This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Here's your Mask Protocol  (Read 71465 times)

Trond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2743
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #45 on: December 27, 2020, 10:36:49 AM »
Forget about the masks, I just wish everything could reopen again. I can live with the mask.

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #46 on: December 27, 2020, 01:10:18 PM »
It would help if you would provide a link to support your assertion that aerosolized particles are the more significant mode of transmission. The World Health Organization seems to consider both; if masks reduce the one significantly, that should still have a useful effect. Nobody is suggesting that masks alone are sufficient steps.

While experimentation in laboratories is certainly important, I am more encouraged by observed results in the real world, such as the differing experience of Kansas counties with mask mandates versus those without.
https://apnews.com/article/health-kansas-virus-outbreak-f218e1a38cce6b2af63c1cd23f1d234e
This could be for other reasons, of course; a mask mandate might include or at least encourage other steps to reduce transmission, or people in counties who resist mask mandates may also resist other steps to discourage transmission.
I've provided many links in the coronavirus thread. I agree that real world examples matter more than theory. So here are few focused more on pragmatics. The first is the most significant recent study on masks. It's a large, randomized study, so unlike many of the sloppy, limited, and biased studies at the start of the pandemic, it meets very high standards of evidence.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
Slightly older, but surveys of the evidence on masks, from the CDC and Oxford:
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/

These don't seem to support your assertion that aerosolized particles are the more significant mode of transmission. An interesting limitation in the first study:
Quote
no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others

Masks have generally been presented as primarily protecting people other than the wearers, but providing some protection to the wearer (among the conclusions, "The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection."). I suspect that mask mandates may be helpful where rates of infection are very high.

Among the problems with masks that are not addressed by mask mandates: people wear them incorrectly, they use masks of materials that are less effective, and they don't wash the cloth ones as they should.

But mask mandates address other issues: remind people to take other appropriate actions (social distancing, not touching their faces, avoiding large gatherings), reduce pressure not to wear masks, and reduce feelings that individuals have no control. And, if the protection is primarily for other people, it works against the free rider problem.

Quote
Aerosolization:
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/71/9/2311/5867798

They don't seem to be advocating against masks, which are not mentioned but may be part of what they describe as droplet precautions (presumably also sneezing into your elbow and such). And it doesn't support that aerosolized particles are the more significant mode of transmission, although it may be that if we defend against every other mode of transmission it will account for more infection.

Ventilation was also a goal in the 1918 pandemic, apparently affecting heating system design:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-05/the-curious-history-of-steam-heat-and-pandemics

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #47 on: December 27, 2020, 01:35:53 PM »
Ehhh, I recall back when the pandemic was really kicking off around Feburary that it was largely a right-wing stance to push for lockdowns, closing borders, taking the virus seriously, etc. The Left by contrast were the ones talking about how it was just "the flu" and that the whole virus was being blown out of proportion by evil nazi fascist bigots as an excuse to be xenophobic towards Chy-nah.

At some point between Feburary and April some switch got flipped and both sides did a total 180.

The whole thing has looked like such a politicised/partisan farce as an outsider looking in on the US.

I remember this:
Quote from: Joe Biden on Twitter in October 2019
We are not prepared for a pandemic. Trump has rolled back progress President Obama and I made to strengthen global health security. We need leadership that builds public trust, focuses on real threats, and mobilizes the world to stop outbreaks before they reach our shores.

I remember Trump mishandling travel bans (allowing 40,000 people in from China afterward and having no provision for quarantining travelers anyway; the Europe ban was way too late and just panicked people into overloading airports, which probably did more to spread the virus than not). I remember Trump not wanting an infected cruise ship to land because it would increase "his numbers" and I also remember them making no provision to quarantine anyone from that ship when they finally allowed it in. I don't remember people on the right advocating for closed borders since 2016, but not for anything else like lockdowns.

