A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Knowledge????



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 28th 20, 06:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Leve
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Knowledge????

I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience.
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!
Ads
  #2  
Old December 28th 20, 09:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61
Default Knowledge????

On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 11:41:14 AM UTC-6, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience.
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!


You are right and good to say this. It is plain as day that there is absolutely no basis for people to distrust their government.
  #3  
Old December 29th 20, 08:19 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default Knowledge????

On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience..
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!


You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

Tom

  #4  
Old December 29th 20, 04:30 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Richard Livingston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Knowledge????

On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 1:19:31 AM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience.
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!

You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

Tom


As I read it, that is NOT what that article says. Some extracts:

"The most effective NPIs include curfews, lockdowns and closing and restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers for an extended period of time. This includes small gathering cancellations (closures of shops, restaurants, gatherings of 50 persons or fewer, mandatory home working and so on) and closure of educational institutions. "

In other words, closing restaurants ("restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers") is among the more effective measures to take, NOT "fundamentally ineffective" as you state.

"Taken together, the social distancing and movement-restriction measures discussed above can therefore be seen as the ‘nuclear option’ of NPIs: highly effective but causing substantial collateral damages to society, the economy, trade and human rights4,39."

"We also find a number of highly effective NPIs that can be considered less costly. For instance, we find that risk-communication strategies feature prominently amongst consensus NPIs. This includes government actions intended to educate and actively communicate with the public. The effective messages include encouraging people to stay at home, promoting social distancing and workplace safety measures, encouraging the self-initiated isolation of people with symptoms, travel warnings and information campaigns (mostly via social media)."

There are also conclusions on ineffective measures:
"Some measures are ineffective in (almost) all methods and datasets—for example, environmental measures to disinfect and clean surfaces and objects in public and semi-public places. This finding is at odds with current recommendations of the WHO (World Health Organization) for environmental cleaning in non-healthcare settings46, and calls for a closer examination of the effectiveness of such measures."

"We also find no evidence for the effectiveness of social distancing measures in regard to public transport. While infections on buses and trains have been reported47, our results may suggest a limited contribution of such cases to the overall virus spread, as previously reported48. A heightened public risk awareness associated with commuting (for example, people being more likely to wear face masks) might contribute to this finding49."

They also found that timing was important. The earlier NPI measures were implemented the more impact on the virus:

"The effectiveness of individual NPIs is heavily influenced by governance (Supplementary Information) and local context, as evidenced by the results of the entropic approach. This local context includes the stage of the epidemic, socio-economic, cultural and political characteristics and other NPIs previously implemented. The fact that gross domestic product is overall positively correlated with NPI effectiveness whereas the governance indicator ‘voice and accountability’ is negatively correlated might be related to the successful mitigation of the initial phase of the epidemic of certain south-east Asian and Middle East countries showing authoritarian tendencies."

In otherwords, the administrations denial and delay in implementing effective measures has made the impact worse for the US.

And rather than focusing on a single measure, the authors conclude that a more comprehensive response is what is really effective:

"The emerging picture reveals that no one-size-fits-all solution exists, and no single NPI can decrease Rt below one. Instead, in the absence of a vaccine or efficient antiviral medication, a resurgence of COVID-19 cases can be stopped only by a suitable combination of NPIs, each tailored to the specific country and its epidemic age. These measures must be enacted in the optimal combination and sequence to be maximally effective against the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and thereby enable more rapid reopening."

You really ought to read and understand the article before citing it.

Rich L.

  #5  
Old December 29th 20, 06:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,939
Default Knowledge????

2G wrote on 12/28/2020 11:19 PM:
On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience..
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!


You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

There was no "*******ization of science" in Dr. Fauci's public remarks early on, because he was
trying to educate laymen, not reporting to other scientists. He had to do so when there was no
vaccine or reliable measurements of the virus transmissibility, so the estimates of the
percentage of vaccinations needed for herd immunity spanned a wide range. He chose a number
towards the lower end of the guesses, because he thought it would serve the public interest
better, and told us we really didn't know for sure.

