Jump to content

Menu

Are people still masking?


Recommended Posts

People here (Northeast Texas) are hardly masking at all. Most did when it was required, but when the Governor took away the mandate, the masks came off, for the most part. Signs are still up at the stores to mask if you aren't vaccinated, and I see some masks, but my church still doesn't mask. We are a low vaccinated and low numbers, but our day of reckoning will eventually come. I know one person who just came out of the hospital yesterday with a pretty bad case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this is the only current mask thread, I’ll drop this here. It’s a good, long discussion of some current research and of why the calculus on masks has been from the wrong starting point, and shows how much of a difference in population level transmission even a small effect can have:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1414294003479089154.html

Quoting from the part about decreasing transmission on a population scale:

“More fundamentally, we’re not just interested in whether my mask protects either me or you from catching Covid during a short intervention period (say, one month). We’re interested in how masking impacts on the *exponential spread* of an accelerating pandemic. 
24/

Take the number 1 and double it, and keep going. 1 becomes 2, then 4, etc. After 10 doubles, you get 512. After 10 more doubles, you get 262144. Now instead of doubling, multiply by 1.9 instead of 2 (a tiny reduction in growth rate). After 20 cycles, the total is only 104127. 
25/
=> if masks reduce transmission by a TINY bit (too tiny to be statistically significant in a short RCT), population benefits are still HUGE. UK Covid-19 rates are doubling every 9 days. If they increased by 1.9 every 9 days, after 180 days cases would be down by 60%. 
26/
These two issues—the near-impossibility of using RCTs to test hypotheses about source control and over-reliance on “statistically significant effects” within a short-term intervention period—is why a RCT of masks is *highly likely to mislead us*”
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2021 at 6:09 PM, Corraleno said:

There IS evidence for increased virulence — a Scottish study found that Delta nearly doubled the risk of hospitalization compared to Alpha. I believe there is data from England corroborating that as well.

"The Cox regression analysis for time to hospital admission found that S gene-positive cases [Delta] were associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 hospital admission: hazard ratio (HR) 1.85 (95% CI 1.39–2.47) when compared to S gene-negative cases [Alpha], after adjusting for age, sex, deprivation, temporal trend, and comorbidities." 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01358-1/fulltext

If you look at the numbers of this study:

9996 S gene-negative cases and 223 hospitalized within 14 days of a positive test (or 2.2%)

7723 S gene-positive cases with 134 hospitalized within 14 days of a postiive test (or 1.7%)

So a smaller percentage of those who had Delta were hospitalized compared to those with Alpha.  

The cox regression analysis measures time to hospitalization, so it appears that those with Delta who were hospitalized were hospitalized sooner after a positive test than those with Alpha.  But, this data does not seep to support the notion that those with Delta are more likely to be hosptialized.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Happy2BaMom said:

 

Do you have links for/from any of these professionals? (Asking sincerely, as it would be nice to know/compare.)

Here’s one with the studies others have posted mentioned, but with the conclusion being that good evidence is difficult and not conclusive. Same article as in the Atlantic, but no paywall. https://www.govexec.com/management/2021/06/why-no-one-sure-if-delta-deadlier/175037/

I listen to and have followed feed of a bunch of scientists. I will see what else I can find later.
 

——-
I don’t understand why it’s so controversial to say it’s not conclusively more virulent. Not conclusive means maybe yes, maybe no. It’s not good science to make claims that aren’t yet well-supported. I’m not invested in the virulence or lack of virulence, but just don’t think that inaccuracy is helping anyone. I think some people, not just here, seem very invested in Covid being more and more terrible, and all of us needing to behave as though it is early-mid 2020. 
 

There have been statements in the forum that the virus is becoming more transmissible AND immune-evading all the time, and that this will continue. When actually, Beta and Gamma seem to evade immunity better than Delta, but Delta took over both of those. I just don’t know what point it serves to continue to see this virus through the lens of doom and still mostly be negative about it. We have vaccines, which practically seems like a miracle. 
 

Immunity is going to last a long time for most of us. Another paper showing it will be for years after infection. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3881728

And we know that our immune systems adapt, with memory B cells able to produce antibodies that target variants, and with the cell-mediated immune systems kicking in to prevent severe disease. That’s. Freaking. Amazing. 

Edited by Penelope
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

If you look at the numbers of this study:

9996 S gene-negative cases and 223 hospitalized within 14 days of a positive test (or 2.2%)

7723 S gene-positive cases with 134 hospitalized within 14 days of a postiive test (or 1.7%)

So a smaller percentage of those who had Delta were hospitalized compared to those with Alpha.  

The cox regression analysis measures time to hospitalization, so it appears that those with Delta who were hospitalized were hospitalized sooner after a positive test than those with Alpha.  But, this data does not seep to support the notion that those with Delta are more likely to be hosptialized.  

 

I guess I mistakenly assumed they were controlling for the fact that at the beginning of the study period, when Delta was not present and Alpha accounted for more than 90% of cases, only 7.6% of the population was fully vaxxed, but by the time Delta became dominant at the end of the study period 39.4% were fully vaxxed. That would mean that just using percentages of N would not be accurate, since presumably a higher % of patients who were infected with Alpha would have been unvaccinated and therefore more likely to be hospitalized for reasons not directly attributable to the variant. But you're saying that they were not controlling for that at all and were only calculating that patients infected with Delta were hospitalized much sooner than with Alpha — e.g. if the average hospitalized Alpha patient was admitted 10 days after a positive test, then the average Delta patient was admitted 5-6 days after a positive test? If that is true, I appreciate the correction. The fact that people hospitalized with Delta need hospitalization much sooner is itself useful information, but I don't think we can conclude from raw numbers that Alpha has a higher hospitalization rate than Delta if the population exposed to Alpha was on average older and much less likely to be vaxxed.

Screen Shot 2021-07-12 at 12.31.54 PM.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KSera said:

Since this is the only current mask thread, I’ll drop this here. It’s a good, long discussion of some current research and of why the calculus on masks has been from the wrong starting point, and shows how much of a difference in population level transmission even a small effect can have:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1414294003479089154.html

Quoting from the part about decreasing transmission on a population scale:

“More fundamentally, we’re not just interested in whether my mask protects either me or you from catching Covid during a short intervention period (say, one month). We’re interested in how masking impacts on the *exponential spread* of an accelerating pandemic. 
24/

Take the number 1 and double it, and keep going. 1 becomes 2, then 4, etc. After 10 doubles, you get 512. After 10 more doubles, you get 262144. Now instead of doubling, multiply by 1.9 instead of 2 (a tiny reduction in growth rate). After 20 cycles, the total is only 104127. 
25/
=> if masks reduce transmission by a TINY bit (too tiny to be statistically significant in a short RCT), population benefits are still HUGE. UK Covid-19 rates are doubling every 9 days. If they increased by 1.9 every 9 days, after 180 days cases would be down by 60%. 
26/
These two issues—the near-impossibility of using RCTs to test hypotheses about source control and over-reliance on “statistically significant effects” within a short-term intervention period—is why a RCT of masks is *highly likely to mislead us*”

Thanks, that's a great thread.  There are some fabulous links embedded in there too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, wathe said:

Re Delta virulence:  This pre-print came across my desk yesterday, based on Canadian data up to July 1, suggesting that Delta is more virulent.  The authors are trustworthy and Very Smart People (I know these people 🙂)

So according to that study, Delta more than doubles the risk of hospitalization and death compared to the original strain, and those numbers most likely underestimate the actual risks:

"Inasmuch as SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in use in Canada appear to diminish the severity of infection even when vaccine fails to prevent infection, the differences in virulence we report here are most likely to represent a lower bound. This diminution of apparent effect is likely exacerbated by our likely having misclassified early delta variant infections as non-VOC due to the absence of routine screening for characteristic delta mutations; in other words, our estimates of excess risk for delta are likely biased towards the null."

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Corraleno said:

I guess I mistakenly assumed they were controlling for the fact that at the beginning of the study period, when Delta was not present and Alpha accounted for more than 90% of cases, only 7.6% of the population was fully vaxxed, but by the time Delta became dominant at the end of the study period 39.4% were fully vaxxed. That would mean that just using percentages of N would not be accurate, since presumably a higher % of patients who were infected with Alpha would have been unvaccinated and therefore more likely to be hospitalized for reasons not directly attributable to the variant. But you're saying that they were not controlling for that at all and were only calculating that patients infected with Delta were hospitalized much sooner than with Alpha — e.g. if the average hospitalized Alpha patient was admitted 10 days after a positive test, then the average Delta patient was admitted 5-6 days after a positive test? If that is true, I appreciate the correction. The fact that people hospitalized with Delta need hospitalization much sooner is itself useful information, but I don't think we can conclude from raw numbers that Alpha has a higher hospitalization rate than Delta if the population exposed to Alpha was on average older and much less likely to be vaxxed.

Screen Shot 2021-07-12 at 12.31.54 PM.png

It is difficult to tell from the information provided exactly what was done. These short "correspondence" pieces jump over much of the statistical background work and the authors use phrases such as "building on methods that have previously been described in detail".  There is information regarding how vaccination status impacts the risk of hospitalization for S Gene Positive patients, but I am not seeing any information that shows where the vaccination status was different, on average, for those with S Negative and S positive.  I am not sure why they are using a Cox regression analysis in this instance.  Cox is generally used when an event samples are truncated before an event occurs.  But if they are sampling patients who were admitted withing 14 days of testing positive, (so someone who is hospitalized 16 days after testing positive is simply omitted--not because the data isn't available yet but because of test design) and 14 days have passed for all in the sample.  And, I have not kept up with the variant literature to know how "weak S postivie" comes in to play at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

England is going mask-optional next week, but individual service providers can insist. 

BBC News - Covid: Masks to remain compulsory on London transport
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-57826331

Scotland is not removing mask mandates. I suspect I'll stay happily north of the border for a bit.

Scotland is at 89/66 percent of adults with first/second doses. England is at 87/66.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn’t a study but may be interesting regarding delta. This is a tweet from the CEO of a hospital in Springfield,Mo, where delta is circulating.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
  • Sad 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was dismayed to see that only about half of the customers in Trader Joe's this morning were masked, vs 100% just a couple of weeks ago. And now they have a big sign by the front door saying "Vaccinated people don't need to wear masks!!!" (exclamation points included), as if they're encouraging people to stop masking. The county as a pretty high vax rate (72% adults, 60% total population fully vaxxed), so I presume most if not all of the unmasked are vaxxed, but I wish they wouldn't actively discourage masking! Most of the employees were still masked as far as I could tell. 

Edited by Corraleno
typos
  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We’ve been the only ones masking inside stores here for the past few weeks. At first, it seemed more were masking after the mandate ended but now no one is (not the employees, elderly, or young kids).  Our vax rate is still below 50%. 

Schools here resume over the next two to three weeks (it’s early here) so it will be interesting to see what happens. As far as I can tell there is no mask requirement at all anymore in the schools. 

My dc return to college next month, but vaccines are required and if you are exempt you have to continue masking and testing. 

Edited by Joker2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I have stepped into a dystopian, made-for-tv miniseries. So now, I have no PCP. Called yesterday to get a refill on my asthma meds, explained that I wanted the first available morning appointment because the practice has only one, tiny waiting room, and I didn’t want to sit with other potentially sick people. So far, so good. Then the following conversation took place:

Me: Just to confirm, patients must wear a mask, right?

Receptionist: Oh, no ma'am. Now that there are vaccines, we no longer require masking.

Me: But the providers are still masking, correct?
 

Receptionist: No, ma'am! (laughs a little) Why would they mask if they have all been vaccinated?