I remember Nancy Pelosi visiting Chinatown to discourage attacks on Asian Americans which were being whipped up by blaming China for the coronavirus. I remember Matt Gaetz mocking concerns by wearing a gas mask into the House of Representatives. I remember Trump praising Xi's efforts and transparency, back when he hoped the Chinese would help his reelection.

I remember Trump's repeated comments that the numbers would soon drop to zero, that it would disappear in warm weather, that it was no worse than the flu, that he was handling it better than the 2009 H1N1 outbreak. The only honest statement he seems to have given in the early days was privately to Bob Woodward.

I remember that the Trump administration chose to respond less to the pandemic because it seemed to be a problem for "blue states" and therefore politically advantageous to let them suffer. Did Jared Kushner ever sue as threatened over the Project Lincoln billboard that quoted him as saying "[New Yorkers] are going to suffer and that’s their problem"?

I don't remember anybody significant on the left saying it was "just the flu".

It is interesting that even you recall that the right's attitude to the pandemic changed away from strong measures in the time period that it became obvious it was a huge problem; if you were correct about an opposite change in  the left, it would be like the right acts against actual evidence and the left responds appropriately to new evidence.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #48 on: December 27, 2020, 11:24:58 PM »
It would help if you would provide a link to support your assertion that aerosolized particles are the more significant mode of transmission. The World Health Organization seems to consider both; if masks reduce the one significantly, that should still have a useful effect. Nobody is suggesting that masks alone are sufficient steps.

While experimentation in laboratories is certainly important, I am more encouraged by observed results in the real world, such as the differing experience of Kansas counties with mask mandates versus those without.
https://apnews.com/article/health-kansas-virus-outbreak-f218e1a38cce6b2af63c1cd23f1d234e
This could be for other reasons, of course; a mask mandate might include or at least encourage other steps to reduce transmission, or people in counties who resist mask mandates may also resist other steps to discourage transmission.
I've provided many links in the coronavirus thread. I agree that real world examples matter more than theory. So here are few focused more on pragmatics. The first is the most significant recent study on masks. It's a large, randomized study, so unlike many of the sloppy, limited, and biased studies at the start of the pandemic, it meets very high standards of evidence.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
Slightly older, but surveys of the evidence on masks, from the CDC and Oxford:
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/

These don't seem to support your assertion that aerosolized particles are the more significant mode of transmission. An interesting limitation in the first study:
Quote
no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others

Masks have generally been presented as primarily protecting people other than the wearers, but providing some protection to the wearer (among the conclusions, "The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection."). I suspect that mask mandates may be helpful where rates of infection are very high.

Among the problems with masks that are not addressed by mask mandates: people wear them incorrectly, they use masks of materials that are less effective, and they don't wash the cloth ones as they should.

But mask mandates address other issues: remind people to take other appropriate actions (social distancing, not touching their faces, avoiding large gatherings), reduce pressure not to wear masks, and reduce feelings that individuals have no control. And, if the protection is primarily for other people, it works against the free rider problem.

Quote
Aerosolization:
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/71/9/2311/5867798

They don't seem to be advocating against masks, which are not mentioned but may be part of what they describe as droplet precautions (presumably also sneezing into your elbow and such). And it doesn't support that aerosolized particles are the more significant mode of transmission, although it may be that if we defend against every other mode of transmission it will account for more infection.

Ventilation was also a goal in the 1918 pandemic, apparently affecting heating system design:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-05/the-curious-history-of-steam-heat-and-pandemics
Different degrees of certainty. The empirical evidence suggests masks have little or no effect. But why? Large droplet transmission can't explain it, aerosolization can. That doesn't mean it's the right answer, just it's the one answer that seems to fit the displayed behavior. I don't know of any studies that have empirically measured the primary mode of transmission, but we still have to make a best guess.

It's worth remembering that we still know relatively little about COVID-19, and that it's a very strange virus.

Interesting link. I wonder whether, a century from now, any changes we make in response to sars2 will be recognized to have negative effects.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2020, 08:28:54 AM by Pat »

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2989
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #49 on: December 28, 2020, 08:08:43 AM »
I've never worn one.

