Pat @Pat@qoto.org

@freemo @icedquinn

And besides, you shouldn't be going to the movies no matter what color the seats are.

@freemo @icedquinn

But the decision as to whether to publish a study is more than just making sure the numbers add up. A credible journal will select studies that actually have merit, that are designed in a way to provide meaningful results.

@freemo @icedquinn

>Case studies are individual peoples...

I understand that and I know the difference. I just threw that out there, saying if someone had a study that was flawed due to a too-low sample, they might try to get the work published as case studies instead. And actually, if someone else is paying for the study, they won't fund it if it's designed with too small of a sample. That's why you see studies fail that can't recruit enough subjects.

@freemo @icedquinn

>For example a paper with a small sample size to the point that any data extrapolated would be within the margin of error...

Then they just publish it as a "case study".

I think the more credible journals reject studies that are poorly designed in the first place, irrespective of the results.

@freemo @icedquinn

Well, they certainly chose which papers they are going to publish, so if they publish a bunch of crap it reflects poorly on their journal.

@freemo @icedquinn

The peer review process must at least check to see if the conclusions stated in the paper are consistent with the data from the study.

Re the Vitamin-D studies, they basically see a correlation between the amount of Vitamin-D in a patient's blood and how sick they are. (over-simplification). Well, if someone has a serious pre-existing condition, they aren't going to be outside much and will be deficient in Vitamin-D, and those are the ones who will be the sickest from COVID-19. None of the studies even consider that. I found one study that set aside people who had diabetes-II, like they were trying to make the study more credible, but it turns out that D is a fat soluble vitamin, so those fat diabetics likely had more D remaining in their blood anyway, even if they were recently sick, which of course skews the results in favor of reverse correlation.

I don't know why researchers keep trying to show that correlation, but the bias is obvious.

@icedquinn @freemo

There's a lot of crap out there, even the peer-reviewed studies.

E.g., look for Vitamin-D studies related to COVID-19. Most show a reverse correlation of Vitamin-D levels to symptomatic COVID-19, but they all have flaws. But they still get published anyway. So you really need to be careful, read them carefully, check the rep of the publications, etc.

@freemo @icedquinn

1. The study is a preprint, it hasn't been peer-reviewed yet. But it's from reputable institutions.

2. The virus used in the study came from covid patients, not vaxed individuals.

@freemo @icedquinn

This is based on PCR cycles, so I wonder if delta DNA reacts differently to the polymerase or the reactants in the PCR soup.

@freemo @icedquinn

>It is the uncomfortable feeling of highly humid air along with the very noticeable CO2 buildup in the air.

An exhalation valve significantly reduces moisture and CO2 build up. I've had the same issue with moisture. I've thought of trying a non-toxic desiccant, like rice, inside the mask, not sure if that would help much. I've seen respirators that advertise the benefits of the exhalation valve in reducing moisture and CO2.

@freemo @icedquinn
>considering how extremely uncomfortable I find respirators to be.

You should try different models. I found some of the filtering facepiece respirators have an airflow that tickles my nose, but others don't. The elastomeric respirators are actually more comfortable than than those white "dome" types.

People wear bras and ties (which are much more uncomfortable than respirators) and they wear them for much more trivial reasons than to save thousands of lives. And they wear them for their whole lives.

"Eliminate" is a term of art in epidemiology which means that there is not continuous community spread of a disease. Measles is eliminated but there are still outbreaks occasionally. Covid was eliminated in Australia, Germany, Austria. Now Austria, after many months, is having another upsurge, so they'll wear the respirators again for a while. Same thing happened in Australia.

In Asia after SARS-1, most people just continued to wear masks even after the pandemic was over. It's not a big deal, really. And you don't need to have 100% of people wearing them. Just 60-65% is enough.

If you don't want to wear a respirator, that's fine, but why do you want to encourage others not to wear them. How does it hurt you if everyone else is wearing a respirator if they want to?

@freemo @icedquinn
>What respirators dont do is eliminate the virus completely. If even a single case of the virus remains (and it will no matter how effective respirators are) then as I already said the moment everyone stops wearing respirators the virus goes right back to where it was.

Respirator DO eliminate the virus. (eliminate, not exterminate or make extinct) Once the virus is eliminated in a region, then there are only sporadic cases from people who travel to the area. Other countries has done this. It called the elimination strategy and it works. It works much better than what the US has tried. Those countries can go a long time with very few cases, while they continue with test and trace. If an outbreak crops up, they just put the respirators back on. Those who don't want to wear a respirator don't have to, they just take a chance on getting the virus and don't get invited to a lot of parties.