Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #481  
Old 08-09-2020, 09:38 PM
HyperMOA HyperMOA is online now
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edmonton (shudder)
Posts: 4,589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sk270 View Post
Given the posts above, I think this thread is about to take off again on another tangent so I hope you see this.

I've spent some more time thinking about what you said. In the beginning , I should have said that I think that the categorical mistrust of science is an error. We need to be more nuanced in our interpretation of research.

I was fired up by what I saw as a wholesale rejection of research findings by some of those posting in this thread.

The research on masks, and many other aspects of Covid-19, is being done all around the world. I do believe the science when I see laboratory, modelling, in-hospital, epidemiological research from many countries and many researchers, funded by a myriad of sources that reach a reasonable consensus.

I agree that science, as most things done by humans, is flawed as humans are flawed. However, I submit that it is the best that we have. The more complex the question, the less likely that science can readily answer it. An example would be quantum physics. Simpler questions can be answered, such as how much of a cough or sneeze is captured by a surgical mask. Some questions cannot be answered by science, such as the perfect way to deal with a pandemic.

As I said, I did some more thinking about this last night and thought I'd try to further clarify my position.

I'm glad I took the time to respond to you and vice versa. I got a lot out of our exchange.
I can agree with all of this. When reading studies of subject matter I can relate or have education on I’m able to make educated opinions of their work. Now this goes only into realms which I can grasp though. Like astrophysics, I know very little of quasars and quarks. In these studies I don’t even have the chance of pronouncing half the words let alone understanding. However when reading about a paper medium filtering out particulate matter, yeah I may have some training in that subject. I think I can understand what they are conveying.

Having said that, I believe that people can understand a lot of what scientists tell us as long as we can identify our own limitations.

I agree that the scientific process is the best we have. I believe most science is impartial and true. However there is enough manipulation of the sciences to warrant skepticism. That was basically my position. Just not articulated very well.
Reply With Quote
  #482  
Old 08-09-2020, 10:08 PM
W921 W921 is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muirsy View Post
17 pages of arguing over masks, when it appears most people spend their days at home on a keyboard getting mad on the internet.

The irony!
Thanks for the laugh and I agree!
Reply With Quote
  #483  
Old 08-10-2020, 01:50 AM
fishnguy fishnguy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesB View Post
No, not at all. It is a different metric. The facts indicate that while you are more likely to get the virus in the US, you are also more likely to survive getting it there than here. Also once more, there are many other factors at work and generalities are mostly inaccurate.
Not really. That’s a completely wrong conclusion to come to. In fact, there is absolutely nothing one can conclude from looking at the numbers (and graphs) alone that you posted. It can be anything, including better testing, different age distribution, and so one. I am fairly confident that the probability of survival is nearly identical in both countries. If anything else, an average person is more likely to survive here in Canada simply because not everyone in the States gets the same treatment. I posted a study in one of the COVID threads a while back indicating that the CFR is practically identical in the two countries, in Canada it is being lower by 0.2% or something like that. I can look it up again if you like.

Like I said before, while the CFR they calculate by only considering the number of confirmed cases and reported deaths can be useful to researchers, for example, it is of no value to the general population due to various factors, including, but not limited to those I mentioned above. I don’t even know why the media is posting those graphs and numbers. Either there is a lack of understanding or they are just trying to get more eyes to read their articles. Of course, there can also be an agenda they are trying to push. It isn’t hard to see why the number of death per unit of population, while not perfect, but is by far a better number for general comparisons.
Reply With Quote
  #484  
Old 08-10-2020, 05:41 AM
Smoky buck Smoky buck is online now
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 7,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pikergolf View Post
More info for you guys to hash out.

https://medicinehatnews.com/news/loc...-had-covid-19/
With the amount of people who experience minimal symptoms and recover with no medical assistance it would not surprise me in the least that the number of people who have had Covid19 is much higher then reported. All of the people I know who have had Covid19 only got tested because of work purposes or they were warned they came in contact with someone who had Covid19. None thought they experienced any symptoms that would normally cause them to consider seeking medical advice

A lot of people won’t get tested if they believe it’s only a common virus
Reply With Quote
  #485  
Old 08-10-2020, 07:07 AM
Grizzly Adams's Avatar
Grizzly Adams Grizzly Adams is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 21,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck12 View Post
This.
Just get one of these. No proof necessary, which would seem to negate the whole idea. Just more waffling by those who supposedly know what it's all about. Then they wonder why people are resisting ?

https://globalnews.ca/news/7261770/c...n-cards-masks/

Grizz
__________________
"Indeed, no human being has yet lived under conditions which, considering the prevailing climates of the past, can be regarded as normal."
John E. Pfeiffer The Emergence of Man
written in 1969
Reply With Quote
  #486  
Old 08-10-2020, 07:58 AM
ghostguy6's Avatar
ghostguy6 ghostguy6 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: edmonton
Posts: 3,116
Default

Ill be picking up one of those cards after work since wearing a mask gives me a serious headache due to a previous injury. I know I don't need a card but it might make things easier when I need to go to the store.
On a side note, less than half the people on the LRT today were wearing masks, of those I would say another half were wearing them incorrectly, like they had their noes hanging out or they had them around their neck. I hope there is this much non compliance when the feds try to take our guns away.
__________________
" Everything in life that I enjoy is either illegal, immoral, fattening or causes cancer!"

"The problem was this little thing called the government and laws."
Reply With Quote
  #487  
Old 08-10-2020, 02:31 PM
JamesB JamesB is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 991
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
Not really. That’s a completely wrong conclusion to come to. In fact, there is absolutely nothing one can conclude from looking at the numbers (and graphs) alone that you posted. It can be anything, including better testing, different age distribution, and so one. I am fairly confident that the probability of survival is nearly identical in both countries. If anything else, an average person is more likely to survive here in Canada simply because not everyone in the States gets the same treatment. I posted a study in one of the COVID threads a while back indicating that the CFR is practically identical in the two countries, in Canada it is being lower by 0.2% or something like that. I can look it up again if you like.

Like I said before, while the CFR they calculate by only considering the number of confirmed cases and reported deaths can be useful to researchers, for example, it is of no value to the general population due to various factors, including, but not limited to those I mentioned above. I don’t even know why the media is posting those graphs and numbers. Either there is a lack of understanding or they are just trying to get more eyes to read their articles. Of course, there can also be an agenda they are trying to push. It isn’t hard to see why the number of death per unit of population, while not perfect, but is by far a better number for general comparisons.
I think I made it quite clear that there are many variables at play. But people like to generalize. I also think it's kind of funny that you think everyone in Canada gets the same treatment.
Reply With Quote
  #488  
Old 08-10-2020, 06:20 PM
BigJon BigJon is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Peace River
Posts: 1,264
Default

Anyone else notice the CDC updated their guidelines on health care workers returning to work and "when to be around people again" after a positive test.

Seems as though actual testing is no longer a basis for determining when to go back to work caring for patients or being around people in general after you were confirmed to have the corona virus.

10 days after onset of symptoms and if you feel good, get after it.

Seems weird, eh?

Definitely a super scary virus with precautions like that.
Reply With Quote
  #489  
Old 08-10-2020, 06:26 PM
Pathfinder76 Pathfinder76 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,773
Default

I went to cow town today and made the obligatory stops at the two Old Navy for road hunters (how anyone could get what they need there for an outdoor pursuit is a giant mystery). If there is mass resistance to mask wearing I didn’t see it there. Everyone and their dog is wearing one. People were walking their dogs with masks on.

One thing needs to be made very clear. Rural Alberta looks NOTHING like the city. It is not even remotely similar. I can go three lifetimes in rural Alberta and not come into the close contact with other human beings that a week in the city would grant me. I feel like I should self isolate at my shooting range for 14 days.