Asymptomatic transmission is a fiction, the entire premise for mask-wearing is a fraud.
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #50 on: December 28, 2020, 03:48:17 PM »
Ventilation was also a goal in the 1918 pandemic, apparently affecting heating system design:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-05/the-curious-history-of-steam-heat-and-pandemics
Different degrees of certainty. The empirical evidence suggests masks have little or no effect. But why? Large droplet transmission can't explain it, aerosolization can. That doesn't mean it's the right answer, just it's the one answer that seems to fit the displayed behavior. I don't know of any studies that have empirically measured the primary mode of transmission, but we still have to make a best guess.

It's worth remembering that we still know relatively little about COVID-19, and that it's a very strange virus.

Yes, and that experts change their advice as more is learned should not be overly criticized. Doing nothing at all while waiting for complete knowledge is fair to criticize.

I recall reading past discussions of another bit of safety advice: wearing a bicycle helmet. There are accidents that it would help in, but unfortunately the bulk of bicycle accidents involve motor vehicles and the helmets would mostly be irrelevant. And like masks people wear helmets incorrectly and don't maintain them. If bicycle accident injuries preventable with helmets threatened to overwhelm hospital capacity, I think there would be a lot more mandatory bicycle helmet laws. But as it is there are still mandatory bicycle helmet laws in the US, although most are aimed at children.

Quote
Interesting link. I wonder whether, a century from now, any changes we make in response to sars2 will be recognized to have negative effects.

To an extent, it's surprising that that change persisted so long. If people stopped shaking hands in favor of bowing to each other or anything else, that would probably be a welcome change. Working remotely seems like it might persist, at least for part of the time and in jobs most compatible with it, and that might increase an existing trend for people to be isolated and lonely.

Mistwell

  • Smarter than Arduin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5289
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #51 on: December 28, 2020, 03:52:20 PM »
I've never worn one.

Asymptomatic transmission is a fiction, the entire premise for mask-wearing is a fraud.

1) Pre-symptomatic transmission is real and proven.
2) A lot of people don't recognize something is a symptom, or write it off as something else.

When a stomach ache is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people write it off as just having eaten the wrong thing.

When sniffles is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people write it off as just seasonal allergies.

When a headache is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people write it off as just a headache perhaps from stress or lack of caffeine or lack of sleep.

When loss of smell is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people simply never notice.

If you don't recognize you have a symptom, then it's not asymptomatic transmission, but you might not wear a mask because you don't know you have a symptom.

And of course you don't know you're going to show a symptom tomorrow, but are contagious right now.

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2989
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #52 on: December 28, 2020, 04:53:45 PM »
1) Pre-symptomatic transmission is real and proven.
2) A lot of people don't recognize something is a symptom, or write it off as something else.

When a stomach ache is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people write it off as just having eaten the wrong thing.

When sniffles is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people write it off as just seasonal allergies.

When a headache is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people write it off as just a headache perhaps from stress or lack of caffeine or lack of sleep.

When loss of smell is a frequent first symptom, a whole lot of people simply never notice.

If you don't recognize you have a symptom, then it's not asymptomatic transmission, but you might not wear a mask because you don't know you have a symptom.

And of course you don't know you're going to show a symptom tomorrow, but are contagious right now.

Good job I've had none of those besides the odd sniffles. In any case, the one that really matters as far as transmitting goes is a cough, which I haven't had.

And you can shove your mask where the sun don't shine. I didn't wear one in any year previous to this and I'm not about to start.
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #53 on: December 29, 2020, 12:10:14 AM »
Yes, and that experts change their advice as more is learned should not be overly criticized. Doing nothing at all while waiting for complete knowledge is fair to criticize.

