2926 dead Americans
About three weeks ago, I did a post entitled “1470 dead Americans” (the 7 day total). It’s time for another post, with a death toll that’s doubled.
And in three weeks I’ll do another, with a much higher death total.
It’s also time to get back to normal. Yes, the current death toll is appalling and rising and almost entirely preventable. But this is not a public health emergency; it’s the new normal. Almost everyone (over 12) who wants a vaccine has received one. It’s time to go back to normal life. It’s not going to get better. Just accept the fact that we are self-inflicting one 9/11 a week, and get on with life (or death, if that’s what you prefer.)
End the ridiculous supplemental unemployment benefit program. Stop the fiscal stimulus. End the idiotic eviction moratorium. End the useless mask mandates. Repeal the insane Florida law that prevents private sector vaccination mandates. Open the schools. Open up the world to international travel. Restart America’s immigration program.
Let’s get back to normal.
Tags:
4. August 2021 at 22:52
My sentiment exactly.
4. August 2021 at 23:05
Exactly so.. . Delta and the superspreading anti-vax yahoos won over a month ago. They determined what will our path to herd immunity… as long as the hospitals can handle it, let it rip…. How is Proust coming along?
5. August 2021 at 01:28
More good ol’ fashioned common sense from Scott:
3,000 deaths from a terrorist attack with the average age of 40 is the same as 3,000 deaths where the average is 80 with the vast majority having comorbidities.
5. August 2021 at 02:11
There are at least two issues here. One is the economic and related programs and the second is the public health issue.
In some areas, those sick with covid (almost exclusively the unvaccinated) are using up vast amounts of hospitals resources. If you need emergency care this could be very serious. There are problems for the immunocompromised. The chance of additional mutations increases the longer the virus can spread widely. There’s also the cost of treating the sick.
5. August 2021 at 04:42
foosion,
I’m not advocating this, but I wonder how much of an incentive it would be if a law were passed that said insurance companies can’t or don’t have to cover covid-related medical costs if you aren’t vaccinated
5. August 2021 at 05:25
I’m game for letting insurance companies underwrite insurance.
Fat, smokers, non-vaxxed pay higher rates. But as long as you are forced by the government to buy insurance and are put in risks-pools with people with other health issues then you can’t ban the non-vaxxed.
5. August 2021 at 05:27
Obamacare essentially operates as a tax on the healthy forcing them to pay higher insurance rates to subsidize those with poor health behavior. I don’t want the government picking and choosing whose bad health decisions get covered.
5. August 2021 at 06:28
Who knows what the real numbers are. The live “counting” site “countrymeters.info records 51,000 deaths per week so far this year —which seems low—-But that is much higher than Current Covid 2926 (which is presumably higher per week for whole year). Which is supportive, I think, of your assertion that this is “not a public emergency”
I agree. Yet we treat it as such —-or maybe that too is an illusion.
It is “funny”. -I think of the implied rationality in Hayek’s “spontaneous” order in economics—-and then compare it to what appears to be a Covid obsession——which does not seem spontaneous and not rational.
It may be spontaneous——but politics are too involved for me to believe it is.
It is about the 2022 election. What else makes sense? Randomness makes sense. But I think the election makes the most sense.
5. August 2021 at 06:32
@foosion
Unvaccinated folks in the US are a drop in the bucket compared to unvaccinated people in the rest of the world. So far as I know, no one has a credible plan to get to global herd immunity, so no matter what folks in the US do, the virus is going to continue to circulate and evolve.
5. August 2021 at 07:18
“End the useless mask mandates”
Can someone point to some arguments/data to buttress this claim?
5. August 2021 at 07:30
Prof. Sumner,
Confession: I’m confused. I can’t tell which sentences you wrote were sarcastic and which ones aren’t, particularly in the paragraph before the last sentence in this post.
5. August 2021 at 07:44
Gary, I’ll do a Proust post soon. (I’m a slow reader, barely 1100 pages into the 4000 page novel.)
Todd, Still lying eh? (Recent deaths are skewing considerably younger than that, with lots of under 65 people dying.)
Biff, There are studies that suggest masks work but mask mandates don’t work. That’s because people pay almost no attention to mask mandates. Perhaps another commenter can find the studies.
Travis, That entire paragraph reflects my sincere views.
5. August 2021 at 07:52
Masks can’t be proven they work or don’t work. Its not possible to do RCT studies that they protect other people and not yourself.
Before 2020 I believe it was the WHO that recommended against masks in a pandemic. It wasn’t because of supply issues. They cited about 20 studies and found nothing statistical. And there was fear that telling people to masks would have them violate other things like distancing while the masks themselves were unproven or didn’t work especially cloth masks.
Fauci discussed masks in his emails. Basically he didn’t think cloth masks worked well; though seems to think properly warn medical masks work when people wear them correctly. We didn’t have supply of those masks and I think theres a realistic belief that people wearing them daily wouldn’t wear them effectively like a trained professional in a medical setting.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/fauci-said-masks-not-really-effective-in-keeping-out-virus-email-reveals/ar-AAKCZ0c
I believe it was Norway that did a study on N-95 for personal protection and did a RCT where they gave one group proper masks/training and another did not. Their study found a non-statistical significant small benefit, but the 95% CI included a range that implied masks didn’t work. IMO so likely small benefit they protect you.
Theres too many other variables in play like household spread, people not following rules, natural burn out of waves of covid that any study on widespread masking gets swamped by other factors.
I assume theres a small positive benefit. But tough to tell because masks also discourage behaviors like going to bars so you also don’t have people socializing drunk.
Basically a perfect issue to divide on partisan lines. Crap data that people can manipulate to their point of view.
5. August 2021 at 08:49
Biden and his Democrats are slightly insane. Not much different than Trump and the GOP.
Just one example: the borders to Canada and the Schengen area remain closed, even though vaccination rates there are higher (or at least as high) as in the US and infections are lower (or about as high).
