I know that the US has taken their own unique path with the pandemic, but please, is it really necessary to spread partisan politics in an attempt to rubbish what other places have done? The author of that piece is roughly somewhere between Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity. If you enjoyed that piece, can I suggest his show - 'Outsiders' on Sky - you can get the podcasts

Partisan politics from down under? I'm clueless about what's considered left or right wing there mate. I though it was an article that expressed a point of view on the limitations of total containment strategies.
https://www.dhhs.vic.gov.au/victorias-restriction-levels-covid-19

https://www.9news.com.au/national/c...victoria/5d7d55c5-e08b-49aa-9cc5-b975e108fdf4

 

I look at this as an example of a good study. I do not see the data as applicable to COVID but as a good experiment that can be replicated to put some serious questions to rest? Not just for COVID, the infection prevention policies have been changed lately due to shortages of PPE, some diseases are now aomwhow much less contageous than before. Go figure

I also thought it was a pretty good study, but still have serious questions:

1) As I mentioned, were the guinea pigs of each group caged together in the same air? If so, the statistical method that considered them independent is not applicable.

In the current study, guinea pigs in one chamber sampled ward air only when patients...

That certainly implies to me that the guinea pigs lived together. No correction is made for cross infections between them. As they say, one bad apple spoils the barrel.

2) It is possible the investigators were just lucky to get they numbers they got. Luck does play a part sometimes. But, if the investigators were testing the guinea pigs periodically during the experiment and made any decision whatsoever based on those tests, the tests for statistical significance need to be changed. For example, assume they tested the non-mask group periodically and decided to stop the experiment when that positivity rate exceeded a certain percentage, say 75%. That's introduces a huge bias. I think that scenario is likely and was not discussed in the main article. In fact, there is no discussion of how the decision to stop the study was made.

Every study I have been involved in had pre-determined stopping points. Early intervention can be allowed, but must be adjusted for as the bias it introduces is not trivial.

There is an online supplement that I will try to find. Maybe it addresses both issues, including more detail about the statistical tests used.

EDIT: See addendum (next post)

 

Addendum:
I was able to find the supplement here:
https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/suppl/10.1164/rccm.201107-1190OC/suppl_file/dharmadhikari+ods.pdf


As for my questions in Post #3523:
Chamber design:

Each of these 60 ducts supplies ward air to one cage of animals (1:1 duct to cage ratio). Each cage held
two animals, and for this study, only 45 of the 60 cages in each animal chamber were
occupied by guinea pigs (total 90 guinea pigs in each side).

So,it appears there was separation. No "one bad apple" problem, or at least there was reasonable accommodation for that. If one was positive, what about the other? It was removed as soon as it tested positive.

Animals exhibiting a reactive TST were removed from the exposure chambers and
housed in a separate animal facility for observation until they were euthanized.

TST procedure

Animals underwent monthly TSTs before, during and 1 month after MDR-TB exposure
ended, with the final test used to detect infections that may have occurred in the last few
weeks of the exposure period (2).

TST results were read blindly. No specific statement whether the endpoint was pre-determined or determined after a certain number of positives. It's implied the study was designed for 17 patients.

In sum, my concerns are largely answered and do not affect negatively the study. It is still a question whether and to what extent a study with TB applies to SARS-CoV-2.

Most important, would the same effect be expected with unsupervised mask wearing as is done by the American public.

Edit: Corrected line spacing in Chamber design and some typos.

 

but please, is it really necessary to spread partisan politics in an attempt to rubbish what other places have done?

Why not? They do it for those living in the USA, until recently only one point of view was even allowed in this thread.

 

Addendum:
I was able to find the supplement here:
https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/suppl/10.1164/rccm.201107-1190OC/suppl_file/dharmadhikari+ods.pdf


As for my questions in Post #3523:
Chamber design:

So,it appears there was separation. No "one bad apple" a problem, or at least there was reasonable accommodation for that. If one was positive, what about the other? It was removed as soon as it tested positive.


TST procedure


TST results were read blindly. No specific statement whether the endpoint was pre-determined or determined after a certain number of positives. It's implied the study was designed for 17 patients.

In sum, my concerns are largely answered and do not affect negatively the study. It is still a question whether and to what extent a study with TB applies to SARS-CoV-2.

Most important, would the same effect would be expected with unsupervised mask wearing as is done by the American public.

Thank you for amazing follow up!

The cloth masks I see everyone wearing actually scare me - i see people constantly touching them. I like the one ear look, and the mask over the chin look is very effective also. Shoving masks in their pockets. Do they wash them? It is the new germ factory, worse than the cell phone

 

Why not? They do it for those living in the USA, until recently only one point of view was even allowed in this thread.

It's unfortunate that folk can't recognise analytical quackery for what it is. In the article referenced, when faced with 6 states where the strategy is working, and one where it failed because of clearly identified errors in implementation, he concludes that it can't work without "petty totalitarianism".

What I don't understand is why there isn't a greater outcry in the US about the spread of the virus there.
from the University of Oxford Our World in Data comparing the US to most of the countries you would probably want to be compared with:



Most other advanced countries are managing to keep numbers down despite significant first waves. I left Sweden and Belgium off that graph as they tend to hide the consistency of the others, here they are:



And just for the hell of it, for those folk who think the outbreaks in Aus and NZ are in any way comparable to what's happening in the US:



If you look at testing, then given the size of the outbreak the US would seem to be off the pace (the US has been typically in the top 3 or so for the last several months):



and on deaths the US slowly overtaking countries that had devastating early waves with maybe not as good health care systems:



Of course, this may turn out to be the best strategy.

 

@justtrying ry
Yep, kind of like re-using Kleenex and thinking that is healthy to do. No hand washing either when "just adjusting."

 

@Tesla23
"Confirmed cases" has very little meaning. It depends entirely on how many tests one does, what test is used, and on what population. Moreover, in the US we have learned that results are being manipulated for financial gain or political purposes.

A very high proportion of those infected do not report as clinically ill. In the slums of India (previously posted link) , 25% of the population have antibodies That means that at one time, they were probably antigen or more likely RT-PCR positive, i.e., "confirmed infections."

Death with autopsy confirmed findings is the least ambiguous measure, so long as the numbers are not manipulated by political agenda..

Between those extremes are the clinically ill, RT-PCT positive cases.

 

Reduce community spread?
https://ktar.com/story/3496338/mexico-targets-junk-food-as-obesity-takes-toll-amid-pandemic/

Mexico targets junk food as obesity takes toll amid pandemic

 

It's unfortunate that folk can't recognise analytical quackery for what it is. In the article referenced, when faced with 6 states where the strategy is working, and one where it failed because of clearly identified errors in implementation, he concludes that it can't work without "petty totalitarianism".

What I don't understand is why there isn't a greater outcry in the US about the spread of the virus there.
from the University of Oxford Our World in Data comparing the US to most of the countries you would probably want to be compared with:

...
Of course, this may turn out to be the best strategy.

It is unfortunate that folk can't see the US is not just one number, one people and one voice. Just like in AZ there are 'states' with lower virus numbers and states with higher virus numbers among US states with larger populations than some nations. A solution that nationalizes solutions at the federal level for what are effectively 50 sovereign countries is not a viable solution in the USA. Our government is specifically designed to let individual states handle Pandemics by giving that power specifically to state governors.

https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/04/who-calls-the-shots-during-a-pandemic-the-us-government.html

Phillip Carter: I'll give you the the classic legal answer—it depends. As Rebecca pointed out, the Constitution reserves most of the power in this space for states, and what the federal government can do is limited to interstate commerce or international things like what goods, supplies, and people we admit from overseas.

The challenge here is that a great deal of response infrastructure, intelligence, and public health surveillance resides at the federal level, like the CDC, but actual decisions about whether to open or close reside at the state level.
...
Who will ultimately make the call—the CDC? Dr. Fauci? Some group of states?

Carter: State governors have the pen where it matters. They're the ones issuing orders to businesses. They have the enforcement powers.

There's some limited authority for the federal government to issue quarantine orders under Title 42. But it's the state orders that have the bite now.

https://news.wfu.edu/2020/05/28/state-governments-and-power-during-the-pandemic/

Dinan outlines key issues related to state government powers and the coronavirus:

• State vs. federal power: Although many commentators have been surprised by the prominent role of state governments in responding to COVID-19, state governments actually possess more power than the federal government in responding to a health crisis. State governments can issue shelter-in-place orders and close or open businesses and schools – powers that can only be exercised by state and not federal officials.

 

https://covidtracking.com/data/charts/us-all-key-metrics

 

Reduce community spread?
https://ktar.com/story/3496338/mexico-targets-junk-food-as-obesity-takes-toll-amid-pandemic/

Mexico targets junk food as obesity takes toll amid pandemic

That type of measures was long overdue down here... I guess every cloud has a silver lining...

