do not vet.

 

[nutwood]

No I was not referring to you, obviously, since you are not the OP, but to the poster of the original link. But let's not add politics to this. AFF has too many such rubbish science posts which no one seems to check for reality before posting and moderators do not vet.

With all due respect, please may I suggest that you do not quote someone's post and then refer to it as "More of the same..."?

 

[TheRealTMA]

With all due respect, please may I suggest that you do not quote someone's post and then refer to it as "More of the same..."?

OK. I probably should have made the comment to the original post of the link but I didn't see that until your post.

But it's let's address the issue of misinformation in the original link shall we? I was suggesting that one should not base one's decisions on junk science from anti-maskers.

 

[Quickstatus]

even an ineffectual screen is better than nothing.

1)False sense of security?

2)but if a better than ineffectual mask is readily available why not wear that?. (N95 and similar derivatives)

 

[nutwood]

OK. I probably should have made the comment to the original post of the link but I didn't see that until your post.

But it's let's address the issue of misinformation in the original link shall we? I was suggesting that one should not base one's decisions on junk science from anti-maskers.

Apology(?) accepted.
With regard to the original link, I found it interesting, however I'm certainly not basing any decisions on it! The whole mask debate is minefield of mis-information. Initially we were told masks were pointless. Suddenly this changed and we were told that we must wear masks and people were being prosecuted for not wearing one. This made it a political issue, instead of a health issue and the whole discussion has gone to the dogs ever since.
My personal opinion, which seems to be supported by the facts, is that wearing a mask will limit your ability to give Covid to others. That seems to be generally accepted. How much protection it gives the wearer is more controversial. As I mentioned, I don one when in a security queue. It doesn't give me a false sense of security, I'm an engineer and elimination/substitution comes well ahead of PPE. Given choice, I'd not be in the queue. Next choice would be to design the queues so you don't meet face on with others. Following that would be ground crew with raw hide whips, stopping people coughing all over their fellow passengers. Lastly PPE.
Unfortunately, if I want to fly, PPE is the only element I can control, so something is better than nothing, and yes, I do use a N95 mask.

 

[N860CR]

The medical field is learning more about covid every day. New drugs are coming out. New strains are emerging. This pandemic is still only a couple years old. I’m not advocating masks for eternity, to paint it as black and white as that is misleading.

As time goes on we’ll better understand and better manage. Perhaps there’ll be a more effective vaccine next month. Who knows.

Doctors on this thread have stated masks can be effective if used by those with covid, to help prevent spread.

We’re already there. Mortality rate of less than 0.1%, effective vaccines, effective antiviral treatments. What more do you want?

Post automatically merged: Aug 2, 2022

I'm struggling to understand your stance.

If wearing masks for eternity is the simplest solution going forward then we need to find a way to cope with wearing masks.

I'm claustrophobic, I find masks uncomfortable and they fog my glasses which can be dangerous as I cannot see where I'm going but I happily wear a mask without much question.

Anyone that wishes to continue their care free attitude to the pandemic is wrong and entirely selfish.

Next thing you'll tell us that social distancing is wrong.

So we wear masks for eternity despite them not being of any questionable value? I’m struggling to understand your stance. Why not wear helmets and mouth guards as well?

 

[Quickstatus]

I do use a N95 mask.

Then that’s is all we can really do.
Something like masks can’t be mandated long term. Mask fatigue, add in politics, the one rule for me and one rule for thee, illogical rules and regulations and criminalising health behaviour through police powers makes mask mandates an impossibility.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

We’re already there. Mortality rate of less than 0.1%, effective vaccines, effective antiviral treatments. What more do you want?

Post automatically merged: Aug 2, 2022

So we wear masks for eternity despite them not being of any questionable value? I’m struggling to understand your stance. Why not wear helmets and mouth guards as well?

The federal government is running advertisements tonight advising people to wear masks indoors and when physical distancing is not possible.

 

[N860CR]

The federal government is running advertisements tonight advising people to wear masks indoors and when physical distancing is not possible.

So? Surely the one thing we’ve learnt over the last two years is that the government won’t waste any opportunity to politicise this.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

So? Surely the one thing we’ve learnt over the last two years is that the government won’t waste any opportunity to politicise this.

This was a health message, not a political one.

 

[Warks]

In other news Covid finally hit our household last week when one adult child brought a case back from overseas. So everyone but me got infected and I was a very close contact (sharing a car ride for an hour or so). I haven't had it before and the only difference being that I got my second booster two weeks before the arrival of the plague. So of course that may have helped. The other thing is that I'm O blood group and everyone else is A. There is a study floating around showing a lower incidence of infection in O vs other blood groups, not sure how significant it is.

 

[N860CR]

This was a health message, not a political one.

They’re all political messages . If masks were effective, someone somewhere would have commissioned a decent study to verify it.

As has been explained to you countless times, Australia has its highest levels of “transmission” when masks were mandated in all settings. The outcome in countries that had strict mask mandates (like those in the east that you fantasize about) and those that didn’t has been the same. Masks are ineffective and it’s bizarre that a select few think they are the be all and end all.

 

[Quickstatus]

The other thing is that I'm O blood group and everyone else is A

They are an intriguing set of studies.
Think of blood group antigens as a set of "hairs" on an cell -because that what they appear to be visually
People either have A, B, O, AB - the best analogy is people have different colour hair - black, brunette, blonde
Except that O is bald! because O is not an antigen.... more below...

One can then speculate that different types of hairs might facilitate the ability of Covid19 to attach itself to the cells. Maybe A hairs are better at helping Covid attach to cells?? Who knows what the mechanism is.

There are criticisms that the studies are not properly controlled nor have a high enough power (number needed to see an true effect).

The other part of the story is that everyone from a very young age develop antibodies to blood cells they don't have.
So O people tend to have Anti A and Anti B antibodies in their system.
Some O people don't have Anti A and Anti B antibodies and are highly sought by Blood banks because their blood can be given to almost everyone.
A people oftenhave Anti B,
B people often have anti A.
AB people have both A and B hairs and therefore don't have any anti A or anti B. And therefore they can have O,A,B blood transfusion that don’t have anti A or anti B antibodies
There is no anti-O antibody - “bald people love hair”

(of course, the Resus negative or positive (ie O negative, O positive, A neg, A pos etc etc etc) is the other important factor in blood transfusions and donations and needs to be also matched but I don't want to complicate the story)

It may be that the anti A and anti B are important in the prevention of Covid infection. People with AB don't have any anti A or Anti B antibodies. So are people with AB the most susceptible???

Speculative but as i said above intriguing.
Regardless, just assume as a human who breathes air , susceptibility is greater than zero (Fish dont get Covid cos they dont breathe air) , and I would not speculate that some people can take less precautions than others.

 

[drron]

There are 2 other problems with masks I have found with masks on this trip. First facial ID doesn’t work on my iPhone and also every time I take my mask off I pull out my hearing aids.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

They’re all political messages . If masks were effective, someone somewhere would have commissioned a decent study to verify it.

As has been explained to you countless times, Australia has its highest levels of “transmission” when masks were mandated in all settings. The outcome in countries that had strict mask mandates (like those in the east that you fantasize about) and those that didn’t has been the same. Masks are ineffective and it’s bizarre that a select few think they are the be all and end all.

So the doctors on this thread saying that masks can be effective to prevent a person infected spreading it are wrong?