Instead, Biden has opened the borders to Russia and Turkey, two countries with much worse numbers. This makes so much sense.
Imagine if Trump had made such a decision, the American and European media would be in furor. But hey, it’s just Biden and then everything is just fine. TDS at it’s very best.
The media is self-censoring, not wanting to criticize too much, even if the decisions are absurd. Many even defend Biden, no matter if it makes any sense or not.
This is kind of hard to believe. I found only studies such as these for example:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01394-0
Sean you write quite a lot of nonsense. Your question can be proven quite easily. In Germany, for example, there were a lot of asynchronous repeals. One region repealed the mandate, the other region right next to it did not, and so on. So one can calculate relatively well whether and how masks work. The same is true for mask mandates.
Of course, you have to be neutral about the situation and open to new arguments and not batshit crazy like a certain Mr. Toddler here.
5. August 2021 at 08:54
“Todd, Still lying eh? (Recent deaths are skewing considerably younger than that, with lots of under 65 people dying.)”
Scott, It’s basic information that anyone can look up in a minute that the average age of a death from 9/11 was 40 and that the average death from Covid-19 has been 80 and with comorbidities.
As of July, 477,000 Americans 65 and older have died with or from Covid-19. 134,000 aged 50 to 64 have died with or from Covid-19, 26,000 aged 30 to 49 have died with or from Covid-19 and 3,000 who were under 30 have died with or from Covid-19.
Of course you can’t be bothered to link to your claim that “deaths are skewing considerably younger now”.
5. August 2021 at 09:15
Sean, You said:
“I believe it was Norway that did a study on N-95 for personal protection and did a RCT where they gave one group proper masks/training and another did not.”
The study was in Denmark, and it didn’t even test as to whether masks slowed Covid transmission.
Christian, You said:
“Biden and his Democrats are slightly insane. Not much different than Trump and the GOP.”
Other than the fact that the GOP is a banana republic style personality cult and the Dems are a normal 1st world country political party.
Todd, I was talking about last week. Just admit that you are wrong.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#SexAndAge
5. August 2021 at 09:46
So suddenly it is “last week”? OK…
But then you can’t make your rifidulous comparison of 911 victims and those who died with or from Covid-19 as the numbers are far lower
Total Covid-19 related deaths in July 5,543
65 and older…… 3,537 (64%)
50 to 64………..1,408 (25%)
30 to 49………….535(10%)
0 to 29……………63 (1%)
That is closer to 400 dying a week with the relevant ages, not 3,000 dying a week. It isn’t that high because there is no such thing as “dying with 911 and dying from 911”.
5. August 2021 at 10:18
Scott,
That doesn’t make the illogical decisions of the Democrats any better, it makes them worse. At least the GOP has the excuse that they are governed by a madman. What’s the Democrats’ excuse? They are the “normal” party? If this is the new “normal”, then good night and good luck.
In Germany, the Green Party, is also considered the most modern, “normal”, intelligent, liberal party, supposedly led by the smartest, most normal and best educated people. Their party program borders on insanity and partly even exceeds these limits.
A foundation of their policy is zero growth or even minus growth, the least is less growth, in order to protect the environment, but at the same time more and more debt, social spending and fiscal spending, which is then paid back with less growth. An elementary school student can see the loopholes in this plan, just to give one example.
@Todd K
What are “relevant ages”? You are simply insane.
5. August 2021 at 10:28
End the supplemental unemployment benefits- yeah OK
Stop the fiscal stimulus- Why?
End the the eviction moratorium- I don’t know. Is there a way that could be phased out somehow? What happens when a few million people face eviction at the same time?
End the mask mandates- OK
Repeal the insane Florida law- for sure!
Open up the world to international travel- No – the US should not be telling other countries they need to open up their travel restrictions if they don’t want to. And this pandemic spread around the world because of international travel in the first place and has resulted in 4 million deaths so far already. What is your cost/benefit analysis of this?
Restart America’s immigration program- OK- with testing and possible quarantine
Let’s get back to normal- let’s get to a new normal but remember and learn from this disaster.
5. August 2021 at 11:13
@Todd K
What are “relevant ages”? You are simply insane
——
Mr. List, are you always this cranky after you wake from your nap?
Obviously the relevant ages are the overwhelmingly 22 to 62 year olds who died in 911. The oldest was a 78 year old whereas that has been the mean of U.S. Covid-19 deaths.
5. August 2021 at 11:27
@Sean
I talked to a virologist about the pandemic a couple of weeks ago and he told me: “I agree with you that the media coverage (CNN, NY Times, WaPo, etc) has been horrible and cloth masks are worthless.”
He didn’t comment on surgical masks but the study you mentioned with N95 masks was from Denmark, not Norway.”
With respect to the virus being a leak from the lab, he thought now a 50% chance, the same as me. In my case, up from 10% last April and 20% last summer.
5. August 2021 at 11:36
@sean, you say you don’t want the government picking and choosing which bad health decisions to enable. this sounds like libertarian conventional wisdom, but you are missing that the problem with the “government picking and choosing” is usually that we don’t know which companies are good/bad and would prefer to let the much smarter market decide.
for being fat, smoking, non-vaxxed – all are unambiguously bad health decisions, so there are no distortions to worry about. it is perhaps not optimal for the government to say we can discriminate against non-vaxxed/smokers but not fat people, but it is still better than not discriminating against any of the three groups.
or does someone have a strong counterargument?
5. August 2021 at 11:41
Scott “people pay almost no attention to mask mandates”
Perhaps that’s because they are almost never enforced.
5. August 2021 at 11:48
While you cannot really do an RCT to prove masks work you can do a lot of other studies. You start with lab studies which consistently show that masks are pretty effective. Then there are a lot of IV studies and others looking at direct and indirect. The majority show decent effectiveness. Finally you look for secondary effects. Wha happened to other respiratory viruses. In areas with high mask age flu and RSV nearly disappeared. So it is likely masks work. Do mandates work? That is a different question and compliance becomes an issue. Of that I am not so certain but I think they have a mixed effect.
