Why has Canada done better than the U.S. in the pandemic? Apparently by listening to the scientists.

[loveofourlord]

In canada if people don't wear masks like in my area I think it's more complacency then outright hatred of it that seems to be prevelant in Canada, like in my town we've never been hit by covid so people don't wear masks because it's just easier to do so and no massive risk at the moment.

 

[pitabread]

I think that geography and weather are in Canada's favor. For instance, Canada's urban areas are limited. In the U.S. Alaska, Wyoming and Montana all have lower per capita infections than Canada. The best though is Hawaii. Only 74 cases per 100k, Canada's is 282 per 100k of people.

If you adjust for provinces or population centres, differences still arise.

For example, Alaska has hundreds of active cases and those have been significantly increasing as of late:

In contrast, Newfoundland has a single active case of COVID-19 (the first new case in over 40 days). And it turns out it's someone who just recently returned from the U.S. :/

N.L. records 1st new case of COVID-19 in 43 days

 

[pitabread]

Does that make sense?

Not really. Unless you have evidence to support this, this is just supposition.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Not really. Unless you have evidence to support this, this is just supposition.

You're asking me to prove a negative. If you don't understand why these organizations have an agenda....that's on you.

 

[pitabread]

You're asking me to prove a negative. If you don't understand why these organizations have an agenda....that's on you.

That's not how the burden of proof works. You're making the claim, I'm asking if you have evidence to support it.

If you don't, then so it goes.

 

[Ana the Ist]

That's not how the burden of proof works. You're making the claim, I'm asking if you have evidence to support it.

If you don't, then so it goes.

Meh....here's the CDC's mission statement. You'll notice that nowhere does it include "providing the public with objective facts".

Mission, Role and Pledge | About | CDC

Here's the CDC's statement regarding face masks...notice that nowhere does it include any statistical data on how effective they are. In fact, it's carefully worded to ensure they have no liability...for example...

• Cloth face coverings may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Now here's some actual statistical data on how effective masks are (though obviously nothing approaching certainty)....

Just how effective are masks at stopping coronavirus? Here's what new research says.

In New York, for instance, the daily new infection rate dropped by 3% per day after a policy requiring that people wear face masks or coverings in public took effect, the researchers found. Overall, the researchers estimated that requirements related to face masks and coverings "significantly reduced the number of infections … by over 78,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9."

Without knowing exactly how many infections their models would have predicted without masks....there's no way of knowing their effectiveness for sure. Still, the data provided there shows it's going to be somewhere between 3% and about 70% effective in reducing transmission.

Now, the CDC has an incentive to get everyone to wear a mask....so obviously, telling people that at the most, they're only about 70% effective would be a mistake. In reality, they probably aren't anywhere near that effective alone.

You don't need to be a genius to figure out why they don't give the general public the hard data on this. It doesn't make them liars....but it doesn't make them honest either. They have an agenda.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

If only the winters weren't so brutal in Canada I might have moved there years ago.

 

[pitabread]

Meh....here's the CDC's mission statement. You'll notice that nowhere does it include "providing the public with objective facts".

Er, did you not read the bit under their pledge?

Base all public health decisions on the highest quality scientific data that is derived openly and objectively.​

<snip>

Now, the CDC has an incentive to get everyone to wear a mask....so obviously, telling people that at the most, they're only about 70% effective would be a mistake. In reality, they probably aren't anywhere near that effective alone.

The percentage effectiveness of a mask will vary wildly depending on what type is used, the mask's physical integrity, how they are worn, how one dons or doffs the mask, etc.

There is no singular value for a mask's effectiveness. So quoting such percentages wouldn't mean anything.

However, even if a particular mask is only 5% effective, that 5% is still better than nothing. So mask wearing should be encouraged.

They have an agenda.

So you keep claiming, but you're still not supporting claim with anything.

 

[loveofourlord]

If only the winters weren't so brutal in Canada I might have moved there years ago.

Move to west coast, where I live we have the mildest weather in the world, we barly get far below 0 *C most years.

 

[pitabread]

If only the winters weren't so brutal in Canada I might have moved there years ago.

Winters in Canada are great. The key is to embrace them rather than fight them.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Winters in Canada are great. The key is to embrace them rather than fight them.

I can't even stand winters in NJ/NY anymore, and it is decidedly milder here. i'm looking to the Southwest. I have a lot of family in Montreal (my mother's whole side of the family, except one uncle whose family moved to Toronto). I would only live in Montreal or Vancouver; MAYBE Toronto but outside of Montreal and Vancouver I find Canada as boring as most states in the US. Also, Montreal is the best food city in Canada (maybe in the world).

 

[Ana the Ist]

Er, did you not read the bit under their pledge?

Base all public health decisions on the highest quality scientific data that is derived openly and objectively.​

Yeah....do you understand that isn't the same as informing the public? The highest quality objective scientific data may conclude that you shouldn't be given all the facts.

The percentage effectiveness of a mask will vary wildly depending on what type is used, the mask's physical integrity, how they are worn, how one dons or doffs the mask, etc.

There is no singular value for a mask's effectiveness. So quoting such percentages wouldn't mean anything.

Well that is the data for the effectiveness of a public mask requirement policy.

However, even if a particular mask is only 5% effective, that 5% is still better than nothing. So mask wearing should be encouraged.

Lol that's the point I'm making.

So you keep claiming, but you're still not supporting claim with anything.

I've supported it with plenty....I've quoted the sources and some hard data. You just admitted that wearing masks should be encouraged regardless of how effective they are....

Well, do you think more people are going to wear masks if they think they're highly effective or if they're only 5% effective?

I understand that if you're getting all your information from the CDC or WHO....you probably have the impression that this pandemic is "beatable" and that it can be either kept under control indefinitely or until a vaccine comes.

If you look at a variety of statement from viral experts not pushing the agenda of national institutions....it's a generally less rosy picture. They range from serious doubt about a vaccine in the short term to a scenario where this disease never goes away.

I get that one of those scenarios is emotionally satisfying and politically useful for manipulating the public.....but the other makes these discussions about "success" largely irrelevant.

Honestly, I don't care if you agree with or understand that these information "sources" have agendas....

It doesn't change the fact that the political left in the US has no plans for dealing with the virus. Even worse, the positions they support are likely going to make things worse.

 

[pitabread]

Yeah....do you understand that isn't the same as informing the public? The highest quality objective scientific data may conclude that you shouldn't be given all the facts.

That is just supposition.

Lol that's the point I'm making.

I'm honestly losing site of your point.

I've supported it with plenty....I've quoted the sources and some hard data. You just admitted that wearing masks should be encouraged regardless of how effective they are....

Well, do you think more people are going to wear masks if they think they're highly effective or if they're only 5% effective?

I think you're misinterpreting my point.

I said that there is no singular number for the effectiveness of a mask. Some masks may be highly effective, some may not. It's going to depend on a multitude of factors.

So I'm not sure why you would criticize the CDC on that basis. ?

I understand that if you're getting all your information from the CDC or WHO....you probably have the impression that this pandemic is "beatable" and that it can be either kept under control indefinitely or until a vaccine comes.

I get my information primarily from direct scientific sources (where available).

It doesn't change the fact that the political left in the US has no plans for dealing with the virus. Even worse, the positions they support are likely going to make things worse.

Maybe that's a problem in your country. I find it a little ironic you're trying to make it in a thread pointing to the success Canada has had in reducing the pandemic's impact.

 

[Ana the Ist]

That is just supposition.

They aren't providing hard data on mask effectiveness....that's a fact, not supposition.

I'm honestly losing site of your point.

It's too early for any realistic discussion about success.

I think you're misinterpreting my point.

What was your point?

I said that there is no singular number for the effectiveness of a mask.

This is supposition.

So I'm not sure why you would criticize the CDC on that basis. ?

Saying they have an agenda isn't a criticism.

Maybe that's a problem in your country. I find it a little ironic you're trying to make it in a thread pointing to the success Canada has had in reducing the pandemic's impact.

Your article is more political narrative than fact, and it's got a significant portion criticizing Trump...

I've stayed on topic.

 

[jacks]

Why has Canada done better than the U.S. in the pandemic?

Maybe a more helpful question for Canada would be, "Why has Canada done worse (death per million) than the 195 countries that have done better?"

 

[pitabread]

Your article is more political narrative than fact, and it's got a significant portion criticizing Trump...

Ah, so that's the real issue. You don't like Trump being criticized. Got it.

 

[pitabread]

Why has Canada done better than the U.S. in the pandemic?

Maybe a more helpful question for Canada would be, "Why has Canada done worse (death per million) than the 195 countries that have done better?"

If you look at many of the countries in question, we're don't necessarily have relevant data from a lot of them. Just compare relative testing. Canada's in the top quartile.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ah, so that's the real issue. You don't like Trump being criticized. Got it.

I didn't say that.

I'd prefer you didn't make things up about me. Basic forum rules are to address the post and not the poster...in case you weren't aware.

 

[jacks]

Canada's in the top quartile.

Yes, when it comes to deaths per million Canada is number 20 out of 215. ( The U.S. is number 9) But that may not be the "top quartile" one wants to brag about; better to be in the bottom quartile. It's not like Canada is doing that great.

 

[pitabread]

Yes, when it comes to deaths per million Canada is number 20 out of 215. ( The U.S. is number 9) But that may not be the "top quartile" one wants to brag about; better to be in the bottom quartile.

Again, you have to consider relative testing, among other factors in the reported numbers. Not all stats from all countries are created equal.

It's not like Canada is doing that great.

Our number of active cases has been in decline for over a month. In contrast with the U.S., we're at least headed in the right direction.