Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences? The main one is that countries that quickly
resorted to widespread mask-wearing had far lower death rates and
shorter outbreaks, a new study argues.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:54:36 +0100, Bod wrote:

Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences? The main one is that countries that quickly
resorted to widespread mask-wearing had far lower death rates and
shorter outbreaks, a new study argues.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

I suspect if you look a little deeper, masks were not the only thing
they did to interrupt the infections. They also imposed quarantines,
border security, and actively prevented new cases from coming in.

On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:02:46 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:54:36 +0100, Bod wrote:

Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences? The main one is that countries that quickly
resorted to widespread mask-wearing had far lower death rates and
shorter outbreaks, a new study argues.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

I suspect if you look a little deeper, masks were not the only thing
they did to interrupt the infections. They also imposed quarantines,
border security, and actively prevented new cases from coming in.



Even within a given country - the statistics can be
staggeringly different : eg in Canada :
Ontario pop. 14 m. cases 40 k. deaths 2800 200 deaths/million
Quebec pop. 8.5 m. cases 60 k. deaths 5700 670 deaths/million
even worse than Sweden's 570 deaths/million !

Quebec had a 2-week earlier March Break which would account
for some of that difference - but I suspect that the seriousness
of the early restrictions and messaging has a lot to do with it.
John T.
-

"Bod" wrote in message
...
Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences?

Primarily very quickly preventing people from entering their
country once it because clear that this virus is a problem.
That was the case with Taiwan, Vietnam and New Zealand.

And the most badly effected like the UK, Italy, USA and Brazil didnt.

The main one is that countries that quickly resorted to widespread
mask-wearing had far lower death rates and shorter outbreaks, a new study
argues.

Thats not accurate.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 03:40:30 +1000, %%, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Bill Wright to Rodent Speed:
"That confirms my opinion that you are a despicable little ****."
MID:

On 8/11/2020 10:40 AM, %% wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and
others have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences?

Primarily very quickly preventing people from entering their
country once it because clear that this virus is a problem.
That was the case with Taiwan, Vietnam and New Zealand.

And the most badly effected like the UK, Italy, USA and Brazil didnt.

The main one is that countries that quickly resorted to widespread
mask-wearing had far lower death rates and shorter outbreaks, a new
study argues.

Thats not accurate.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/


Wrong, as always.

"8

Masks: Early Adoption.
The World Health Organization initially advised against widespread mask
wearing by the public, as did the United States CDC.1,48 The WHO
reversed course and
recommended masks in public on June 5, 2020.49
Despite these initial recommendations, a number of countries did favor mask
wear by the public early in their outbreak, and such countries
experienced low
coronavirus-related mortality (Table 2, Table A1, Figure
1).50-68,S1-S301 It is likely that in
Mongolia and Laos, both of which reported no coronavirus-related
mortality by May 9,
the public began wearing masks before any cases were confirmed in their
countries
(Table 2). We identified 22 additional countries with recommendations
or cultural norms
favoring mask-wearing by the public within 20 days of the estimated
onset of the
countrys outbreak:1 including (beginning with those favoring masks
earliest in the
course of their outbreak): Japan, the Philippines, Macau, Hong Kong,
Sierra Leone,
Cambodia, Timor-Leste, Vietnam, Malaysia, Bhutan, Venezuela, Taiwan,
Slovakia, St.
Kitts and Nevis, South Korea, Indonesia, Brunei, Grenada, Mozambique,
Uzbekistan,
Thailand, and Malawi (Table 2). The average mortality by May 9 for
these 24 early
mask-wearing countries was 1.5 per million (SD 2.0). Twenty of the 24
were lower-
mortality countries (p=0.001).

An additional 17 countries recommended that the public wear masks within 30
days of the estimated onset of their outbreak: São Tomé and PrÃ*ncipe,
Czechia,
Dominica, Bangladesh, Zambia, Chad, Benin, Sudan, El Salvador, Antigua and
Barbuda, Myanmar, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Côte d'Ivoire, South Sudan,
Kenya, Saint
Lucia, and Barbados (Table 2). The average mortality by May 9 for this
group was 8.5
per million (SD 12.4). "

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Ju ne_15_2020

On 8/11/2020 10:02 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:54:36 +0100, Bod wrote:

Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences? The main one is that countries that quickly
resorted to widespread mask-wearing had far lower death rates and
shorter outbreaks, a new study argues.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

I suspect if you look a little deeper, masks were not the only thing
they did to interrupt the infections. They also imposed quarantines,
border security, and actively prevented new cases from coming in.

Go read the study.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Ju ne_15_2020

"Bob F" wrote in message
...
On 8/11/2020 10:40 AM, %% wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences?

Primarily very quickly preventing people from entering their
country once it because clear that this virus is a problem.
That was the case with Taiwan, Vietnam and New Zealand.

And the most badly effected like the UK, Italy, USA and Brazil didnt.

The main one is that countries that quickly resorted to widespread
mask-wearing had far lower death rates and shorter outbreaks, a new
study argues.

Thats not accurate.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/


Wrong, as always.

We'll see...

"8

Masks: Early Adoption.
The World Health Organization initially advised against widespread mask
wearing by the public,

Irrelevant to what asian countries particularly actually did.

as did the United States CDC.1,48 The WHO reversed course and recommended
masks in public on June 5, 2020.49 Despite these initial recommendations,
a number of countries did favor mask wear by the public early in their
outbreak,

Not only favoured, but in fact required them to be worn.

and such countries experienced low coronavirus-related mortality (Table 2,
Table A1, Figure 1).50-68,S1-S301 It is likely that in Mongolia and Laos,
both of which reported no coronavirus-related mortality by May 9, the
public began
wearing masks before any cases were confirmed in their countries

And the reason they got cases later was just because they
didnt see many infected people arriving in their country,
not because they wore masks before any arrived.

(Table 2). We identified 22 additional countries with recommendations or
cultural norms favoring mask-
wearing by the public within 20 days of the estimated onset of the countrys
outbreak:1 including (beginning with those favoring masks earliest in the
course of their outbreak): Japan, the Philippines, Macau, Hong Kong,
Sierra Leone, Cambodia, Timor-Leste, Vietnam, Malaysia, Bhutan, Venezuela,
Taiwan, Slovakia, St. Kitts and Nevis, South Korea, Indonesia, Brunei,
Grenada, Mozambique, Uzbekistan, Thailand, and Malawi (Table 2). The
average mortality by May 9 for these 24 early mask-wearing countries was
1.5 per million (SD 2.0). Twenty of the 24 were lower-mortality countries
(p=0.001).

Irrelevant to whether mask wearing was the MAIN FACTOR in
the result they got or whether it was in fact shutting their borders.

An additional 17 countries recommended that the public wear masks within
30 days of the estimated onset of their outbreak: São Tomé and PrÃ*ncipe,
Czechia, Dominica, Bangladesh, Zambia, Chad, Benin, Sudan, El Salvador,
Antigua and Barbuda, Myanmar, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Côte d'Ivoire, South
Sudan, Kenya, Saint
Lucia, and Barbados (Table 2). The average mortality by May 9 for this
group was 8.5 per million (SD 12.4). "

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Ju ne_15_2020

Uesless when you dont also analyse when they shut their borders.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 20:32:19 -0700, Bob F wrote:

On 8/11/2020 10:02 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:54:36 +0100, Bod wrote:

Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences? The main one is that countries that quickly
resorted to widespread mask-wearing had far lower death rates and
shorter outbreaks, a new study argues.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

I suspect if you look a little deeper, masks were not the only thing
they did to interrupt the infections. They also imposed quarantines,
border security, and actively prevented new cases from coming in.

Go read the study.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Ju ne_15_2020


Did you. This really looks like a study in search of data points to
demonstrate their hypothesis

They say before they started
"We hypothesized that in countries where mask use was either an
accepted cultural norm or favored by government policies on a national
level, the per-capita mortality might be reduced, as compared with
countries which did not advocate masks."




"On multivariable analysis, lockdowns tended to be associated with
less mortality (p=0.43), and increased per-capita testing with higher
reported mortality (p=0.70), though neither association was
statistically significant. Conclusions. Societal norms and government
policies supporting the wearing of masks by the public, as well as
international travel controls, are independently associated with lower
per-capita mortality from COVID-19."