Me: I guess I need to cancel that appointment I just made and find a doctor who actually cares about his patients. Have a good one. <click> 
 

Now, I know the doc who runs this practice, and have for thirty-some years. He first treated me for tendonitis in my wrists when I was in junior high school. My mother worked as a nurse for his practice for quite a while when I was much younger. He played guitar at my wedding, and his kids were the attendants at my wedding. (The first round of kids, anyway. He divorced their mom and married a much younger model- she's my age- about the time my daughter was born.) This isn't just me losing a physician, it’s me completely losing faith in someone who I believed was a good doctor and a good friend. 
 

At this point, if Daleks were to appear in my backyard, I’d almost welcome them, because at least then I’d know that it was only a matter of time before the Tardis shows up, the Doctor sends the bad guys packing, and we could roll credits on this whole distressing episode. 

Edited by I talk to the trees
Punctuation
  • Sad 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have family visiting so I’ve been out and about more in the past few days than the last year and a half. It’s a mixed bag here on masking, some people do even outdoors and some don't, and it seems ok. Case numbers remain very low statewide.

We still mask indoors whether or not other people are, and we aren’t eating inside in restaurants. Everywhere has outdoor seating, though, and I’ve felt comfortable with that so far. I hope it stays forever—Portland looks extra pretty and festive with all the new decks and outdoor seating opportunities. It’s been fun to take advantage of it—mostly because it’s not overcrowded since there are fewer tourists here again this year.

Even though we no longer have a mask mandate, a lot of shops ask or advise that customers wear one inside. The Starbucks we went to didn’t have washrooms available and it was closed to all indoor seating—just pop in to order then leave. I was super happy for their staff, knowing their exposure levels were greatly minimized by the policy. 
 

Overall although I’d prefer everyone continue to mask all the time in public, I feel like there’s a decent balance here for the summer months. I highly suspect more people will mask come fall when delta takes hold. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I talk to the trees said:

I feel like I have stepped into a dystopian, made-for-tv miniseries. So now, I have no PCP. Called yesterday to get a refill on my asthma meds, explained that I wanted the first available morning appointment because the practice has only one, tiny waiting room, and I didn’t want to sit with other potentially sick people. So far, so good. Then the following conversation took place:

Me: Just to confirm, patients must wear a mask, right?

Receptionist: Oh, no ma'am. Now that there are vaccines, we no longer require masking.

Me: But the providers are still masking, correct?
 

Receptionist: No, ma'am! (laughs a little) Why would they mask if they have all been vaccinated?

Me: I guess I need to cancel that appointment I just made and find a doctor who actually cares about his patients. Have a good one. <click> 
 

Now, I know the doc who runs this practice, and have for thirty-some years. He first treated me for tendonitis in my wrists when I was in junior high school. My mother worked as a nurse for his practice for quite a while when I was much younger. He played guitar at my wedding, and his kids were the attendants at my wedding. (The first round of kids, anyway. He divorced their mom and married a much younger model- she's my age- about the time my daughter was born.) This isn't just me losing a physician, it’s me completely losing faith in someone who I believed was a good doctor and a good friend. 
 

At this point, if Daleks were to appear in my backyard, I’d almost welcome them, because at least then I’d know that it was only a matter of time before the Tardis shows up, the Doctor sends the bad guys packing, and we could roll credits on this whole distressing episode. 

Wow.  I thought healthcare settings were still requiring masks per CDC a recommendations.  I know of one or two that allow patients to remove their mask once they are alone in a room, if they have verified they are fully vaccinated.

I’m so sorry.  
 

Somehow I’m under the vague impression that you and I are, or were once, in the same state.  So now I’m bracing for a similar experience to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spryte said:

Wow.  I thought healthcare settings were still requiring masks per CDC a recommendations.  I know of one or two that allow patients to remove their mask once they are alone in a room, if they have verified they are fully vaccinated.

I’m so sorry.  
 

Somehow I’m under the vague impression that you and I are, or were once, in the same state.  So now I’m bracing for a similar experience to come.

I used to be in NY, moved to VA abut 8 yrs ago. About as soon as we moved here, I realized  that a dozen years in the north often turns one into a northerner! 😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, I talk to the trees said:

I used to be in NY, moved to VA abut 8 yrs ago. About as soon as we moved here, I realized  that a dozen years in the north often turns one into a northerner! 😉

Waving hello!  Also in VA now (moved from NM).  😊 Totally hear you on being away for a decade+ changing you! Same experience.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2021 at 7:38 PM, Penelope said:

I understand the concern about elderly parents. I hope that whether people in general continue to mask or not, they will continue to much more careful about symptoms, testing, and not exposing other people when they are ill. 
 

With the second part, I certainly don’t know, but virus becoming endemic seems to be a common opinion. It’s not that every person will get infected, but many of us could , at least over the next few years. It is not just getting enough people with immunity in the US that is necessary, but the rest of the world, and that won’t happen quickly. The virus has gotten more contagious, and the vaccines aren’t fully sterilizing. If we know that they aren’t fully sterilizing after just a few months, what happens over time? Given how long it took to get this much uptake for initial vaccination, I think getting even that many people again to get boosters on time to prevent waning immunity (whenever that is) might be a challenge. 

 

I thought that even for measles, which does have long-lasting immunity from infection or vaccination- it took until the 21st century (so 25 years) for outbreaks to stop, and that was with only having to vaccinate children, as virtually all older adolescents and adults were immune from childhood infection when the vaccine became available. As with Covid, apparently vaccinated people still catch measles when exposed and can be asymptomatic. It’s just that in the US, exposure is incredibly rare anymore. But there was still plenty of measles around for decades after we had a measles vaccine.

I grew up in the 60s and 70s and never had any measles outbreak near me or anyone I know get measles once we got the vaccine- I think my brother had it when I was born or right before I was born or something like that but I know he (6 years older than me) did have it.  

I know there were outbreaks in some places but it was never widespread again in our country once vaccinations started in late 60s?,

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2021 at 9:19 AM, Kanin said:

Side question, are you by any chance from the Syracuse, NY area? I've only ever heard "anymore" used that way by people from upstate NY. 

I use it and never lived in upstate NY and only visited for one vacation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spryte said:

Wow.  I thought healthcare settings were still requiring masks per CDC a recommendations.  I know of one or two that allow patients to remove their mask once they are alone in a room, if they have verified they are fully vaccinated.

I’m so sorry.  
 

Somehow I’m under the vague impression that you and I are, or were once, in the same state.  So now I’m bracing for a similar experience to come.

Health care settings still require masks in my state.  Even chiropractors (since some have mentioned chiropractors as people who aren't as likely to follow masking, vaccination etc. guidelines.)  Even our optometrist.  And vets (which I don't know if it's included in the legislation or if they just do it out of caution but I go to more than one vet and they all mask). 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spryte said:

Wow.  I thought healthcare settings were still requiring masks per CDC a recommendations.  I know of one or two that allow patients to remove their mask once they are alone in a room, if they have verified they are fully vaccinated.

I’m so sorry.  
 

Somehow I’m under the vague impression that you and I are, or were once, in the same state.  So now I’m bracing for a similar experience to come.

I have to take my dd to the Children's Hospital on a regular basis. They require masks for everyone in the building at all times and are still doing a basic screening of everyone who comes in the building. We also had to mask when she went to an appointment with her regular pediatrician. I can't believe that medical facilities aren't still requiring masks!

Other than medical facilities, I've seen very few masks lately. I saw a woman at church wearing one, a few children at dance are still wearing them, and there's people here and there in stores, but otherwise people seemed to have ditched the masks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My son broke his foot, so this week, I have been to 2 different doctors and one hospital (for x-rays).

They all asked for us to wait in the car and call the front desk to let them know we had arrived. Then someone brought paper work for us to fill out in the car. They didn’t let us in the building until someone was able to lead us directly to a room. Everyone was masked. 
 

At the grocery store, I think about 50% are masked. 
 