I recall reading past discussions of another bit of safety advice: wearing a bicycle helmet. There are accidents that it would help in, but unfortunately the bulk of bicycle accidents involve motor vehicles and the helmets would mostly be irrelevant. And like masks people wear helmets incorrectly and don't maintain them. If bicycle accident injuries preventable with helmets threatened to overwhelm hospital capacity, I think there would be a lot more mandatory bicycle helmet laws. But as it is there are still mandatory bicycle helmet laws in the US, although most are aimed at children.
Yes, they're bound to make mistakes at the start. I'm far more critical when they don't reassess. But I think one of the greatest failures of public health is conveying ambiguity. We need less reassurance and confidence, and more discussion of the limits of our knowledge.

It's been ages, so I could be misremembering, but I've seen bicycle helmets listed as one of the contributing factors that's led to childhood becoming much safer over the last 40 years.

I'm not sure I believe that. It could be true. But it could just as easily be false. People are terrible at statistics, and there's a lot of incentive for advocates and public officials to claim the measures they promoted or enacted really do work. All they need is a few sob stories to support their cause.

But figuring out what works is important. We can waste a lot of money and other resources if we listen to the emotional pleas, and ignore the numbers. Worse, we have limited resources. So when we spend them on things that don't help, we're not spending them on things that will help. It's a lost opportunity cost.

To an extent, it's surprising that that change persisted so long. If people stopped shaking hands in favor of bowing to each other or anything else, that would probably be a welcome change. Working remotely seems like it might persist, at least for part of the time and in jobs most compatible with it, and that might increase an existing trend for people to be isolated and lonely.
The trends toward social isolation might be one of those things they look back on in a 100 years, and say "what were they thinking?"

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #54 on: December 29, 2020, 01:59:32 AM »
It's been ages, so I could be misremembering, but I've seen bicycle helmets listed as one of the contributing factors that's led to childhood becoming much safer over the last 40 years.

I'm not sure I believe that. It could be true. But it could just as easily be false. People are terrible at statistics, and there's a lot of incentive for advocates and public officials to claim the measures they promoted or enacted really do work. All they need is a few sob stories to support their cause.

I don't know what the story is on bicycle helmets. I just recall it as a surprising discussion because I had not thought about them; sort of, "of course bicycle helmets are good! but they don't really do much in practice because the problem is from motor vehicles", and I am probably not doing it justice.

The trends toward social isolation might be one of those things they look back on in a 100 years, and say "what were they thinking?"

I suspect that will be true, but it shouldn't all be blamed on the pandemic.
https://www.hrsa.gov/enews/past-issues/2019/january-17/loneliness-epidemic

oggsmash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #55 on: December 29, 2020, 03:01:16 AM »
Greetings!

I think it is interesting that all of the people here--as well as in society--that are Leftists almost exclusively and stridently support mask wearing and strict lockdown policies for society in regards to the China virus, while more right-wing and Conservative people support freedom, for both individuals and individual communities making independent choices.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
That's, like, your opinion, man. I'm a conservative even if I'm not a right-wing extremist, and I support reasonable masking requirements and some limitations on business access. I find that it's the right-wing extremist assholes that see the measures as all or nothing.

  If am curious about that statement.  What does conservative mean, and list some of your conservative positions.  I think with all the post shifting I am not sure what conservative, liberal, progressive, left wing extremist,  or right wing extremist mean.

SHARK

  • The Great Shark Hope
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5040
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #56 on: December 29, 2020, 05:10:21 AM »
Greetings!

I think it is interesting that all of the people here--as well as in society--that are Leftists almost exclusively and stridently support mask wearing and strict lockdown policies for society in regards to the China virus, while more right-wing and Conservative people support freedom, for both individuals and individual communities making independent choices.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
That's, like, your opinion, man. I'm a conservative even if I'm not a right-wing extremist, and I support reasonable masking requirements and some limitations on business access. I find that it's the right-wing extremist assholes that see the measures as all or nothing.

  If am curious about that statement.  What does conservative mean, and list some of your conservative positions.  I think with all the post shifting I am not sure what conservative, liberal, progressive, left wing extremist,  or right wing extremist mean.

Greetings!

Hey there, Ogg! Well, as for Conservative, I would say it embraces a number of aspects for myself. Being an advocate of free-market Capitalism, generally, a *smaller*, restrained Federal government, strongly supporting Constitutionalism, our Constitutional Republic as our system of government; Strongly supporting Freedom of Speech, being pro-gun and supporting the 2nd Amendment; Advocating for our traditions, history, and culture, and supporting nationalism as opposed to Globalism; Generally, supporting traditional values, Christianity, being Pro-Life, a strong work-ethic, being independent and self-reliant. Opposing racialist, "Intersectionalism", Critical Race Theory, Feminism, Progressivism, Leftism, Globalism and Marxism. I think that serves as a good summary, my friend!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the façade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security b

VisionStorm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2184
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #57 on: December 29, 2020, 09:45:33 AM »
Greetings!

I think it is interesting that all of the people here--as well as in society--that are Leftists almost exclusively and stridently support mask wearing and strict lockdown policies for society in regards to the China virus, while more right-wing and Conservative people support freedom, for both individuals and individual communities making independent choices.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
That's, like, your opinion, man. I'm a conservative even if I'm not a right-wing extremist, and I support reasonable masking requirements and some limitations on business access. I find that it's the right-wing extremist assholes that see the measures as all or nothing.

  If am curious about that statement.  What does conservative mean, and list some of your conservative positions.  I think with all the post shifting I am not sure what conservative, liberal, progressive, left wing extremist,  or right wing extremist mean.

It's all completely subjective and it's only gotten more undefinable over the years--particularly over the past few years, when "right-wing" has become a slur, and anyone from the anonymous dregs of social media to the far reaching stench of the mainstream media networks can just assign it to you, regardless of what your views actually are. They're also just pointless labels because at the end of the day what people should do is assess every situation on a case by case basis and address the issue based on what's actually going on there and what actually could help fix a problem, rather than working backwards from a set of prescriptive ideological precepts on how to view the world or manage every social or political circumstance.

I don't care about "Left" or "Right", I care about the massive economic devastation that the lockdowns are bringing and the long term effects that it will inevitably have on society in general, along with the change in culture that will happen (and has already been happening for decades, since 9/11) as a result of most of the population just automatically accepting and defending every authoritarian edict that comes from the government, or even ANY perceived authority figure, including the mainstream media.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #58 on: December 31, 2020, 01:39:53 PM »
The trends toward social isolation might be one of those things they look back on in a 100 years, and say "what were they thinking?"

I suspect that will be true, but it shouldn't all be blamed on the pandemic.
https://www.hrsa.gov/enews/past-issues/2019/january-17/loneliness-epidemic
I'm more worried about the kids. A lot of development for babies is about recognizing faces, and for school age children it's about socialization with their peers and developing interpersonal skills. Kids tend to be quite resilient, but we also know that things like strong trauma has lasting negative effects. With luck, they'll bounce back. But who knows?

consolcwby

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
  • Feel the despair!
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #59 on: December 31, 2020, 10:53:22 PM »
The trends toward social isolation might be one of those things they look back on in a 100 years, and say "what were they thinking?"

I suspect that will be true, but it shouldn't all be blamed on the pandemic.
https://www.hrsa.gov/enews/past-issues/2019/january-17/loneliness-epidemic
I'm more worried about the kids. A lot of development for babies is about recognizing faces, and for school age children it's about socialization with their peers and developing interpersonal skills. Kids tend to be quite resilient, but we also know that things like strong trauma has lasting negative effects. With luck, they'll bounce back. But who knows?
That's all true. Now that Jeffery Epstein is alive, those poor kids have even MORE to worry about! Fun Fact: Will J. Epstein become the new Chuck Norris?
My guess is this: Epstein will be the cure to the virus! He'll abuse it to death! What the HECK! Wouldn't THAT be kick in the NECK??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------                    snip                    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  https://youtu.be/ShaxpuohBWs?si