Why are people still so fearful of the SARS-CoV-2 virus?

[Richard Scott]

Economic devastation causing hundreds of thousands of deaths of all sorts of people, to (in the case of many Covid deaths), prolong the lives of those who may only have a few months to live anyway. I know which I’d rather prevent.

We need to grow up a bit, shelter the vulnerable as best we can, open up the economy and accept there will sadly be more deaths. I suspect this will become more politically acceptable as the economic impact really kicks in as it will over the next few months.

Agreed, a big dose of reality needed.

 

[talldave]

Approximately 1700 people die every day. At the moment, 3 of those deaths are Covid. Is there something other than old age that we should perhaps be scared of?

It was depressing to read of the increase in deaths due to domestic violence since lockdown kicked in, but it seems people are too busy freaking out over Covid to care.

Yesterday evening as my partner nipped to the local shop, a gentleman ahead of her collapsed on the pavement. Fortunately the ambulance she called was there almost immediately. The guy was asthmatic and wearing a mask outdoors - he just couldn't breathe. If he'd fallen into the road it could have been a very different outcome. Perhaps without Project Fear he wouldn't be so scared to be wearing a mask in the street?

 

[najaB]

You do realise wearing a face covering will do nothing to prevent you from contracting it, right?

But *you* wearing a face covering if you're infected will do a lot to stop him from catching it from you. And the person who sits across from you on the train wearing theirs will do a lot to stop you getting infected. And...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2020 ==

Maybe Hydroxychloroquine, maybe something else...

It won't be Hydroxychloroquine, there is zero evidence that it is in any way effective. The something like the steroid cocktail developed in the UK or remdesivier are more likely since they've been show to work.

 

[Richard Scott]

But *you* wearing a face covering if you're infected will do a lot to stop him from catching it from you. And the person who sits across from you on the train wearing theirs will do a lot to stop you getting infected. And...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2020 ==

It won't be Hydroxychloroquine, there is zero evidence that it is in any way effective. The something like the steroid cocktail developed in the UK or remdesivier are more likely since they've been show to work.

That's if you're sat opposite the 1 in around 4000 that may have it, even if 4 times that it's still unlikely. Even then no guarantee you'll get it.

 

[takno]

But *you* wearing a face covering if you're infected will do a lot to stop him from catching it from you. And the person who sits across from you on the train wearing theirs will do a lot to stop you getting infected. And...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2020 ==

It won't be Hydroxychloroquine, there is zero evidence that it is in any way effective. The something like the steroid cocktail developed in the UK or remdesivier are more likely since they've been show to work.

Interesting that you are so keen to dismiss hydroxychloroquine on the basis that there's no evidence that it works, but are willing to ascribe "a lot" of benefit to masks in the face of there really being no evidence that they work either.

 

[najaB]

Approximately 1700 people die every day. At the moment, 3 of those deaths are Covid.

Don't look at the Sunday or Monday statistics, the numbers are always well down. Today it was 12, expect around 30-40 on Wednesday through Thursday if it's a typical week. But that's at the peak of summer when deaths due to respiratory illnesses is always at the lowest. We'll need to see what happens come November.

 

[DB]

But *you* wearing a face covering if you're infected will do a lot to stop him from catching it from you. And the person who sits across from you on the train wearing theirs will do a lot to stop you getting infected. And...

As pointed out many times, the evidence that wearing a mask has any significant impact on transmission is weak. By no means can it be claimed with any level of confidence that it will do 'a lot to stop... '

 

[najaB]

...but are willing to ascribe "a lot" of benefit to masks in the face of there really being no evidence that they work either...

Sigh. It's not just that there's no evidence it works, the studies with Hydroxchloroquine were ended early because the mortality rate was *higher* among those using it than in the control group. The only reason it even gets any mention is because the guy who asked if a super dose of flu vaccine would be effective in treating Covid-19 keeps talking about it.

Whereas with use of face masks there is strong circumstantial evidence that is effective, the problem is that it is difficult to quantify. To quote one paper published in The Lancet:

But absence of evidence of effectiveness from clinical trials on mass masking should not be equated with evidence of ineffectiveness. There are mechanistic reasons for covering the mouth to reduce respiratory droplet transmission and, indeed, cough etiquette is based on these considerations and not on evidence from clinical trials.14 Evidence on non-pharmaceutical public health measures including use of masks to mitigate the risk and impact of pandemic influenza was reviewed by a workshop convened by WHO in 2019; the workshop concluded that although there was no evidence from trials of effectiveness in reducing transmission, “there is mechanistic plausibility for the potential effectiveness of this measure”, and it recommended that in a severe influenza pandemic use of masks in public should be considered.15 Dismissing a low-cost intervention such as mass masking as ineffective because there is no evidence of effectiveness in clinical trials is in our view potentially harmful.

 

[Richard Scott]

Don't look at the Sunday or Monday statistics, the numbers are always well down. Today it was 12, expect around 30-40 on Wednesday through Thursday if it's a typical week. But that's at the peak of summer when deaths due to respiratory illnesses is always at the lowest. We'll need to see what happens come November.

Why are we expecting 30-40 Wednesday or Thursday? Last time it was higher than 20 was July 29th? It may go up slightly in November but I very much doubt it will. People seem to like perpetuating the impending doom theory, which hasn't happened.

 

[takno]

Sigh. It's not just that there's no evidence it works, the studies with Hydroxchloroquine were ended early because the mortality rate was *higher* among those using it than in the control group. The only reason it even gets any mention is because the guy who asked if a super dose of flu vaccine would be effective in treating Covid-19 keeps talking about it.

Whereas with use of face masks there is strong circumstantial evidence that is effective, the problem is that it is difficult to quantify. To quote one paper published in The Lancet:

As far as I can see from the actual studies, the benefits of face *masks* are difficult to quantify on account of being surprisingly small. The benefits of face coverings are comfortably non-existent. Mechanical studies which largely involve deliberately coughing or loudly singing into at least triple-layer coverings and usually proper masks are all very well, but have to be offset against the high levels of touching, poor general wearing and the reduction in physical distancing they encourage. I'm sure this has all been done to death in the facemasks thread, which I can't face reading. In the context of this discussion let's settle for pointing out that the most upbeat assessments of them are that they might help a bit, but certainly not a lot

 

[43066]

But *you* wearing a face covering if you're infected will do a lot to stop him from catching it from you.

Will it? Maybe if I wear a correctly fitted surgical type mask and follow mask hygiene (and it’s still only a “maybe” because they’ve never been properly tested outside clinical settings). Even this government isn’t brazen enough to state that there *is* a benefit, only that there *might* be

What about if I wear a beekeeper’s hat, or a fig leaf with eyeholes, or a comedy Margaret Thatcher cardboard mask? All of these are “face coverings” according to the definition.

Isn’t it obvious that the government is more concerned about controlling behaviour through these measures (whether that’s to make people feel “reassured”, or to frighten people even more is a matter of debate).

And the person who sits across from you on the train wearing theirs will do a lot to stop you getting infected. And...

I’m not particularly concerned about being infected as I’m not high risk. If I was, perhaps I should be shielding (albeit even that is doubtful given how low levels of the virus are).

 

[Crossover]

Will it? Maybe if I wear a correctly fitted surgical type mask and follow mask hygiene (and it’s still only a “maybe” because they’ve never been properly tested outside clinical settings). Even this government isn’t brazen enough to state that there *is* a benefit, only that there *might* be

I did ponder the overall effectiveness myself a little as, the other week, I watched (whilst in the car donning my mask and sanitising my hands) someone leave the nearby shop to head to their vehicle, remove their mask then carry it between their teeth (be it by the ear straps, but still). Also seen many get removed whilst waking across a car park, scrumpled up and go in the back pocket/jacket pocket etc

 

[jtuk]

To keep things in perspective, Sikora's tweeted on the number in hospitals in England right now:

https://twitter.com/ProfKarolSikora/status/1296107523544616960

This equates to more than three hospitals for every two Covid patients

 

[MikeWM]

Sigh. It's not just that there's no evidence it works, the studies with Hydroxchloroquine were ended early because the mortality rate was *higher* among those using it than in the control group. The only reason it even gets any mention is because the guy who asked if a super dose of flu vaccine would be effective in treating Covid-19 keeps talking about it.

I disagree. See my posts from a few weeks back here and here. The evidence points to it being likely to be effective if you give it early. Yes, it is no use in very serious cases, which was what they were doing in the study you mentioned. The twitter thread linked to in my second post deals with that.

(Of course, you can't read the linked article anymore in my first post because, like pretty much every other article discussing HCQ in a remotely positive light, it has been taken down.)

See also this from two weeks ago

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ens-thousands-lives-Covid-19-politicised.html

Hydroxychloroquine could prevent tens of thousands of people from dying from coronavirus but the controversial malaria drug is being discarded prematurely, top scientists have warned.

...

The COPCOV Trial is a double-blind placebo study which aims to enroll 40,000 healthcare workers to see if hydroxychloroquine acts as a prophylaxis against Covid.

It is being led by the University of Oxford, the London-based research charity the Wellcome Trust and the Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU) in Bangkok.

In a press release distributed this morning, MORU researchers warned 'fraudulent data, unjustified extrapolation and exaggerated safety concerns together with intense politicisation and negative publicity may stop COPCOV' from going ahead.

Whereas with use of face masks there is strong circumstantial evidence that is effective, the problem is that it is difficult to quantify. To quote one paper published in The Lancet:

I don't agree that

although there was no evidence from trials of effectiveness in reducing transmission, “there is mechanistic plausibility for the potential effectiveness of this measure”

counts as 'strong circumstantial evidence' - in any event, it certainly gets nowhere near the standard of proof required for compulsion.