I think there is a strong possibility we will be locked down again in the fall, so I’m letting my kids much more than usual while we still can, but all socializing is outside and the teens are all vaccinated. Next week, we have both a beach trip and an open water swim on the schedule. 
 

My 11 year old isn’t eligible to be vaccinated yet, so we are still being very careful. We don’t plan to return to in person church until January when everyone in the family will be vaccinated. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mathnerd@crazyforlatin@sassenach“With cases of COVID-19 rising locally and increased circulation of the highly transmissible Delta variant, the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and the City of Berkeley recommend that everyone, regardless of vaccination status, wear masks indoors in public places to ensure easy verification that all unvaccinated people are masked in those settings and as an extra precautionary measure for all.

Read the full press release:

https://covid19.sccgov.org/news-releases/pr-07-16-2021-bay-area-counties-recommend-masking-indoors-for-everyone “

Edited by Arcadia
Link error
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

@mathnerd@crazyforlatin@sassenach“With cases of COVID-19 rising locally and increased circulation of the highly transmissible Delta variant, the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and the City of Berkeley recommend that everyone, regardless of vaccination status, wear masks indoors in public places to ensure easy verification that all unvaccinated people are masked in those settings and as an extra precautionary measure for all.

Read the full press release: https://covid19.sccgov.org/news-releases/pr-07-16-2021-bay-area-counties-recommend-masking-indoors-for-everyone”

Thanks for posting this, Arcadia. I sent it along to my folks (who have also continued to mask indoors). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Thanks for posting this, Arcadia. I sent it along to my folks (who have also continued to mask indoors). 

Think the link on their Facebook page was wrongly linked. This is the correct link https://covid19.sccgov.org/news-releases/pr-07-16-2021-bay-area-counties-recommend-masking-indoors-for-everyone

ETA:

With cases of COVID-19 rising locally and increased circulation of the highly transmissible Delta variant, the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and the City of Berkeley recommend that everyone, regardless of vaccination status, wear masks indoors in public places to ensure easy verification that all unvaccinated people are masked in those settings and as an extra precautionary measure for all.

In June, the Delta variants comprised 43 percent of all specimens sequenced in California. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) noted that Delta variants are now responsible for 58 percent of new infections across the country.”

Edited by Arcadia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

Think the link on their Facebook page was wrongly linked. This is the correct link https://covid19.sccgov.org/news-releases/pr-07-16-2021-bay-area-counties-recommend-masking-indoors-for-everyone

ETA:

With cases of COVID-19 rising locally and increased circulation of the highly transmissible Delta variant, the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and the City of Berkeley recommend that everyone, regardless of vaccination status, wear masks indoors in public places to ensure easy verification that all unvaccinated people are masked in those settings and as an extra precautionary measure for all.

In June, the Delta variants comprised 43 percent of all specimens sequenced in California. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) noted that Delta variants are now responsible for 58 percent of new infections across the country.”

Thanks—I found it. 🙂 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We saw almost no masks in iowa.  One restaurant we.got.takeout.from had there workers masked.  In South Dakota we saw.a.few.masks.on tourists.  Back in Washington now we still have !a date for unvaxxed, you would never know I saw 2 masks all day and we had to run a lot of errands after being gone for a month.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2021 at 12:30 PM, TravelingChris said:

I grew up in the 60s and 70s and never had any measles outbreak near me or anyone I know get measles once we got the vaccine- I think my brother had it when I was born or right before I was born or something like that but I know he (6 years older than me) did have it.  

I know there were outbreaks in some places but it was never widespread again in our country once vaccinations started in late 60s?,

Same experience but I’m a little younger. It wasn’t declared eliminated til the 2000’s. I shouldn’t have said “plenty of measles around”, because I guess that sounds widespread, but I just meant it wasn’t gone. There was still “plenty” of it around for about 15 years after a vaccine was available, looks like anywhere from 30-80,000 cases per year, then declined from there, link below has a graph. Looks like another bump from 1988-92, 30 or 40 thousand cases per year. 