 

Back to School Covid rules! Each child will be temperature tested before being allowed to board the bus. All children must wear a mask at all times on the bus. Family members must sit together on the bus. Really?!?! May sound good on paper but it sure ain't a-gonna happen on any school bus that I ever heard of.

 

"Confirmed cases" has very little meaning. It depends entirely on how many tests one does, what test is used, and on what population. Moreover, in the US we have learned that results are being manipulated for financial gain or political purposes.

Last I heard, you need to present with symptoms to get a test, or to have been exposed to some one having the virus.

A valid viable link to manipulations for financial or political gains? It is/was from what I gather just the opposite. Fla and Texas were manipulating results to allow opening the state to business.

 

A solution that nationalizes solutions at the federal level for what are effectively 50 sovereign countries is not a viable solution in the USA

But yet it is done quite often, mostly by extortion, withholding Federal funds if the states don't comply. Like the drunk driving laws/limits, auto insurance mandates, etc.

 

But yet it is done quite often, mostly by extortion, withholding Federal funds if the states don't comply. Like the drunk driving laws/limits, auto insurance mandates, etc.

So the threat at the federal level is to deny funds for controlling a pandemic during a pandemic? I can see how that would be a wise decision to make at the federal level. Yes, extortion, the threat of armed force at the federal level like is seen in China is called real totalitarianism instead of "petty totalitarianism".

 

Last I heard, you need to present with symptoms to get a test, or to have been exposed to some one having the virus.

A valid viable link to manipulations for financial or political gains? It is/was from what I gather just the opposite. Fla and Texas were manipulating results to allow opening the state to business.

https://khn.org/news/some-states-ar...e-covid-19-results-blurring-the-full-picture/

Melanie Amato, press secretary for the Ohio Department of Health, said her state is collecting only positive test results as many private labs have begun testing residents. As of Tuesday afternoon, the state reported 564 confirmed cases, 145 hospitalizations and eight deaths on its website.

“We don’t require private labs to report negative labs in any infectious disease,” she said.

It seems more of a bureaucratic rules problem than a conspiracy to manipulate results in most cases.

 

Last I heard, you need to present with symptoms to get a test,

Not here anymore. Both locally at the county health department parking lot and also in the parking lot of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville when I was there last week they are conducting "drive-thru" testing. I don't think they are even charging customers for the testing. I'm sure someone is paying for it.

 

Last I heard, you need to present with symptoms to get a test, or to have been exposed to some one having the virus.

A valid viable link to manipulations for financial or political gains? It is/was from what I gather just the opposite. Fla and Texas were manipulating results to allow opening the state to business.

See: Daily Tests, post #3532 There is no doubt the number of tests being done has increased greatly.

Whether a prescription is required to get a test varies by state and type of test, as states regulate the professions. In some states, a prescription is not required for the coronavirus (e.g., Maryland). In some states, no prescription is required for any laboratory test. In Ohio, according to a State site, retail sites like pharmacies can do the test: https://blog.ohiohealth.com/testing-for-covid-19/ Getting a prescription does not require a visit to a practitioner in any state of which I am aware.

Many college students are being required to have a negative test before returning to campuses.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/20/cor...n-record-highest-daily-cases-since-april.html

Germany and Spain have both recorded their highest respective daily coronavirus infection rate since April, with other countries in the region also reporting a sharp rise in new cases.

Several European countries have imposed travel restrictions, social-distancing measures and mask-wearing procedures to prevent the spread of the virus.

However, the World Health Organization cited a relaxation of public health measures, in addition to people “dropping their guard,” as possible explanations for the resurgence in the number of new Covid-19 infections across the region.

A chart shows coronavirus cases in the European Union and the United Kingdom, from early this year through Wednesday.

https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...-most-coronavirus-cases-since-their-lockdowns

"We can't live like zombies with masks on in the streets," poet and photographer Ouka Leele told a crowd of fellow protesters over the weekend, as NPR's Scott Neuman reported.

France's President Emmanuel Macron said on Wednesday that he is not considering a new lockdown.

"Macron told Paris Match magazine that 'local strategies' were preferable to another national lockdown," France 24 reported, "which he said would cause considerable 'collateral damage.' "

In the EU, France, Spain and Germany are far from alone in seeing a late-summer rebound in cases: More than a dozen member nations have been seeing week-over-week gains, according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.