this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2024
90 points (95.9% liked)

Canada

7230 readers
311 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The results show that wearing a mask led to a reduction of 2.76 cases per 100,000 people, and a 0.19 per cent reduction in the mortality rate worldwide.

all 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 37 points 10 months ago

And they would have been even more effective if we didn't have such a large number of idiots who were against wearing masks, against getting vaccines, against lockdowns, against social distancing, against listening to their doctor, and who generally hated their families enough to not care!

[–] healthetank@lemmy.ca 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Huge pet peeve of mine when articles discuss a study but don't link it. Link

When you look at what else we do in the modern world to avoid/mitigate a similar level of mortality, these seem like no brainers, especially the masking. A 0.19 per 100,000 reduction seems small, but the mortality rate was ~50 per 100,000 in Canada. This is basically a 4% reduction in deaths by masking. For a minor cost measure with no long term economic outcomes, this should have been an easy one for people to get on board with.

School reduction in spread (~10%) shouldn't surprise anyone who knows school aged kids. They're germ balls, and multiple kids per household means there's effectively no "bubbles", so of course stopping that spread would have a huge impact, but then kids are stuck at home, so it has a huge cost too.

SIPOs (Shelter in Place Order) had a 5% reduction in hospitalizations, which is honestly smaller than I was expecting.

See below for the mortality summarization.

Specific NPIs. Of the 6 NPIs studied in per capita mortality, bar/restaurant closures experienced the largest effects 4 weeks after implementation, corresponding to 1.08 fewer deaths per 100,000. Although we did not find any more evidence of fewer deaths per capita, limited gatherings (–6.41%), business (–5.32%) and school closures (–3.98%) were associated with decreased mortality growth rates after 2 weeks, whereas SIPOs (–1.66%), masks (–1.9%), and school closures (–8.29%) corresponded to reductions after 3 weeks. SIPOs were the only NPI studied at the β‰₯4-week lag for growth rates and were associated with a 1.95% drop in the mortality rates. Although the authors observed mitigative effects of travel restrictions on case growth rates, this was not the case for mortality.

I imagine its a tricky thing to study in any detail, and its interesting to look back now to see the effectiveness of the measures put in place.

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

Big same on the pet peeve. Thanks for doing god's work.