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/graph-us-measles-cases

This is one article I had looked at and found interesting. https://www.history.com/news/measles-vaccine-disease

 

 

Edited by Penelope
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@MEmama Yolo county might be further from your parents, but FYI. Delta is 76% of positive samples.

https://www.yolocounty.org/Home/Components/News/News/12675/3404

Yolo County Public Health Officer Recommends Masking Indoors and Testing Following Exposure for All Residents as Delta Variant Predominates

 

(Woodland, CA) – Due to the increasing prevalence of the highly infectious Delta variant and rising COVID-19 case rates, the Yolo County Health Officer recommends that fully vaccinated persons wear masks indoors in public spaces as a precautionary measure. Those who are fully vaccinated and 65 years old or older or immunocompromised are strongly recommended to wear masks in indoor settings.

Since mid-April, 59 cases of the Delta variant have been detected in Yolo County by the UC Davis Genome Center. The Delta variant made up 76% of positive samples collected on the UC Davis campus and through Healthy Yolo Together testing between June 27 and July 7. Vaccinated residents are strongly recommended to wear masks in indoor settings where vaccination verification is not required and the vaccination status of others is unknown. Unvaccinated individuals are still required to wear masks in indoor public spaces.

The Yolo County Health Officer also recommends that fully vaccinated individuals get tested for COVID-19 following an exposure to someone with COVID-19, even if they have no symptoms. Data continue to show that fully vaccinated individuals are well protected from the Delta variant and that all three available vaccines are effective against the Delta variant, but some breakthrough infections do occur in vaccinated persons. Although vaccine breakthroughs with the Delta variant in Yolo are rare, preliminary evidence suggests that the affected persons may be able to transmit the virus to others even when they have no symptoms.”

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LA County http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/acd/ncorona2019/masks/

“As of Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 11:59 PM, masks will be required in all indoor public places in Los Angeles County. Some exceptions will apply, similar to masking requirements that were in place prior to the June 15 reopening. Details are available in the revised Health Officer Order. This page will be revised soon to align with the order.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/12/2021 at 1:58 PM, Penelope said:

I don’t understand why it’s so controversial to say it’s not conclusively more virulent. Not conclusive means maybe yes, maybe no. It’s not good science to make claims that aren’t yet well-supported. I’m not invested in the virulence or lack of virulence, but just don’t think that inaccuracy is helping anyone. I think some people, not just here, seem very invested in Covid being more and more terrible, and all of us needing to behave as though it is early-mid 2020. 

 

 

I'm not sure who you're addressing here, as I only asked for your sources, and I asked for them because there are numerous other medical doctors, professionals and researchers who *are* saying it is more virulent. That's not controversial.

And there are quite a lot of people very interested in any risk of Covid being completely minimized, despite really horrible (& ongoing) consequences for millions of people around the globe.

Edited by Happy2BaMom
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Happy2BaMom said:

I'm not sure who you're addressing here, as I only asked for your sources, and I asked for them because there are numerous other medical doctors, professionals and researchers who *are* saying it is more virulent. That's not controversial.

And there are quite a lot of people very interested in any risk of Covid being completely minimized, despite really horrible (& ongoing) consequences for millions of people around the globe.

I put a break like this ———- in my post after the first part where I was responding to you, and before the part you quoted. So no, that quote was not a response to you. 
 

I don’t know if it is more numerous on one side or the other. I think some public academics are just more careful to say when something isn’t certain, rather than say something definitive and turn out to be wrong later. OR they are more nuanced when they talk to journalists, but are quoted out of context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2021 at 10:19 AM, Spryte said:

Wow.  I thought healthcare settings were still requiring masks per CDC a recommendations.  I know of one or two that allow patients to remove their mask once they are alone in a room, if they have verified they are fully vaccinated.

I’m so sorry.  
 

Somehow I’m under the vague impression that you and I are, or were once, in the same state.  So now I’m bracing for a similar experience to come.

Individual offices, not tied to specific hospitals, are allowing patients to remove their mask alone in a room after verifying vaccination here as well.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...