Glad to be home.
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”

-Billy Molls

Last edited by Pathfinder76; 08-10-2020 at 06:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #490  
Old 08-13-2020, 09:32 AM
Bergerboy's Avatar
Bergerboy Bergerboy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: In your personal space.
Posts: 4,787
Default Do masks have an effect?

https://edmontonsun.com/news/local-n...c-c577fc079046

The Edmonton zone is home to 470 of the 1,044 active cases in the province. Chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw said public health officials are currently working to trace the surge in cases and determine if there are any patterns in terms of transmission.

So a hair under the 2 week mandatory implementation of masks in Edmonton there is a sudden spike. Weird huh? A smaller city with a similar population density like Grande Prairie that has no mask bylaw (we can call this the control subject) has not had a similar increase. This raises some questions.

1. Do masks have any effect whatsoever on the prevention of Covid transmission?
2. Do masks somehow promote transmission?
3. Could there be other dynamics at play that are overlooked that dictate the transmission rate?

I don't have any answers, I am just becoming more amused at the juvenile attempts we are making as society to control something we cannot.

Thoughts?
__________________
When in doubt, use full throttle. It may not improve the situation, but it will end the suspense.
Reply With Quote
  #491  
Old 08-13-2020, 09:56 AM
Smoky buck Smoky buck is online now
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 7,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergerboy View Post
https://edmontonsun.com/news/local-n...c-c577fc079046

The Edmonton zone is home to 470 of the 1,044 active cases in the province. Chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw said public health officials are currently working to trace the surge in cases and determine if there are any patterns in terms of transmission.

So a hair under the 2 week mandatory implementation of masks in Edmonton there is a sudden spike. Weird huh? A smaller city with a similar population density like Grande Prairie that has no mask bylaw (we can call this the control subject) has not had a similar increase. This raises some questions.

1. Do masks have any effect whatsoever on the prevention of Covid transmission?
2. Do masks somehow promote transmission?
3. Could there be other dynamics at play that are overlooked that dictate the transmission rate?

I don't have any answers, I am just becoming more amused at the juvenile attempts we are making as society to control something we cannot.

Thoughts?
I am not a big promoter of masks but I don’t believe Grand Prairie vs Edmonton is a fair comparison. With Edmonton starting with a much higher level of outbreak then Grand Prairie it will dramatically skew the numbers

Now if Edmonton’s cases continue to increase at the present rate or higher after the mask laws have been implemented it would give reasonable data to question how effective masks are. Honestly though with states like California which has had mask laws and even past strict lockdown that has done little to stop the spread of Covid19 I am not expecting masks to have much results in Alberta either

What the mask law has done though is caused a good number of people from surrounding communities to shop elsewhere or order online. This will likely help limit transmission of Covid19 to surrounding towns so maybe we will get some indirect benefits from Edmonton mask laws

Just my present thoughts
Reply With Quote
  #492  
Old 08-13-2020, 11:36 AM
ghostguy6's Avatar
ghostguy6 ghostguy6 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: edmonton
Posts: 3,116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergerboy View Post

1. Do masks have any effect whatsoever on the prevention of Covid transmission?
2. Do masks somehow promote transmission?
3. Could there be other dynamics at play that are overlooked that dictate the transmission rate?


Thoughts?
1. Generally the non medical masks are not effective as the pore sizes are too large to stop the virus or even the aerosolized spit particles in the air. For these masks to be even remotely effective they must be worn correctly which is not being done.

2. Those that wear masks are far less likely to maintain social distancing. So far social distancing is the only thing that has continuously been recommended since this outbreak started. Those masks are disposable meaning they have a very short lifespan. I discussed that earlier but people are wearing them for long periods of time. Once contaminated they actually hold the virus against your mouth and nose. Also close to your eyes. Think about it, most home made masks are cotton. Cotton is a very absorbent material. As you exhale you spread these particles off the mask further spreading the virus.

3. Absolutely, there are always unforeseen factors at play. One thing I have noticed is there is a much larger push to masks and statements saying washing your hands is not effective as once thought. People may not be washing as much as before because of this. Many people are also now wearing face shields in place of masks. They do not filter the air at all so how effective are they really?
__________________
" Everything in life that I enjoy is either illegal, immoral, fattening or causes cancer!"

"The problem was this little thing called the government and laws."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.