Lots of people have comorbidities. I seldom see a pt that does not have comorobidites in the EMR. Almost half of the country has hypertension. Almost half are obese. At least 10% have diabetes. Saying only those with comorobidities are at risk is nearly meaningless.
I still dont understand why people focus only on deaths. The hospitalization rate for Covid has been about twice as high as for flu and maybe 3 times as high for teens.
https://www.aappublications.org/news/2021/06/04/covid-hospitalization-adolescents-060421
All of that said I largely agree with Scott. I would let individual local areas decide if they wanted to have mandates of any kind but would not have national or state level ones. Delta does seem to be different and some areas should have that option if things get out of control. Stop the economic aid and stop telling private businesses that they cannot require proof of vaccination. Let them have the financial reward or punishment for doing that.
Steve
5. August 2021 at 11:57
Steve wrote: “While you cannot really do an RCT to prove masks work you can do a lot of other studies.”
Of course an RCT could prove masks work in the sense of protecting the wearer but so far 11 RCTs have not shown this. What an RTC can’t show is that masks protect others.
5. August 2021 at 11:59
Scott said “the Dems are a normal 1st world country political party”.
He forgot to add the term “left wing” after the word “normal”. Normal as in “typical” or “expected”—which to me means the Dems are corrupt, insane and stupid—-as expected.
I bet Scott does not wear a blue and white “cloth” mask–or any mask. he is not that dumb—-unless required by law—because he is likely polite.
5. August 2021 at 12:01
Christian – Meta analysis sucks and I addressed that. Theres other areas showing no effects. And covid comes in waves so theres a pattern of people getting scared; enacting mandates and then two weeks later cases decline. Same thing in other areas. It could just be time period of when different waves hit. Or it could be that people who follow masks guidance follow a lot of other rules. The issues with the studies you cite are exactly the issues I said there were with those studies in my first message.
Scott – Agree. My memory was off on the country, but the results were what I said they showed limited efficiency at protecting the individual but said nothing about whether they protect you from spreading to other people.
Derek – We don’t have a free market health care system. Its government mandate and government manipulated rates. If the governments going to essentially tax you and force you to buy a product then I think they lose the right to tell you which behaviors you need to make.
5. August 2021 at 12:05
To Biff-Whiff
While not proof—as there can be no proof without real experiments which we refuse to do—but evidence to support the claim that masks are useless——everyone in NJ and NY followed the mask rule and has followed the mask rule—-you could not go anywhere if you did not—and they are number 1 and 2 in deaths per million.
5. August 2021 at 12:09
The narrative in Germany has always been that we will go back to the “new normal” as soon as every adult has been offered vaccination. We achieved that point.
Then it was said that the incidence has to fall below 100. No wait, below 50. No wait, below 35. All the goals have been achieved weeks ago, but politicians have still not kept their promises. The situation seems to be similar in the US.
Scott is right, let’s go back to normal, a new normal. Why hasn’t this happened weeks ago. It is neither transparent, nor comprehensible.
5. August 2021 at 12:18
To Derek
Insurance companies already are required to insure pre-existing conditions—-regardless of the condition—-so what are you arguing for?
5. August 2021 at 12:26
Steve,
HCQ performs well in a lab setting. There’s meta studies showing it works. Same as masks. Seems as though there are not rct for HCQ saying it doesn’t work, but the case for HCQ before that honestly the data looked better than the data for masks.
5. August 2021 at 12:27
Scott and death skews
75% of those over 65 have been fully vaccinated—so of course the percentage deaths within age groups are skewing more to the young—–
The surprising fact is how little they are skewing.
5. August 2021 at 12:29
@Lizard
So far, the vaccines also work against the variants, so the rest of the world is not particularly relevant. And when the virus changes, vaccinations only become more important again. It’s the same with influenza, and influenza changes even more than corona.
@Sean
In my country, meta-analysis tends to mean summarizing and presenting previous research. These were original works that I linked to.
You seem to mean prospective studies compared to retrospective studies. I do think that retrospective studies can be done in this case, maybe in some cases even the very term retrospective is questionable here. In some cases, they could simply wait to see what would happen.
The results were also too strong, it is difficult to explain what else should be the cause. These people calculate how big the effect of the masks was compared to other causes, hard to find arguments against it.
Wouldn’t it be more logical to argue exactly the opposite? They are already forcing behavior anyhow, so what is the difference really. If you enforce something, then do it right.
5. August 2021 at 13:08
I don’t see it in your data but I only skimmed the article. Dug thru a lot more papers in the past.
Their lead is like one town in Germany. That can be anything. Virus burn out. Mask mandates were associated with people not going to bars. Social distancing. Your article is literally just cherry picked data.
5. August 2021 at 13:34
Scott,
Agree.
5. August 2021 at 15:53
Todd, I LITERALLY cannot believe you are still here and still doing this. I’m almost impressed.
5. August 2021 at 16:20
Hey, the Concern Troll is back! I hope you are having a good summer, A.
6. August 2021 at 04:39
–“I’m not advocating this, but I wonder how much of an incentive it would be if a law were passed that said insurance companies can’t or don’t have to cover covid-related medical costs if you aren’t vaccinated.”–
Probably not too much, as vaccination rates tend to be low amongst those with low trust in the system and the young. It may even cause a decline in trust, as healthy people who are below 50 wonder why they are being so aggressively pushed to get a vaccine for a disease in which they have a 99.8% survival rate.
I think you’d also have to reduce the premium for this to be fair. Separately, this goes pretty aggressively against the founding notion of Obamacare, which (with a possible exception for smoking status) that you’d be able to get affordable insurance that was community rated and that would cover you if you needed health care. There doesn’t seem to be any limiting principle to this: for example, obesity causes a lot of health problems (including susceptibility to severe COVID!) so you could argue that premiums should vary based on BMI.
6. August 2021 at 05:24
When, in past history, were we so hyper-focused on achieving herd immunity for viruses that were, in some cases, much more “effective” (deadly, like, “people-falling-dead-in-the-streets” deadly) than this current Covid hoopla? Herd immunity, despite the so-called “science”, is a naturally occurring thing as it has been since homo sapiens roamed this planet. Why, only since 2020, is herd immunity now supposedly only achievable with some rapid-to-market, not fully FDA approved, EUA-only thing being shoved in our faces? And why does the MSM not allow for Dr. Fauci and all of the “experts” to get a good grilling with questions about their flip-flops, waffles, etc. In other words, common sense questions? This whole thing is a sham . . . people get sick, unfortunately people die from illness, but by no means should this be an excuse for the government to take away freedoms and liberties. Viruses don’t go away 100%. Viruses mutate. The so-called savior vaxxes for Covid are already proving to not be as effective as we were led to believe. The CDC/WHO/White House case for why everyone needs to ve Covid-vaxxed is weak, at best. Prove me wrong.
6. August 2021 at 07:05
The democratic party is sick, twisted, and disgusting in just about every way imaginable. If someone has freedom, a power hungry, pseudo intellectual, calling themselves a democrat, will be there to strip it all away.
Don’t smile, don’t use the wrong pronoun, don’t laugh with your family, or celebrate Christmas, travel, or give any political opinion that doesn’t fit the narrative – and please bring your vaccine, facial recognition, digital passport! Sincerely, “DNC”.
The “woke” brigade reminds me a bit of Puritan Oliver Cromwell’s policies that stripped England of anything remotely fun.
The masses celebrated his death.
6. August 2021 at 07:12
Justin’s comment is precisely what is wrong with democrat commie collectivists.
He cannot help but think of a way to “coerce” people into getting vaccinated, because he’s worried about his health.
It’s not my problem, nor is it anyone else’s problem, that you are fat and disgusting & probably have preexisting conditions. What part of “I don’t care about you” is so difficult for “virtue signaling commies” to understand.
I am an individual, that makes decisions predicated upon my “risk”. Not “your risk”. If you are fat and nasty, and at risk, then stay home. Don’t be so selfish and tell me to stay home, or inject something inside my body, because you have a nasty body! Not my problem!
If the virus had a fatality rate as high as small pox (as was the case in Jacobson vs Massachusetts), then most people would line up to take it.
But it’s not! Not even close!
6. August 2021 at 07:42
@Sean
Sorry if I trust an article from Nature more, with three different studies, one from Germany, one from Canada, and one from the US, instead of the feeling of an anonymous commenter from the internet, with zero studies, who doesn’t even know what a meta-analysis is. I know it is completely irrational, but hey, what you gonna do about it.
6. August 2021 at 07:49
@rinat
Can you even read? Justin is not calling for coercion in his comment. He’s just responding to another comment. He uses a quote to do so. Quotes are indicated by quotation marks. You might want to look that up again – and many other things while you are at it.
6. August 2021 at 07:59
@ foosion
Mask Mandates enforced or not, I still want to know:
If your underwear can’t stop the gas you pass from escaping and stinking up the room, how are we supposed to believe a piece of cloth over our face is going to make a difference?
6. August 2021 at 08:01
foosion
Please view my response to Biff_Whiff. Mask Mandates enforced or not, if they really don’t do anything, then why does it matter?
6. August 2021 at 08:05
ssumner and others
Let’s stop calling them “liberals”, because that just tarnishes the original/true definition. Call them what they are: Leftists (with an agenda).
6. August 2021 at 08:44
Todd, You said:
“So suddenly it is “last week”? OK…”
LOL, the whole post was obviously about last week. For the epidemic as a whole the death toll is over 600,000.
Jerry, You said:
“What happens when a few million people face eviction at the same time?”
The system worked fine for 200 years. People need to pay their rent or get out. Why is that so complicated?
Michael, You said:
“I bet Scott does not wear a blue and white “cloth” mask–or any mask. he is not that dumb—-unless required by law—because he is likely polite.”
Wrong again. I’m not so dumb as to think that mask don’t work. I’m not so dumb to think that doctors wear masks as a fashion statement.
Sean, You said:
“but said nothing about whether they protect you from spreading to other people.”
LOL, Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the show?
(Actually, the study was too poorly designed to show anything at all.)
Michael, You said:
“so of course the percentage deaths within age groups are skewing more to the young—”
First Todd tells me I’m wrong. Then you tell me “of course” I’m right. I was responding to Todd!
Henry, You said:
“The “woke” brigade reminds me a bit of Puritan Oliver Cromwell’s policies that stripped England of anything remotely fun.”
You mean like the laws that put people in prison for possession of a few ounces of pot? Remind me, do those laws exist in Alabama or in California? What sort of fun to you want to ban?
6. August 2021 at 08:47
Brophus @ 07:59, I believe the smell you are referring to is mostly caused by molecules such as hydrogen sulfide. These are orders of magnitude smaller than a virus particle which consists of thousands of molecules. Even if virus particles are still very tiny. That a filter won’t stop the smaller thing does not mean it cant stop a much larger thing.
I actually had this same conversation with my brother the doctor a few months ago. One of the many times I was wrong about something…
6. August 2021 at 09:25
Restart the immigration program?
You mean the 1M illegals that have already arrived this year.
Notice how the Cuban refugees (real refugees) were turned back. But the pseudo refugees from Mexico (an upper middle income country) are permitted to pour in unabated.
The reason? Cubans tend to be conservative! They know communism sucks!
6. August 2021 at 09:32
Scott,
I agree with you on everything except giving up. At this point, there is no need for any of the stimulus/relief programs. I agree with you that we have learned that masks probably work, but mask mandates almost certainly do not. Recommendations and guidance are much better paths. That said, business owners should have the right to require masks. The patten is clear, that when things get bad, even the biggest deniers start taking precautions, regardless what the governor does.
I still think we need to do everything we can to get people vaccinated. My son’s college is requiring vaccines for all students, which means he will probably be safer in a packed fraternity party than I am at the gym. I mostly agree with you, except I’m not ready to give up.
6. August 2021 at 09:37
“Why is that so complicated?”
Scott, I believe you were a small landlord of sorts at one time, as am I right now. You know it is a complicated situation even in the best of times to try to evict people from the home they rent from you. That just was not an option for a while and now it appears that there may be a huge backlog of them built up due to the pandemic and the prohibitions on evictions. I don’t even know what the state of the law is at this point, but luckily I don’t have to know.
But you are the economist and recommending ending the moratorium on evictions. So maybe you might have an answer when someone asks you what do you think the effect of millions of people going through that process all at once might have.
I think it could be complicated. It might cause a spike in demand for apartments or a drop in ‘effective’ demand for apartments. It certainly will cause an increase in the need for social services by some of the evicted. It might disrupt employers of those evicted as well. Will it have an effect on property values? Might it increase demand for professional painters?
I guess we will see what happens- but I am pretty sure it will be complicated.
6. August 2021 at 10:31
The American Institute for Economic Research did a review of all the mask studies they could find as of Feb 2021. Their findings are available at https://www.aier.org/article/masking-a-careful-review-of-the-evidence/
The conclusion is that their is no evidence that masks reduce the spread of covid
6. August 2021 at 11:32
Christian if you want to debate in good faith you don’t attack the person as “internet commentator”; you consider whether the arguments are valid.
Scott – I’m not going to claim a study shows something it doesn’t. It showed limited effectiveness at protecting the wearer.
6. August 2021 at 15:00
I’m a bit of a mask skeptic but spend a fair amount of time looking at the actual studies and do so with a pretty open mind.
As far as I can tell,
1. We still don’t clearly know how the disease is primarily transmitted… larger droplets or smaller aerosols.
2. We don’t know how much of what we inhale and exhale actually goes through the mask and gets filtered versus how much goes in and out the sides and top of the mask.
Without this information, I think it’s hard to make a claim either way regarding mask efficacy.
However if, as some recent research suggests, smaller aerosols are the primary transmission vector, then the argument for the efficacy of cloth or surgical masks becomes pretty weak.
And if masks themselves are not effective, then mask mandates certainly are not effective.
6. August 2021 at 18:07
bb, Good points.
Larry, You said:
“American Institute for Economic Research”
It’s an unreliable organization, which has been pretty inaccurate on Covid. I’d encourage people to read Alex Tabarrok if they want the views of an economist on Covid.
Masks work. That’s why doctors wear them.
dtoh, Most of the studies I’ve seen suggest that masks work. Some people cite the danish study, but that never even tested whether masks work.
I agree that government mask mandates are not a good idea. It made sense for grocery stores to have mandates, as the cost was trivial and the upside was considerable.
6. August 2021 at 18:17
Best single review I have seen on masks.
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118
Steve
6. August 2021 at 19:40
“I’d encourage people to read Alex Tabarrok if they want the views of an economist on Covid.”
Well, yeah, you know as much as he does about this pandemic. Nothing.
“No doctor wore a mask until told to in 2020” That is your “science”. This coming from a guy who has bragged about being a Luddite – knowing nothing about technology or science.
6. August 2021 at 19:51
Oops. Didn’t mean to make those quotes in the last part.
Scott doesn’t know what a scientific study is let alone be able to interpret one. How does Scott and the other religious maskers out there explain huge increases in Covid-19 cases and deaths despite high compliance with masks in most of the U.S. Canada and the original mask country, Japan?
They can’t: “Nothing to see here folks, move along…”
6. August 2021 at 19:56
Brophus:
“When, in past history, were we so hyper-focused on achieving herd immunity for viruses that were, in some cases, much more “effective” (deadly, like, “people-falling-dead-in-the-streets” deadly) than this current Covid hoopla? Herd immunity, despite the so-called “science”, is a naturally occurring thing as it has been since homo sapiens roamed this planet. Why, only since 2020, is herd immunity now supposedly only achievable with some rapid-to-market, not fully FDA approved, EUA-only thing being shoved in our faces?”
I’m sure this is meant as a rhetorical question. You realize that Scott hasn’t had a science course since he was in high school, right? That was when Apollo 13 landed on the moon, yo.
6. August 2021 at 19:56
Apollo 11
6. August 2021 at 19:59
Steve,
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118
I read that one too. Basically like all the other meta-analyses;
1. It says there is no direct evidence of mask efficacy.
2. It then cites a lot of ecological studies, everyone of which is seriously flawed if you actually take the time to read them.
3. It then provides a sophisticated model, which says essentially… IF you assume that masks work, THEN wearing masks will reduce transmission.
4. Therefore in conclusion – Masks are highly effective.
Everyone of these second hand summaries of other studies is exactly the same.
6. August 2021 at 20:13
More Scott B.S. His lies are like Trump’s (whenever convenient), but he’s on the authoritarian Left:
“You mean like the laws that put people in prison for possession of a few ounces of pot? Remind me, do those laws exist in Alabama or in California? ”
Recreational pot is still banned in 32 states.
6. August 2021 at 21:58
I agree. So long as the hospitals aren’t swamped, it’s time to let it ride and let the those who’ve chosen not to get vaccinated reap the whirlwind. Maybe even if the hospitals are swamped, it may still be better to let it ride.
7. August 2021 at 04:59
dots- I did read them. I have been reading studies about masks and transmission of disease off and on since the the early 90s. No, they are not all seriously flawed. I dont just read the clinical stuff but also the stuff by the aerosol scientists. The problem is that the gold standard test is the double blind RCT and you can have a blind test with masks. It is pretty hard and expensive to do RCTs. Finally, there are really too many factors to control since you are also dealing with human behavior that can influence the studies.
So you are left with lab studies who show that masks are definitely effective. You are left with secondary effects, like noticing that flu and RSV all disappeared as we wore masks. And then you are left with probability. The large majority of well done studies, not flawless but no study is ever flawless, show that they have some effect. Not force fields but they have some effect. So it is highly probable they work. You seem to want 100% certainty. You just dont get that in medicine. I do clinical medicine. Every time I Intubate someone, choose an antibiotic or put someone on a pressor I dont know with certainty it is the right choice. If I want 100% certainty then I would never treat anyone for anything. This is biology and medicine. The best you get is high probabilities. Its not physics. (According to the physicist in the family physics isn’t even physics.)
Steve
7. August 2021 at 08:22
Steve wrote: “Finally, there are really too many factors to control since you are also dealing with human behavior that can influence the studies.”
No, having many factors is why there are RCTs in the first place. In the Denmark study, the roughly 3,000 who used masks in April 2020 were carefully matched occupation-wise with the 3,000 who did not use masks.
The May 2020 meta study that was published by the CDC concluded:
“In pooled analysis [of ten mask RCTs], we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks.”
7. August 2021 at 12:47
The Danish study, like most studies, looked only at the wearer of the mask. It did not look at those exposed to the person wearing the mask. Since we want to know if the mask prevents spread you need both sides of that equation. The study was also too small. If you look at the confidence intervals they suggest a 23% to 46% positive effect from masks, but the numbers were not large enough to reach significance. 3000 sounds large but they tested in an environment when infections were uncommon so they ended upon with 42 in the mask group and 53 in the control with Covid. Link to origin study follows and the BMJ if you are curious had a nice critique.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
There is nothing magical about RCTs. If you choose the wrong population, if it isn’t big enough or any number of other things. A well done IV study can be a better study than an RCT. I think I know the CDC study to which you refer to and it also had issues. (There was a study, IIRC, just as an example where they looked at 18-21 male military. Useless. About a zero percent chance they would comply.)
Steve
7. August 2021 at 13:11
>>> Masks work. That’s why doctors wear them.
Scott, what can you say about this research then?
https://www.cochrane.org/CD002929/WOUNDS_disposable-surgical-face-masks-preventing-surgical-wound-infection-clean-surgery
7. August 2021 at 13:55
@steve
Not at all looking for 100% certainty. I’d settle for minimally convincing logic or data.
I’d be very interested in links to the articles by aerosol scientists. I’ve read a lot of them…. maybe I missed one.
RSV and flu are potentially explained by the reduction in the frequency and proximity of social interaction. If flu/RSV have lower baseline R0 than Covid, then increased social distancing could be enough to eliminate flu and RSV but not Covid. Also conventional wisdom is that flu and RSV are transmitted by large droplets whereas recent research suggests smaller aerosol as the transmission mechanism for Covid. If so, then masks could significantly reduce flu and RSV transmission but not Covid. Or since flu and RSV are believed to be transmitted by fomites, it could be increased handwashing that has reduced the transmission.
If you know of some ecological or epidemiological studies that you think are particularly convincing, I’d be very interested to take a look. Again, I’ve looked but haven’t really found anything.
I don’t know the answers, but it does seem to me that the quality of the studies and the data does not justify the level of adamancy espoused by a lot of mask proponents.
Also I think it would be very hard in today’s environment to publish a study questioning mask efficacy without getting branded a heretic and putting funding and/or tenure at risk. Which is a shame, because if people were willing to question the narrative, a lot more effort would have gone into looking at how indoor ventilation affects transmission, testing whether BCG vaccinations are an effective prophylaxis, using gene sequencing in contact tracing to better understand the transmission mechanism, promoting greater production and use of N95 masks, etc., etc.
8. August 2021 at 06:25
You do know there are non peer reviewed online journals that publish everything? The studies that pushed people to believe HCQ got published even though they were incredibly flawed. That first study from France had only 40 pts, the pts were young and IIRC mostly women. A well done study would’ve no problem getting published. Plenty of iffy studies that show masks dont work already got published.
“RSV and flu are potentially explained by the reduction in the frequency and proximity of social interaction. If flu/RSV have lower baseline R0 than Covid, then increased social distancing could be enough to eliminate flu and RSV but not Covid.”
Except the whole world did not distance. Lots of us still had to go to work. We have to work closely with each other. Iwoukd have expected a reduction but not to have it disappear.
Finally, I hope you do realize that some Covid is transmitted baby droplets. It is not either droplets OR aerosol, it is both. We have always known masks work against droplets and the aerosol people have shown they have some effect against aerosols also.
I would suggest starting with Milton ands lab’s work.
Steve
8. August 2021 at 06:58
People who live in someone else’s home, condo, without paying rent, are the most atrocious and disgusting people on the face of the earth.
It’s the equivalent of stealing from a business owner which, apparently, is now okay if you are black, brown and poor. The DNC has done everything in their power to destroy capitalism and replace it with totalitarian communism: “loot, burn, complain endlessly, and pillage”, should be their new moto.
BTW, has anyone noticed that the disgusting radical democrats are always the ugly losers from high school and college? The outcasts, who were not that bright, or good looking, and felt “oppressed” by everyone else?
It’s really revenge of the dorks. We could say revenge of the nerds, but most Dems are not really that educated. And no, a four year college degree from a public state school, where they teach “sport management” isn’t an education. Come back when you are reading 100 books a year, graduated from Yale, then we can talk about what a real education is.
Poverty is not an excuse to steal! If you cannot find a job, you either don’t have the skills, you don’t really want to work, and/or, the politicians enacted legislation that will continue to ship your unskilled labor to Chinese Nazi’s.
Just remember: when you buy Chinese, you are really buying from Uighur concentration camps. You are also placing more Americans out of work. And those Americans who are dumb and unskilled will think that the problem is “business”, instead of “govt”, and they will spark a revolution that permits power hungry democrat thugs to create a totalitarian state.
Welcome to the world of vaccine passports, yellow bands, stamped QR codes on our wrists, and other democrat centralized tyranny.
I hear food control is also coming soon. Another democrat thought experiment, in which we are all forced to stop eating beef because a slimy apparatchik says so.
Democrats are communist thugs. Say it with me.
8. August 2021 at 07:16
90% of democrats are not communist. But they do sympathize with the CCP style of governance. They want global corporations, social credit scores and global governance.
It’s just excessive arrogance and hubris. They view themselves above the law & better than everyone else.
Just look at Obama: 600 + people at his private birthday party; yet, he doesn’t want you to have more than 5 people over for thanksgiving dinner. People from around the country flew in on private jets; yet, the democrats tell us we are all destroying the world and should all cease traveling on jets. Nobody wore masks at his Birthday Party; yet, the democrats (perhaps we should simply call them the CCP) tell everyone else to wear a mask – some of them tell us to wear triple masks – that we know, from numerous medical studies, are not effective.
8. August 2021 at 14:01
Todd, Are you seriously still talking about the Danish study? I literally don’t even know what to say. We’ve probably had a few hundred posts about how you were unable to even understand the abstract of the study and how it doesn’t say what you think it does and I think in the end you at least flipped to saying that there were plenty of other studies and now you’re back to it?
And you are STILL talking about science courses?
steve, “The Danish study, like most studies, looked only at the wearer of the mask. It did not look at those exposed to the person wearing the mask” is exactly right. I haven’t checked the comments on this blog in about six months so I don’t know the background here and how long you’ve been trying but when I argued with Todd then people told me they’d been doing the same thing for a year and I’d eventually realize it was pointless….
8. August 2021 at 15:41
@steve
I do understand the difference between peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed studies. That said, a lot of garbage gets through peer reviews, and peer reviews are often just an echo chamber for amplifying a popular consensus. Science is not a popularity contest. Truth is determined by the quality of data, methodology and logic,… not by a show of hands.
“Except the whole world did not distance.”
That doesn’t matter. Aggregate reduction in the frequency, duration, and proximity of contacts is what matters. Depending on the numbers, isolation of a small percentage of the population can bring the R0 below 1 and eliminate the disease.
“I would have expected…” is spitballing. It’s not science.
“We have always known masks work against droplets and the aerosol people have shown they have some effect against aerosols also.”
That is not an important question. It is well known that masks have filtration properties across a wide range of particle sizes. The important question is whether that filtration is sufficient to significantly reduce transmission. To me that is the unanswered question and it depends on many things including: how much of inhalation and exhalation actually get filtered as opposed to being diverted through the top and sides of a mask, what is the actual net filtration rate for the particles that cause transmission, is that reduction in particles sufficient to significantly reduce the probability of transmission.
Again I don’t know the answers to those questions, but I have not seen any studies (including Milton) that are anywhere near sufficiently conclusive on these points to justify a claim of mask efficacy in significantly reducing transmission.
And BTW, please don’t make the argument that since masks reduce the number of particles, they must also reduce transmission. That argument relies on assumptions of linearity and/or other characteristics in the relationship for which there is no or little evidence.
8. August 2021 at 20:07
“We’ve probably had a few hundred posts about how you were unable to even understand the abstract of the study”
Still have problems counting up to 15, I see.
8. August 2021 at 20:18
Did you actually go and count them? I’m pretty sure I myself wrote at least 20-30 and the debate started long before me and seems to have continued. It doesn‘t change the substance though. You continue to think that a science degree from a no name university makes you an expert on „science“ but are still unable to accept any contrary evidence (including the abstract of the study you‘ve been misrepresenting for almost(?) a year).
Anyway, it looks like Jayne and Henry are still here too so you‘re not the worst of the bunch.
8. August 2021 at 20:50
My physics degree was from a liberal arts college that was #40 in the U.S. then among liberal arts colleges in physics. I never said I went to MIT but there is a chasm between the science minded and those like you and Scott who never took a science course in college.
9. August 2021 at 05:12
To Dtoh
I read the essay too (actually I skimmed each paragraph). It is useful in that it provides the results of many studies——qualitatively judging them—-so it was interesting. Many of the studies had opposite views of others.
My “common sense” view is “if everyone who wore masks properly (once, or washed), never touched them, always washed hands, did not scratch eyes, stayed away from people as much as possible—-even if the other wear masks ( a mistake everyone makes), never slips them below their nose——maybe a few other things, keep them on when family is there, eat alone, then maybe it would be helpful” .
In fact, my sense from skimming each paragraph is that is what they generally assume when they say (“probably helps”)
When Trump and Pence were mocked——that is what they said—-meaning the proper way to wear masks. Scott of course will not agree with this sentence.
But so few do this, it is for all practical purposes useless to wear masks. Scott is against mask mandates because he assumes (I assume) that so few do this it is pointless to wear masks.
That is why I say he is not dumb enough to wear masks——of course—-he might take the view “if I can save one life” it is worth it. Which is not to be mocked. Except I doubt that——I am sure there are many things we all do which if we did not —“might save one life”—-even factoring in “opportunity costs”. The word “might” is not very useful.
9. August 2021 at 06:39
I’m anti-masks but actually agree with Steve’s summary of the science.
He said they have “some effect” in his summary of the literature. I agree with that point.
I don’t view masks as having zero costs. I like playing team sports. Those suck with masks. I like going to bars and socializing. Those suck with masks.
Some effect and real costs to wearing them favors allowing people to choose if they want to wear a masks. The standard to support wearing masks requires evidence that they have significant positive effects which is not presenet in the literature.
12. August 2021 at 08:23
Scott for the first time in a while, we agree.
NOTE: had we had weekly wage subsidies (available only to SMBs) heading into the pandemic, when the pandemic hit, the avg job offer from SMBs to folks would have fallen (maybe from $150/wk to $50/wk) but LFP would have stayed exactly the same, bc labor keeps getting paid a marginally identical wage, but the types of work would have changed, and who gets paid would have changed (younger healthier labor would be taking jobs they dont stay home for)
Politically, Fortune 1000 would have all been CRYING that we should OPEN BACK UP, bc the labor advantage that MOM&POP Restaurant had over Friday’s would have expanded vs what they had in March. So everyone’s incentives are aligned.
Just to hit that point again, the 300K SMBs that sell on Amazon, would have had wage prices fall giving them more cash for inventory, and they’d already be selling on ALL ecomm sites, bc with wage subsidies they all do their own Pick, Pack, Ship and dont have to lock their inventory into Amazon warehouses.
Extended UI would have been STUPID, bc there would still be no labor slack. Which would have made paying everyone for vaccine and variolation trials more obvious.
The point is NGPLT makes tones of sense, but what you really want when the shit hits the fan, is the low skilled labor that can’t get a premium wage from Fortune 1000, all getting wage subsidies and working in the kiddie pool of SMBS and families, bc the digital search match subsidy mechanism is in place and EVERYONE keeps working, bc EVERYONE is still worth $50/wk during a pandemic.
13. August 2021 at 06:56
https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1425858836519325702
More proof that Sumner’s CCP is calling the shots at the UN.
Apparently, scientists now need “permission” to include any incriminating data.
Btw, for you sicko’s forcing this vaccine on your children: you may want to know that Dr. Restef Levi recorded a 25% increase in cardiac arrests 15-29. This increase was correlated with mass vaccination.
So yes, we can control the death numbers Scott. Not getting the vaccine is the #1 way to reduce the deaths. After that, you may want to eat less fast food – something American idiots simply cannot avoid – and losing weight. Losing weight is another problem for the dumb American, whose diet consists of a sugar cereal, carbs for lunch, and a 3000 calorie salad for dinner. But they blame it on the farmer, or a genetic defect. I wonder how many fat, disgusting obese losers have a defect? Is it 70% of the American population. Do humor me.
13. August 2021 at 07:03
Yes, they are extremely fat.
The first time I went to America, I thought people would look like the Hollywood movies.
But no.
Everyone I met was fat and ugly.
So yeah, obnoxious, fat, and mostly stupid. That is your average American today.
In the 70’s, the girls were actually hot. They dressed well, they were thin, and they were fairly educated. Today, they are walking elephants. Holy Moly. And the men are even uglier.
If I was American, I’d be running away from that country. Settle in Hungary, Lithuania, poland – somewhere where democrats don’t exist. Those countries no what happens when you listen to democrat policies. Even Philippines has more freedom and common sense.
13. August 2021 at 11:57
I don’t see why re-start immigration. OK, schooling and work have to proceed or resume, but immigration and much of travel no.
13. August 2021 at 11:58
“Even Philippines has more freedom and common sense.”
Ok, then.
13. August 2021 at 12:00
“Not getting the vaccine is the #1 way to reduce the deaths”
I know of more than 600,000 Americans who might have disagreed if they were still alive.
13. August 2021 at 17:05
“If I was American, I’d be running away from that country. Settle in Hungary, Lithuania, poland – somewhere where democrats don’t exist. Those countries no what happens when you listen to democrat policies. Even Philippines has more freedom and common sense.”
If people who think Hungary and the Philippines are better than America (i.e.the Auschwitz Camp shirts-wearing fellows) went away, certainly, America will be better off, but funnily, despite all the whining, they won’t go experience the paradise in Budapeste. They are less stupid than they pretend to be.
15. August 2021 at 14:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X29lF43mUlo
It’s a shame George Carlin isn’t around to see the germaphobes in 2021. I’m sure he’d have a few funny words for the totalitarian elites & their brainwashed foot soldiers (aka democrats).
Mass psychosis?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09maaUaRT4M
15. August 2021 at 17:58
“Mass psychosis?”
With a Holocaust-level loss of human lives worldwide and mkre American lives lost in one year and a half than in all World Wars and the battles of the Cold War? Seriously, will psychopaths ever stop whining about not having gotten to murder as many people as they wanted?
“He’d have a few funny words for the totalitarian elites & their brainwashed foot soldiers (aka democrats).”
Talking about foot soldiers and totalitarians, remember when Republican presidents who lost an election (say, Gerald Ford or Bush Sr.) would not send literal Nazis invade Congress to overturn it?
16. August 2021 at 12:00
Romania is fully open. No PCR-Test, No vaccine passports required, no masks needed. Only 25% vaccinated: they have less than 500 cases per day.
Colombia also opened in May. Academics screamed that it was a death sentence. They were calling for the President to be arrested, and removed, for what they called “attempted genocide”. In reality, the cases spiked for about two weeks. They are now at the lowest levels since the pandemic began. Those same academics now turn their attention to innocent children in the U.S., and apparently Hungary, since Hungary is a conservative republic that doesn’t fit the “post Europe”, multicultural, global government narrative.
Countries who followed the Great Barrington approach to herd immunity are far better off than the countries who haven’t. It is not “callous”; indeed, it is the only moral approach.
Doesn’t it concern people that the government is not permitting debate on these issues? Doesn’t it concern anyone that doctors are being blocked on social media because many of their opinions are not in line with the CDC narrative? Doesn’t it concern people that scientists who disagree with the CDC are being labeled “callous, and stupid, or wrong” by reporters, the vast majority of which have never even taken a biology class at the undergraduate level?
Does that sound like a healthy democracy.
17. August 2021 at 20:49
Wow, the thread is still going!
Mary wrote: “Doesn’t it concern people that the government is not permitting debate on these issues? Doesn’t it concern anyone that doctors are being blocked on social media because many of their opinions are not in line with the CDC narrative? Doesn’t it concern people that scientists who disagree with the CDC are being labeled “callous, and stupid, or wrong” by reporters, the vast majority of which have never even taken a biology class at the undergraduate level?”
Yes, it has bothered the science minded for over a year but not authoritarians like Scott.