But I agree there were some that did distort the science in their announcements, but the big
majority of the public soon learned to choose Dr. Fauci, and those like him, over the
"downplayers".


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

  #6  
Old December 29th 20, 06:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61
Default Knowledge????

On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 11:15:30 AM UTC-6, Eric Greenwell wrote:
2G wrote on 12/28/2020 11:19 PM:
On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience..
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!


You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

There was no "*******ization of science" in Dr. Fauci's public remarks early on, because he was
trying to educate laymen, not reporting to other scientists. He had to do so when there was no
vaccine or reliable measurements of the virus transmissibility, so the estimates of the
percentage of vaccinations needed for herd immunity spanned a wide range. He chose a number
towards the lower end of the guesses, because he thought it would serve the public interest
better, and told us we really didn't know for sure.

But I agree there were some that did distort the science in their announcements, but the big
majority of the public soon learned to choose Dr. Fauci, and those like him, over the
"downplayers".


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1



We must absolutely be talking about two completely different, but totally valid Anthony Faucis.

The one I saw on live television in February of this year stated "americans have nothing to worry about" when asked about the threat of Covid-19. He did that interview on Fox News. A week later he did another interview on USA Today where he added exactly one sentence as a qualifier and that was "those who travel" might face some risks.

February, 2020.
If that was not downplaying the risk, what is it exactly that you call it?

One month prior, January of 2020, Trump issued travel restrictions that applied to China.

Facts -

Seattle diagnosed the first three cases of Covid-19 in the United States. The doctors saw a common set of symptoms in two patients and developed a protocol. Why? because the CDC had none. The CDC didn't have one for another month and a half AFTER these patients were being treated. The doctors saw a common thread with two previous patients and retested blood samples only to find they had two more cases on their hands.

While I think it's great and it's grand that you have enormous trust in Fauci, I'm puzzled how it is you do not see him as a....what was that term? Oh yeah, a "Downplayer".






  #7  
Old December 29th 20, 11:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default Knowledge????

On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 7:30:07 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 1:19:31 AM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience.
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!

You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

Tom

As I read it, that is NOT what that article says. Some extracts:

"The most effective NPIs include curfews, lockdowns and closing and restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers for an extended period of time. This includes small gathering cancellations (closures of shops, restaurants, gatherings of 50 persons or fewer, mandatory home working and so on) and closure of educational institutions. "

In other words, closing restaurants ("restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers") is among the more effective measures to take, NOT "fundamentally ineffective" as you state.

"Taken together, the social distancing and movement-restriction measures discussed above can therefore be seen as the ‘nuclear option’ of NPIs: highly effective but causing substantial collateral damages to society, the economy, trade and human rights4,39."

"We also find a number of highly effective NPIs that can be considered less costly. For instance, we find that risk-communication strategies feature prominently amongst consensus NPIs. This includes government actions intended to educate and actively communicate with the public. The effective messages include encouraging people to stay at home, promoting social distancing and workplace safety measures, encouraging the self-initiated isolation of people with symptoms, travel warnings and information campaigns (mostly via social media)."

There are also conclusions on ineffective measures:
"Some measures are ineffective in (almost) all methods and datasets—for example, environmental measures to disinfect and clean surfaces and objects in public and semi-public places. This finding is at odds with current recommendations of the WHO (World Health Organization) for environmental cleaning in non-healthcare settings46, and calls for a closer examination of the effectiveness of such measures."

"We also find no evidence for the effectiveness of social distancing measures in regard to public transport. While infections on buses and trains have been reported47, our results may suggest a limited contribution of such cases to the overall virus spread, as previously reported48. A heightened public risk awareness associated with commuting (for example, people being more likely to wear face masks) might contribute to this finding49."

They also found that timing was important. The earlier NPI measures were implemented the more impact on the virus:

"The effectiveness of individual NPIs is heavily influenced by governance (Supplementary Information) and local context, as evidenced by the results of the entropic approach. This local context includes the stage of the epidemic, socio-economic, cultural and political characteristics and other NPIs previously implemented. The fact that gross domestic product is overall positively correlated with NPI effectiveness whereas the governance indicator ‘voice and accountability’ is negatively correlated might be related to the successful mitigation of the initial phase of the epidemic of certain south-east Asian and Middle East countries showing authoritarian tendencies."

In otherwords, the administrations denial and delay in implementing effective measures has made the impact worse for the US.

And rather than focusing on a single measure, the authors conclude that a more comprehensive response is what is really effective:

"The emerging picture reveals that no one-size-fits-all solution exists, and no single NPI can decrease Rt below one. Instead, in the absence of a vaccine or efficient antiviral medication, a resurgence of COVID-19 cases can be stopped only by a suitable combination of NPIs, each tailored to the specific country and its epidemic age. These measures must be enacted in the optimal combination and sequence to be maximally effective against the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and thereby enable more rapid reopening."

You really ought to read and understand the article before citing it.

Rich L.


You looked in the wrong place - it is "Special measures for certain establishments," not "small gathering cancellations" which includes ALL small groups, not just restaurants. Contact tracing found that restaurants accounted for 1.4% of infections vs 70% in the home.

This study is important because it quantifies how effective the measures are that uninformed government bureaucrats and elected officials are cramming down our throats without representation. That said, it is likely that people will reach different conclusions and you are welcome to state yours minus the invectives.

Tom

  #8  
Old December 29th 20, 11:23 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default Knowledge????

On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 9:15:30 AM UTC-8, Eric Greenwell wrote:
2G wrote on 12/28/2020 11:19 PM:
On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience..
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!


You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

There was no "*******ization of science" in Dr. Fauci's public remarks early on, because he was
trying to educate laymen, not reporting to other scientists. He had to do so when there was no
vaccine or reliable measurements of the virus transmissibility, so the estimates of the
percentage of vaccinations needed for herd immunity spanned a wide range. He chose a number
towards the lower end of the guesses, because he thought it would serve the public interest
better, and told us we really didn't know for sure.

But I agree there were some that did distort the science in their announcements, but the big
majority of the public soon learned to choose Dr. Fauci, and those like him, over the
"downplayers".


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1


Eric,

Tony Fauci is on video saying he "nudged" the percentage of inoculation to reach herd immunity w/o ANY science reference to justify it. This implies his original threshold was merely a guess. This IS a *******ization of science since it lends a degree of precision to his comments w/o ANY scientific basis.

Tom
  #9  
Old December 29th 20, 11:32 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
John Sinclair[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 88
Default Knowledge????

On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 2:16:10 PM UTC-8, 2G wrote:
On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 7:30:07 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 1:19:31 AM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience.
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!
You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

Tom

As I read it, that is NOT what that article says. Some extracts:

"The most effective NPIs include curfews, lockdowns and closing and restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers for an extended period of time. This includes small gathering cancellations (closures of shops, restaurants, gatherings of 50 persons or fewer, mandatory home working and so on) and closure of educational institutions. "

In other words, closing restaurants ("restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers") is among the more effective measures to take, NOT "fundamentally ineffective" as you state.

"Taken together, the social distancing and movement-restriction measures discussed above can therefore be seen as the ‘nuclear option’ of NPIs: highly effective but causing substantial collateral damages to society, the economy, trade and human rights4,39."

"We also find a number of highly effective NPIs that can be considered less costly. For instance, we find that risk-communication strategies feature prominently amongst consensus NPIs. This includes government actions intended to educate and actively communicate with the public. The effective messages include encouraging people to stay at home, promoting social distancing and workplace safety measures, encouraging the self-initiated isolation of people with symptoms, travel warnings and information campaigns (mostly via social media)."

There are also conclusions on ineffective measures:
"Some measures are ineffective in (almost) all methods and datasets—for example, environmental measures to disinfect and clean surfaces and objects in public and semi-public places. This finding is at odds with current recommendations of the WHO (World Health Organization) for environmental cleaning in non-healthcare settings46, and calls for a closer examination of the effectiveness of such measures."

"We also find no evidence for the effectiveness of social distancing measures in regard to public transport. While infections on buses and trains have been reported47, our results may suggest a limited contribution of such cases to the overall virus spread, as previously reported48. A heightened public risk awareness associated with commuting (for example, people being more likely to wear face masks) might contribute to this finding49."

They also found that timing was important. The earlier NPI measures were implemented the more impact on the virus:

"The effectiveness of individual NPIs is heavily influenced by governance (Supplementary Information) and local context, as evidenced by the results of the entropic approach. This local context includes the stage of the epidemic, socio-economic, cultural and political characteristics and other NPIs previously implemented. The fact that gross domestic product is overall positively correlated with NPI effectiveness whereas the governance indicator ‘voice and accountability’ is negatively correlated might be related to the successful mitigation of the initial phase of the epidemic of certain south-east Asian and Middle East countries showing authoritarian tendencies."

In otherwords, the administrations denial and delay in implementing effective measures has made the impact worse for the US.

And rather than focusing on a single measure, the authors conclude that a more comprehensive response is what is really effective:

"The emerging picture reveals that no one-size-fits-all solution exists, and no single NPI can decrease Rt below one. Instead, in the absence of a vaccine or efficient antiviral medication, a resurgence of COVID-19 cases can be stopped only by a suitable combination of NPIs, each tailored to the specific country and its epidemic age. These measures must be enacted in the optimal combination and sequence to be maximally effective against the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and thereby enable more rapid reopening."

You really ought to read and understand the article before citing it.

Rich L.

You looked in the wrong place - it is "Special measures for certain establishments," not "small gathering cancellations" which includes ALL small groups, not just restaurants. Contact tracing found that restaurants accounted for 1.4% of infections vs 70% in the home.

This study is important because it quantifies how effective the measures are that uninformed government bureaucrats and elected officials are cramming down our throats without representation. That said, it is likely that people will reach different conclusions and you are welcome to state yours minus the invectives.

Tom


When I was a kid (80 years ago) the county health department would quarantine your house if somebody in there got the measles............yellow notice on the door and nobody went in or out!
Now days you can’t get half the nation to even put on a mask! Come on people, get with the program and help put this virus behind us!
JJ
  #10  
Old December 30th 20, 01:03 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Hank Nixon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default Knowledge????

On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 5:32:11 PM UTC-5, John Sinclair wrote:
On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 2:16:10 PM UTC-8, 2G wrote:
On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 7:30:07 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 1:19:31 AM UTC-6, 2G wrote:
On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:41:14 AM UTC-8, Bob Leve wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of seeming experts who are littering this site with passionately uninformed opinions yet don't seem to have the credentials or expertise of an infectious disease MD or actual governmental experience.
Lets get back to what this site is about: Sharing information about the wonderful sport of soaring!
You're right (that they are not MDs). However, we have leaders who also aren't MDs but believe and act like they are. So, let's hear from some real experts:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
This study ranks the effectiveness of virtually all COVID interventions by various governments. It is shocking that certain popular measures (closing restaurants and crisis management plans) might actually be doing more harm than good. And the wearing of masks is fundamentally ineffective as determined by 3 of 4 analysis methods. And our national expert, Tony Fauci, admits that he is "nudging" his herd immunity level based on public polls! Sorry, but this is a *******ization of science. And he is far from being the only one.

Tom
As I read it, that is NOT what that article says. Some extracts:

"The most effective NPIs include curfews, lockdowns and closing and restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers for an extended period of time. This includes small gathering cancellations (closures of shops, restaurants, gatherings of 50 persons or fewer, mandatory home working and so on) and closure of educational institutions. "

In other words, closing restaurants ("restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers") is among the more effective measures to take, NOT "fundamentally ineffective" as you state.

"Taken together, the social distancing and movement-restriction measures discussed above can therefore be seen as the ‘nuclear option’ of NPIs: highly effective but causing substantial collateral damages to society, the economy, trade and human rights4,39."

"We also find a number of highly effective NPIs that can be considered less costly. For instance, we find that risk-communication strategies feature prominently amongst consensus NPIs. This includes government actions intended to educate and actively communicate with the public. The effective messages include encouraging people to stay at home, promoting social distancing and workplace safety measures, encouraging the self-initiated isolation of people with symptoms, travel warnings and information campaigns (mostly via social media)."

There are also conclusions on ineffective measures:
"Some measures are ineffective in (almost) all methods and datasets—for example, environmental measures to disinfect and clean surfaces and objects in public and semi-public places. This finding is at odds with current recommendations of the WHO (World Health Organization) for environmental cleaning in non-healthcare settings46, and calls for a closer examination of the effectiveness of such measures."

"We also find no evidence for the effectiveness of social distancing measures in regard to public transport. While infections on buses and trains have been reported47, our results may suggest a limited contribution of such cases to the overall virus spread, as previously reported48. A heightened public risk awareness associated with commuting (for example, people being more likely to wear face masks) might contribute to this finding49."

They also found that timing was important. The earlier NPI measures were implemented the more impact on the virus:

"The effectiveness of individual NPIs is heavily influenced by governance (Supplementary Information) and local context, as evidenced by the results of the entropic approach. This local context includes the stage of the epidemic, socio-economic, cultural and political characteristics and other NPIs previously implemented. The fact that gross domestic product is overall positively correlated with NPI effectiveness whereas the governance indicator ‘voice and accountability’ is negatively correlated might be related to the successful mitigation of the initial phase of the epidemic of certain south-east Asian and Middle East countries showing authoritarian tendencies."

In otherwords, the administrations denial and delay in implementing effective measures has made the impact worse for the US.

And rather than focusing on a single measure, the authors conclude that a more comprehensive response is what is really effective:

"The emerging picture reveals that no one-size-fits-all solution exists, and no single NPI can decrease Rt below one. Instead, in the absence of a vaccine or efficient antiviral medication, a resurgence of COVID-19 cases can be stopped only by a suitable combination of NPIs, each tailored to the specific country and its epidemic age. These measures must be enacted in the optimal combination and sequence to be maximally effective against the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and thereby enable more rapid reopening."

You really ought to read and understand the article before citing it.

Rich L.

You looked in the wrong place - it is "Special measures for certain establishments," not "small gathering cancellations" which includes ALL small groups, not just restaurants. Contact tracing found that restaurants accounted for 1.4% of infections vs 70% in the home.

This study is important because it quantifies how effective the measures are that uninformed government bureaucrats and elected officials are cramming down our throats without representation. That said, it is likely that people will reach different conclusions and you are welcome to state yours minus the invectives.

Tom

When I was a kid (80 years ago) the county health department would quarantine your house if somebody in there got the measles............yellow notice on the door and nobody went in or out!
Now days you can’t get half the nation to even put on a mask! Come on people, get with the program and help put this virus behind us!
JJ


+1
UH
 




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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Add-on have to take the Knowledge test? jp Soaring 3 July 10th 20 06:22 AM
I seek your knowledge. William Hung[_2_] Piloting 2 July 8th 08 01:58 PM
I seek your knowledge. William Hung[_2_] Home Built 2 July 8th 08 01:58 PM
Commercial Pilot FAA Knowledge Exam - Includes Gleim TestPrep & Commercial Pilot FAA Knowledge Exam book Cecil Chapman Products 1 November 15th 04 05:22 PM
FAA Knowledge test Dave Piloting 15 October 31st 03 07:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.