A possible cohort study of states that did and states that didn't mask, comparing the base rates of infection, rates of transmission, should be possible. Hospital admissions were covid screened, supposedly, exclude non-respiratory admissions (ie the motorcyclist who was admitted to trauma after a crash who tested positive before admissio…
A possible cohort study of states that did and states that didn't mask, comparing the base rates of infection, rates of transmission, should be possible. Hospital admissions were covid screened, supposedly, exclude non-respiratory admissions (ie the motorcyclist who was admitted to trauma after a crash who tested positive before admission) who were positive. The key would be finding institutions who screened prior to admission (negatives) and prior to discharge (positive conversions), and compare those rates between the states with different policies.
I suspect that data won't be available or reliable, though, since it appears we cured the common cold as most of them became covid cases.
(See Naquin, A. et al, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surv.Summ. 2024 Oct 31; 73(6):1-18).
But it looks like the cold and flu are bouncing back, so maybe we can get a prospective study in comparing states like MD to other states with similar climates, and population densities that don't do this.
They would have to start by measuring the problem of nosocomial transmission of respiratory viruses in acute healthcare settings. Not clear to me that they even know what problem they are trying to solve. They should probably start with cluster randomized trials in nursing homes/chronic care facilities.
Tracy, a point made earlier was the fact that the annual seasonal flu spike, which killed many people each year including children, did not occur during the COVID isolation...most likely due to the isolation and masking (despite poor quality masking). So, those lives were saved.
Precisely correct. But you have to convince the state officials that they're not particularly astute. That's why I made a comment in 2020 at an interdisciplinary conference discussion the COVID response at the hospital that we'd cured the common cold. We didn't of course, but the cold/flu admit dx were all Covid, which may or may not have had any relationship to reimbursement rates. But, Maryland has given us the opportunity to prove them wrong again and fund a research resident for a year.
A public health intervention *always* takes place in a context anyway. A population wide intervention can't be divorced from the population's adherence.
The valid study *is* one in which in real life most people don't wear masks properly. At this time and place. In this context.
A possible cohort study of states that did and states that didn't mask, comparing the base rates of infection, rates of transmission, should be possible. Hospital admissions were covid screened, supposedly, exclude non-respiratory admissions (ie the motorcyclist who was admitted to trauma after a crash who tested positive before admission) who were positive. The key would be finding institutions who screened prior to admission (negatives) and prior to discharge (positive conversions), and compare those rates between the states with different policies.
I suspect that data won't be available or reliable, though, since it appears we cured the common cold as most of them became covid cases.
(See Naquin, A. et al, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surv.Summ. 2024 Oct 31; 73(6):1-18).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39471107/#&gid=article-figures&pid=figure-2-uid-1)
But it looks like the cold and flu are bouncing back, so maybe we can get a prospective study in comparing states like MD to other states with similar climates, and population densities that don't do this.
They would have to start by measuring the problem of nosocomial transmission of respiratory viruses in acute healthcare settings. Not clear to me that they even know what problem they are trying to solve. They should probably start with cluster randomized trials in nursing homes/chronic care facilities.
What is "masking"????????????
You can NOT do any truly valid study, because 90% of face diaper wearers don't wear their diaper right anyway, and they don't wear it at home.
Tons of studies, forever, have failed to demonstrate any value.
People crying for MORE studies sound like people wishing proof of gods.
Tracy, a point made earlier was the fact that the annual seasonal flu spike, which killed many people each year including children, did not occur during the COVID isolation...most likely due to the isolation and masking (despite poor quality masking). So, those lives were saved.
Precisely correct. But you have to convince the state officials that they're not particularly astute. That's why I made a comment in 2020 at an interdisciplinary conference discussion the COVID response at the hospital that we'd cured the common cold. We didn't of course, but the cold/flu admit dx were all Covid, which may or may not have had any relationship to reimbursement rates. But, Maryland has given us the opportunity to prove them wrong again and fund a research resident for a year.
A public health intervention *always* takes place in a context anyway. A population wide intervention can't be divorced from the population's adherence.
The valid study *is* one in which in real life most people don't wear masks properly. At this time and place. In this context.