Thread Rating:

redietz
redietz
Joined: Jun 5, 2019
  • Threads: 24
  • Posts: 554
Thanks for this post from:
Romes
October 20th, 2020 at 6:48:52 AM permalink
Okay, this "85% who wore masks got it" must be flagged and addressed. It is completely misinforming to state something like that without qualifying the study in question. I'm doing a more thorough blog entry later today on this very topic that addresses the provenance of the lie, which is what it is. I will actually ask Wizard's permission to post the link, which I never do, because I am horrified that a site that purports to do valid statistical analyses would have folks spreading this numbers garbage.

The CDC study, which I suggest you go read, is dealing with people WHO ALREADY SHOW SYMPTOMS. So it is not a referencing the general population. First important point -- the study is talking about people who have symptoms and suspect they have covid and therefore got tested.

Second point, the question was a survey question, which (unfortunately) is not behavior monitoring via camera or anything but a survey question relying on the accuracy of the people surveyed and their attitudes towards the fact they suspect they have covid because they have symptoms.

Third, the question under discussion has to do with whether people who have symptoms wore a mask "always or usually" when outside. That question was not the key question in the study, however -- it wasn't the thrust of the study. The study had to do with whether people ate in restaurants inside. The study was designed to see if people who wore masks in general, but ate in restaurants (where they would be removing masks), stayed safer than those people who wore masks less but also ate in restaurants (where they would not be wearing masks).

The conclusion was that, of those who showed symptoms and wound up testing positive for covid (I think half of those with symptoms wound up positive), that 85% had worn masks for the previous two weeks "always or usually" while 88% who did not wear masks "usually or always" tested positive.

So for those who ate in restaurants, where they didn't wear masks, and who got covid, whether they did or did not wear the masks in public elsewhere, did not matter very much.

As you can see, this has nothing to do with whether wearing masks in a general population results in 85% of those who wear them getting covid.

Now here's what gets me. I thought the study was so clear that anybody claiming it proves "85% of people who wear masks get covid" would get eye rolls for being dense. But evidently not.

Finally, I will repeat once again -- masks are primarily and most effective in preventing YOU from giving disease to OTHERS. While masks have some limited protective value for the wearers, their primary value is for protecting OTHERS from the MASK WEARERS.

I think I did a reasonable paraphrasing of the study.

Wiz, let me know if I got anything significant wrong.
Last edited by: redietz on Oct 20, 2020
"You can't breathe dead hippo waking, sleeping, and eating, and at the same time keep your precarious grip on existence."
darkoz
darkoz 
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 238
  • Posts: 7278
October 20th, 2020 at 7:39:05 AM permalink
You did a better job than my attempt to explain it.

I also noted this forum is distinctly quiet when it comes to science disputing but quite vocal about math disputing.

While not the same they are linked in many ways and the disparity in forum members being quiet about science distortions here surprises me.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 175
  • Posts: 9746
Thanks for this post from:
rawtuff
October 20th, 2020 at 7:50:55 AM permalink
Quote: redietz

Okay, this "85% who wore masks got it" must be flagged and addressed. It is completely misinforming to state something like that without qualifying the study in question. I'm doing a more thorough blog entry later today on this very topic that addresses the provenance of the lie, which is what it is. I will actually ask Wizard's permission to post the link, which I never do, because I am horrified that a site that purports to do valid statistical analyses would have folks spreading this numbers garbage.

The CDC study, which I suggest you go read, is dealing with people WHO ALREADY SHOW SYMPTOMS. So it is not a referencing the general population. First important point -- the study is talking about people who have symptoms and suspect they have covid and therefore got tested.

Second point, the question was a survey question, which (unfortunately) is not behavior monitoring via camera or anything but a survey question relying on the accuracy of the people surveyed and their attitudes towards the fact they suspect they have covid because they have symptoms.

Third, the question under discussion has to do with whether people who have symptoms wore a mask "always or usually" when outside. That question was not the key question in the study, however -- it wasn't the thrust of the study. The study had to do with whether people ate in restaurants inside. The study was designed to see if people who wore masks in general, but ate in restaurants (where they would be removing masks), stayed safer than those people who wore masks less but also ate in restaurants (where they would not be wearing masks).

The conclusion was that, of those who showed symptoms and wound up testing positive for covid (I think half of those with symptoms wound up positive), that 85% had worn masks for the previous two weeks "always or usually" while 88% who did not wear masks "usually or always" tested positive.

So for those who ate in restaurants, where they didn't wear masks, and who got covid, whether they did or did not wear the masks in public elsewhere, did not matter very much.

As you can see, this has nothing to do with whether wearing masks in a general population results in 85% of those who wear them getting covid.

Now here's what gets me. I thought the study was so clear that anybody claiming it proves "85% of people who wear masks get covid" would get eye rolls for being dense. But evidently not.

Finally, I will repeat once again -- masks are primarily and most effective in preventing YOU from giving disease to OTHERS. While masks have some limited protective value for the wearers, their primary value is for protecting OTHERS from the MASK WEARERS.

I think I did a reasonable paraphrasing of the study.

Wiz, let me know if I got anything significant wrong.





Way too wordy. If you can break it down to a sound bite and throw in a picture or two, you might reach the intended audience.
redietz
redietz
Joined: Jun 5, 2019
  • Threads: 24
  • Posts: 554
October 20th, 2020 at 8:20:16 AM permalink
I need to rewrite one clause above. I should have said, "85% of those who wound up positive reported having worn masks 'always or usually' the previous two weeks (not including inside restaurants) while 88% of those who wound up positive said they had NOT worn masks always or usually." That's clearer.

I took a cognitive psych course back in the late 70's, and one book dealt a lot with processing positive and negative statements contained in single sentences and clauses and how it slows people down in terms of understanding what's being said. This topic has those elements to it. You have the negative of "not wearing masks" affected by the positive of "getting the virus" and then the implicit understanding that people remove masks to eat in restaurants, another negative. So a bevy of positives and negatives all jammed together.

Yeah, when you're reading limits are twitter-based, not much gets understood. It really is 1984-ish when everything is sound bites and twitter, and people repeat 100 characters as if it's some gospel understanding of reality.

My blog entry just assumed almost everyone grasped what the study was about. The entry is about how some lie regarding the study gets vetted for the president and repeated -- what is the process (or failed process)?

But evidently not everyone grasped the gist of the study.
"You can't breathe dead hippo waking, sleeping, and eating, and at the same time keep your precarious grip on existence."
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 175
  • Posts: 9746
October 20th, 2020 at 8:28:45 AM permalink
Not to worry. We have turned the corner and can now see the light at the end of the tunnel. The cavalry is just over the next hill.
terapined
terapined
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 5400
October 20th, 2020 at 8:30:54 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

Not to worry. We have turned the corner and can now see the light at the end of the tunnel. The cavalry is just over the next hill.


Taiwan and New Zealand yes
because
They are not depending on a vaccine and the world may never get a vaccine
"Everybody's bragging and drinking that wine, I can tell the Queen of Diamonds by the way she shines, Come to Daddy on an inside straight, I got no chance of losing this time" -Grateful Dead- "Loser"
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11995
October 20th, 2020 at 8:47:02 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

Not to worry. We have turned the corner and can now see the light at the end of the tunnel. The cavalry is just over the next hill.



Quite often the only thing you can do is wait things out. Americans cannot accept this for the most part.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
redietz
redietz
Joined: Jun 5, 2019
  • Threads: 24
  • Posts: 554
October 20th, 2020 at 9:31:58 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

You did a better job than my attempt to explain it.

I also noted this forum is distinctly quiet when it comes to science disputing but quite vocal about math disputing.

While not the same they are linked in many ways and the disparity in forum members being quiet about science distortions here surprises me.




Exactly. I don't get it. Interpreting the study as "85% of people who wear masks get covid" is completely wrong, and obviously wrong. You may as well say the sun orbits the earth. Why tolerate misinformation like this without calling it out?
"You can't breathe dead hippo waking, sleeping, and eating, and at the same time keep your precarious grip on existence."
darkoz
darkoz 
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 238
  • Posts: 7278
October 20th, 2020 at 9:58:54 AM permalink
Quote: redietz

Exactly. I don't get it. Interpreting the study as "85% of people who wear masks get covid" is completely wrong, and obviously wrong. You may as well say the sun orbits the earth. Why tolerate misinformation like this without calling it out?



What AZ is attempting is to claim people aren't wearing their masks properly so they are going to catch and spread covid regardless. Ergo, mask wearing is worthless.

That is completely the reverse of the study findings which is that mask wearing is important and needs to be done in totality (not removed in drinking and dining establishments) and of course done correctly.

I don't get AZ way of thinking.

It's like saying 85% of people who wore condoms incorrectly resulted in pregnancy and STD transmission ergo no one should wear condoms.

Completely ass-backward thinking
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
rawtuff
rawtuff
Joined: Mar 15, 2013
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 196
October 20th, 2020 at 10:03:41 AM permalink
Quote: redietz


Yeah, when you're reading limits are twitter-based,



It should be "your", right?
The joy of the non native correcting others on grammar, couldn't resist sry.

Otherwise, yeah, there are too many misreadings/misinterpretations of basic concepts in virology and stats related to the pandemic from all sides, but my hopes were there should be a common sense consensus among the majority of the first world population at least.
Not the case sadly.

  • Jump to: