Covid-19

[XU_Lou]

How about a comparison that is very similar in geography and population:
https://twitter.com/boriquagato/stat...850049031?s=20

Muskie - you're probably going to have to be banned from this board for blowing Paul's mind.... Facts simply should not be allowed in a debate on this subject this sensitive.

[paulxu]

2. Masks do work. I don't know a single physician colleague who claims otherwise. Certain types of mask work better than others (Astym 3 vs. N95 vs. KN-95 vs. P100 vs. others) at reducing the risk of transmission by varying degrees. Knowing how to wear a mask helps, obviously. I don't understand those who refuse to wear a mask. It certainly makes me feel uncomfortable when I see or if I am an area when appropriate social distancing and mask wearing is being ignored

This idea may not be well received by some.

(my comparison to Taiwan was not regarding their government, location, etc. It was for the value of wearing masks.)

[bobbiemcgee]

This idea may not be well received by some.

(my comparison to Taiwan was not regarding their government, location, etc. It was for the value of wearing masks.)

Like trump? He's out on the lawn with no mask spewing disease on the film crew.

Kid: "Mommy why do I have to wear a mask when the president never does"?

Mom: "Because he's an idiot."

[XU_Lou]

Like trump? He's out on the lawn with no mask spewing disease on the film crew.

Kid: "Mommy why do I have to wear a mask when the president never does"?

Mom: "Because he's an idiot."

Well okay, Herr Goebbels...

[paulxu]

From those wacky people at the New England Journal of Medicine:

When it comes to the response to the largest public health crisis of our time, our current political leaders have demonstrated that they are dangerously incompetent. We should not abet them and enable the deaths of thousands more Americans by allowing them to keep their jobs.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2029812

[GoMuskies]

Yeah, I remember when that journal used to be reputable.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2021693

[noteggs]

First Scientific American now NEJM? Some see this as good for Biden and bad for Trump, but it concerns me greatly being in the medical industry and extremely bad for science/medicine to be endorsing candidates. Period.

Guess it shouldn’t surprise me too much because we have been politicizing science over 40 years with climate change and part of the rationale SA endorsed Biden.

Side note- Kind of makes me wonder why NEJM rushed through the bogus study on HCQ. Hmm...seems rather political now and it pains me to think that way.

[paulxu]

NEJM has been in business for over 200 years.
I'll leave it KmCrw to weigh in on its merits. I believe from my brother (doctor) that it is a well respected publication.
This is only the 4th letter in its history that all editors have signed, and the first to comment on a political situation.
Perhaps they're concerned.

[noteggs]

NEJM is an excellent source of information and normally well respected by all in the healthcare industry not just doctors. I would like to hear what Dr Crawford has to say because I enjoy reading his takes, but you do realize others have the capacity to analyze and interpret the data? Lloyd on this board comes to mind. At work, I’ve highlighted a lot of my conversations around their publications and findings, but that’s not the issue at all here!

Concerned or not, this is not role of any scientific organization to endorse a political candidate. Honestly, I would say the same thing if they (scientific group) endorsed a Republican candidate because of implications of abortion.

Bottom line we don’t want medical decisions to made by politicians because they (medical and scientific groups) prefer one candidate over another. Unfortunately with this new precedent, that seems to be way we are going. Sad.

[paulxu]

Since it's apparently the first time in 200 years, I assume they are really concerned.