I see "lockdowns" and "international travel". They also look at
mortality, not infections and infections are what masks are all about.
Death has more to do with age and preexisting conditions. as they
point out

"Population characteristics.
Countries with older populations suffered higher coronavirus
mortality. Countries with low mortality had on average 8.8% of their
population over age 60, as compared with 18.2% in the high-mortality
countries (p0.001, Table 1). The proportion of the population which
was male was not associated with country-wide mortality (p=0.95, Table
1). Smoking prevalence was on average 13.7% in low mortality countries
and 18.4% in high-mortality countries (p0.001, Table 1). The
prevalence of obesity was on average 14.6% in low-mortality countries
and 24.0% in high-mortality countries (p0.001, Table 1)."

Old fat people die, more so if they smoke.

Reading his analysis, I don't see where they controlled for countries
that social distanced with or without a mask. It is just as easy to
say, people who were scared bad enough to put on a mask, probably also
did not get close to anyone, washed their hands more and other things
we should be doing. I bet they also told those people the mask was
protecting THEM.

The message here seems to be you are falling on someone else's
grenade.

On 8/12/20 11:32 PM, Bob F wrote:
On 8/11/2020 10:02 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:54:36 +0100, Bod wrote:

Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences? The main one is that countries that quickly
resorted to widespread mask-wearing had far lower death rates and
shorter outbreaks, a new study argues.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

I suspect if you look a little deeper, masks were not the only thing
they did to interrupt the infections. They also imposed quarantines,
border security, and actively prevented new cases from coming in.

Go read the study.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Ju ne_15_2020

Fake study.Â* Try again.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 20:32:19 -0700, Bob F wrote:

On 8/11/2020 10:02 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 12:54:36 +0100, Bod wrote:

Some countries have been devastated by the novel coronavirus, and
others
have escaped lightly.

Why the extreme differences? The main one is that countries that
quickly
resorted to widespread mask-wearing had far lower death rates and
shorter outbreaks, a new study argues.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7075024/m...avirus-deaths/

I suspect if you look a little deeper, masks were not the only thing
they did to interrupt the infections. They also imposed quarantines,
border security, and actively prevented new cases from coming in.

Go read the study.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Ju ne_15_2020

Did you. This really looks like a study in search
of data points to demonstrate their hypothesis

Then you need new glasses. Its doing what rigorous
science does, see if the data supports that possibility.

They say before they started
"We hypothesized that in countries where mask use was either
an accepted cultural norm or favored by government policies
on a national level, the per-capita mortality might be reduced,
as compared with countries which did not advocate masks."

And it isnt advocate that matters, its what actually happened
mask use wise.

"On multivariable analysis, lockdowns tended to be associated
with less mortality (p=0.43), and increased per-capita testing
with higher reported mortality (p=0.70), though neither
association was statistically significant.

Mortality is poor measure because that varys with how
overloaded the medical system is and the quality of the
medical system varys so widely over the countrys they included.

But positives are even worse because
that depends on what testing is done.

Conclusions. Societal norms and government policies
supporting the wearing of masks by the public, as well
as international travel controls, are independently
associated with lower per-capita mortality from COVID-19."

I see "lockdowns" and "international travel". They also look at
mortality, not infections and infections are what masks are all about.

But its infections that lead to mortality, stupid.

Death has more to do with age and preexisting
conditions. as they point out

"Population characteristics.
Countries with older populations suffered higher coronavirus
mortality. Countries with low mortality had on average 8.8% of their
population over age 60, as compared with 18.2% in the high-mortality
countries (p0.001, Table 1). The proportion of the population which
was male was not associated with country-wide mortality (p=0.95, Table
1). Smoking prevalence was on average 13.7% in low mortality countries
and 18.4% in high-mortality countries (p0.001, Table 1). The
prevalence of obesity was on average 14.6% in low-mortality countries
and 24.0% in high-mortality countries (p0.001, Table 1)."

Old fat people die, more so if they smoke.

Its much more complicated than that, particularly with smoking.

Reading his analysis, I don't see where they controlled for
countries that social distanced with or without a mask.

It isnt really possible to do that because its impossible to measure.

It is just as easy to say, people who were
scared bad enough to put on a mask,

More of your flagrantly dishonest language

probably also did not get close to anyone,
washed their hands more and other things
we should be doing.

Or they do that stuff all the time, most obviously with the Japs.

I bet they also told those people the mask was protecting THEM.

Because it obviously does. That's why those doing the testing
and those who treat the seriously infected wear them, stupid.

The message here seems to be you are falling on someone else's grenade.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something.

On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 05:01:41 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
FredXX to Rodent Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID: