Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, October 24, 2020

If Americans would stop complaining about face masks and wear them when they leave their homes, they could save well over 100,000 lives -- and perhaps more than half a million -- through the end of February, according to a study published Friday in Nature Medicine.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"The researchers considered five scenarios for how the pandemic could play out with different levels of mask-wearing and rules about staying home and social distancing. All the scenarios assumed that no vaccine was available, nor any medicines capable of curing the disease.

Consistently, the most effective " not to mention cheapest and easiest " way to reduce deaths was to increase the number of people wearing masks.

As of Sept. 21, only 49% of Americans said they "always" wore a mask in public, according to the study. If U.S. residents do not mask up in increasing numbers, they risk another round of mandatory social distancing measures that could shut businesses and schools around the country, the authors said.

"The potential lifesaving benefit of increasing mask use in the coming fall and winter cannot be overstated," wrote the team from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

The forecasts also suggest that if states continue to ease their social distancing mandates and other restrictions despite the recent rise in COVID-19 cases, there could be more than 1 million deaths in the U.S. by the end of February."

The Five Scenarios are at the thread link.

Related

The Study - Published: 23 October 2020
Modeling COVID-19 scenarios for the United States

www.nature.com

Gives new meaning to the term, "mouth breathers".

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2020-10-24 02:08 AM | Reply

Mask wearing is new news??
smh
If there is anyone that doesn't know this by now, they should be jailed.
Fauci is now talking a mask mandate. I say yes - HELL YES

#2 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-10-24 04:10 PM | Reply

Mask mandates may be tricky to enforce, but it might be time to call for them, Fauci said.

And there it is in a nutshell. How do we enforce it? People are getting punched out over the mask thing so how are cops going to enforce a mandate?
Without getting fired or sued?

#3 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-10-24 04:17 PM | Reply

#3

Public enforcement really isn't the issue. Even if it's less than 100% it would still be much higher than it is currently without any mandate at all.

The point is focusing on what's best from the overall public health perspective instead of living by the canard about 'personal liberty'. There is no such liberty when you're hooked to a ventilator in a hospital or you've died from Covid.

That should be the point. Private spaces can set their own rules demanding compliance just like we see right now.

#4 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-10-24 04:24 PM | Reply

Sorry but I read that a mandate means just that. Compliance.
In this case it very well could mean life or death so I consider it right up there with the laws against bank robbery.

#5 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-10-24 04:51 PM | Reply

So PB, you're voting for Biden then?
Of the two candidates he's the only one in favor of what you want.

#6 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2020-10-24 05:45 PM | Reply

There is a psychological aspect to wearing a mask. People that wear a mask, are automatically more aware of social distancing and will give others a wide berth.
Non maskers *usually tend to be rebellious and nonconformist.
If anyone dares to give a no masker the stink eye, confrontation is close by.

#7 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-10-25 10:58 AM | Reply

I consider it right up there with the laws against bank robbery.
#5 | Posted by phesterOBoyle

It's more like laws against manslaughter. People usually don't die in a bank robbery.

"Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man's nose begins."
John B. Finch ,Chairman of the Prohibition National Committee, 1880s

#8 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2020-10-25 04:37 PM | Reply

If anyone dares to give a no masker the stink eye, confrontation is close by.
#7 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE

Oh I give them a big stinkeye and make sure to be as conspicuos as I make a wide circle around them.

#9 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2020-10-26 01:35 PM | Reply

"If anyone dares to give a no masker the stink eye, confrontation is close by."

As well it should. No-maskers are either ignorant of asymptomatic contagion, or aware of it. Either stance puts others' lives at risk.

#10 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-10-26 01:53 PM | Reply

conspicuos

Boy, that is embarrassing.
Conspicuous, of course.

#11 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2020-10-26 03:01 PM | Reply

And there it is in a nutshell. How do we enforce it? People are getting punched out over the mask thing so how are cops going to enforce a mandate?
Without getting fired or sued?

#3 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE

Stiff fines should be levied against those who are in public spaces without a mask on.

There is SCOTUS precedence for infringement of personal liberties for public health reasons. Whether that matters with the current court we won't know until it gets there.

#12 | Posted by jpw at 2020-10-26 03:24 PM | Reply

Non maskers *usually tend to be rebellious and nonconformist are selfish, self-absorbed ------.
If anyone dares to give a no masker the stink eye, confrontation is close by.

#7 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE

Fixed it.

#13 | Posted by jpw at 2020-10-26 03:26 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort