Sponsored by
VGoodiez 420EDC
  • Welcome to VaporAsylum! Please take a moment to read our RULES and introduce yourself here.
  • Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
  • Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?

COVID-19

Status
Not open for further replies.
 
bulllee said:
If you go to the link and check it out, it explains all the Covid numbers.
Click to expand...

Looks like it's 23.93 deaths per 100,000 population, not 23.93%. Percent of population would be 0.02. The percent of total cases (rather than population) that end in death is (1720/84092)100 = 2.05.

The percent of current cases ending in death is roughly (88/4878)100 = 1.80, but this is a little misleading because deaths lag new cases. Also, according to the note, Arizona recently updated its process for identifying COVID deaths, so it's identifying more deaths now than it did earlier in the pandemic.
 
20200702_210415.jpg
 
Systematic reviews offer the most autoritative information on a subject. They attempt to include all of the relevant studies, and the the criteria for inclusion of studies is made transparent. The presentation isn't very user-friendly. Regarding masks, the difference in absolute risk is −14.3% (3.1% with face mask vs 17.4% with no face mask.) Interpret this to mean that for an exposure associated with a 17.4% risk of infection without a mask, wearing a mask would reduce the risk of infection to 3.1%. Put another way, if your risk of infection in a given situation is about 1 in 6 without a mask, wearing a mask will reduce it to about 1 in 30. Not bad, IMO.

Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Derek K Chu, MD, Prof Elie A Akl, MD, Stephanie Duda, MSc, Karla Solo, MSc, Sally Yaacoub, MPH, Prof Holger J Schünemann, MD, et al.

THE LANCET| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10242, P1973-1987, JUNE 27, 2020

Findings
Our search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents, with no randomised controlled trials and 44 relevant comparative studies in health-care and non-health-care settings (n=25 697 patients). Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] −10·2%, 95% CI −11·5 to −7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; pinteraction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD −14·3%, −15·9 to −10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; pinteraction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD −10·6%, 95% CI −12·5 to −7·7; low certainty). Unadjusted studies and subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings.

Interpretation
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance.
Click to expand...
 
CarolKing said:
@voyciz not sure what you mean by saying I had racist remarks? I resent that and I think you need to go through the rules again. I won’t be commenting on any of your posts any longer. You are trying to cause discord instead of having a conversation about a very important subject. Stay safe in CA.
Click to expand...
I believe it was the part about "Americans feel entitled to do whatever they want". Is this not prejudiced/racist against my country? Please correct me if I'm wrong, I can provide dictionary.com links if necessary.

Stevenski said:
No. I don't know what you mean. It is simply not true. Not in any way, shape or form. It is completely different to hitting your hand with a hammer. I am no scientist either but I listen to them. Let me guess helmets are a freedom infringenent too?
Click to expand...
Helmets, like masks, like seatbelts, need to be a freedom of choice. We have a long way to go.

Stevenski said:
And what remarks are they? If you are going to accuse someone of that kind of thinking I suggest you quote them.
Click to expand...
I believe it was the part about "Americans feel entitled to do whatever they want". Is this not prejudiced/racist against my country? Please correct me if I'm wrong, I can provide dictionary.com links if necessary.

Stevenski said:
I am more interested at how many of the recovered immune 20 year olds will face a lifetime of complications from covid19.
Click to expand...
Yes good point, I am interested in this as well!

momofthegoons said:
This is a baseless comment and I don't blame @CarolKing for being resentful of it. There are a few things I wont tolerate on this forum... and this type of 'name calling' is one of them. There was no reason to attack her character with your comments. And anything further along that line will earn you a warning point here.
Click to expand...

Mom, this is really disheartening. I aways thought VA was a place to express yourself freely as long as you were not hurting anyone. My intent was not to cause any harm, but to educate. It is true that sometimes my feelings get in the way, but I mean no harm by it. If you look back at this thread you will see that I am being attacked, and only trying to defend myself. I answer any questions directed towards me and do not respond with insults, or laughing emojis. The "racist" reference was due to her derogatory generalizations about the American people. Would you consider if racist if she had said Mexicans or Africans instead?
Anyway, I am done here. Mom, if you want me to take leave from your community, I will do as you say.

Baron23 said:
I think I really hate this thread.
Click to expand...
YES!
 
voyciz said:
I believe it was the part about "Americans feel entitled to do whatever they want". Is this not prejudiced/racist against my country? Please correct me if I'm wrong, I can provide dictionary.com links if necessary.
Click to expand...
I don't know what your country is....and really don't care....but no, that is NOT racist.

Not sure if English is your first language, but from Oxford Dictionary:

adjective

  • Prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
noun

  • A person who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

Note the emphasis on race....not country of origin or residency. Racist as in "race" and I rather agree with others that your shot at Carol was completely unprovoked and inappropriate.
 
Baron23 said:
I don't know what your country is....and really don't care....but no, that is NOT racist.

Not sure if English is your first language, but from Oxford Dictionary:

adjective

  • Prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
noun

  • A person who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

Note the emphasis on race....not country of origin or residency. Racist as in "race" and I rather agree with others that your shot at Carol was completely unprovoked and inappropriate.
Click to expand...

Hmm OK, sorry. I guess I was mistaken here. I guess the right term is "prejudiced", not "racist". For some reason I thought that if you hated people from a certain country, you were racist. It is common slang here where I'm from. I take the racist part back, but that generalization about Americans was still horrible.
 
voyciz said:
Hmm OK, sorry. I guess I was mistaken here. I guess the right term is "prejudiced", not "racist". For some reason I thought that if you hated people from a certain country, you were racist. It is common slang here where I'm from. I take the racist part back, but that generalization about Americans was still horrible.
Click to expand...
Yes. Generalizations are horrible and usually wrong.
 
Helios said:
Genuinely curious what you all think about her post? Not trying to bait anyone.

Click to expand...

Well, I'll give you my opinion....she's a dangerous cretin and I while I don't have any particular knowledge of CA political office authority, I'm pretty sure that the Governor can issue such directives for the common good in critical situations.

Additionally, Walmart, CVS and all of the others that she names have absolutely no obligation to explain the obvious to this individual and can mandate almost any requirement for entrance to their properties that they like except as excluded by law.....certainly masks come under their perogative to maintain a safe workplace for their employees as well as their customers.

And, while I pretty much never wish health ills on others...karma is indeed a bitch...I will make an exception for this person and hope she gets a nice raging case of COVID because IMO she certainly will cause a lot of cases of the virus with this idiotic message.
 
Baron23 said:
I don't know what your country is....and really don't care....but no, that is NOT racist.

Not sure if English is your first language, but from Oxford Dictionary:

adjective

  • Prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
noun

  • A person who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

Note the emphasis on race....not country of origin or residency. Racist as in "race" and I rather agree with others that your shot at Carol was completely unprovoked and inappropriate.
Click to expand...

voyciz said:
Hmm OK, sorry. I guess I was mistaken here. I guess the right term is "prejudiced", not "racist". For some reason I thought that if you hated people from a certain country, you were racist. It is common slang here where I'm from. I take the racist part back, but that generalization about Americans was still horrible.
Click to expand...
Actually...after doing some research, the correct term is "xenophobic". Although, I will say that it's not exactly better than racism. Anyway, I don't want to stir up any drama or bad feelings here, just correcting myself. I will admit when I'm wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Sponsored by
VGoodiez 420EDC
Back
Top