Question re: masks/lockdowns effectiveness and super spread events

It's not possible to have an exclusively clinical discussion about this topic because the largest failures were political. I would invite you to ask the question in the politics club in the break room.  

Imagine if you were isolating a new and deadly virus in your unit and 20% of the people who came into the unit intentionally violated isolation protocol.  Was it the protocol that was flawed when the virus spread? Nah...it was a failure of leadership to message, model, and "mandate" compliance with protocol in the unit. 

I think it's a discussion that is necessary. 

Hmm.. 

I wonder where A hit with the ladies" is 

*giggles* ?

I do not have any hard data to support my suppositions but I have a few guesses as to why there is a difference in infections/hospitalizations. 

1. Each state has its own method for gathering and reporting data, as well as identifying COVID deaths.Comparing data between states is apples to oranges, or maybe Red Delicious to Granny Smith.  I am skeptical that we are getting accurate reports from Florida, which has few restrictions and a governor who does not seem interested in knowing about rates. 

2. California and NY have denser populations, making spread easier. They also have more media, who can publicize the ill effects of COVID.  The Dakotas and the Navajo nation have been hit hard, but you don't hear that much about them. 

3. Certain populations seem to fair much worse with COVID infection, and I am going to guess that the hardest hit areas have a higher percentage of those populations. For instance, my area has relatively low percentage of persons of color, and our hospitalization and  death rates are far below those of California. 

To the original poster, why do you think there seems to be a difference? 

2 hours ago, Peachpit said:

I posted this under General Nursing and it was suggested I post here so here is my prior post verbatim: 

I want to preface my post by saying I am NOT looking to get into a political debate/argument about right wingers/left wingers or any wingers..I am seriously wanting opinions about how to answer these questions as I am having these or similar questions asked of me and I honestly am not sure how to respond other that citing CDC/FDA information.

First, if masks/lockdowns are as effective as some would have people believe, what are places like California and NY, where some of the strictest mask/lockdown restriction were/are, in place having such terrible times with the virus much more than other places that had little or no mask/lockdown requirements? 

Secondly, some political and/or social events/protests have been deemed "super spreader" while others have been ignored by experts. It seems those most criticized were Republican/Republican leaning while those ignored/excused were Democratic/Democratic leaning. 

Again, I am not looking for political/social arguments, just a way to better answer the questions when asked than I am doing now.

 

Thanks

Do you have some evidence that the mitigation measures attempted didn't save lives or slow the spread?

The data seems to imply that the mitigation strategies do have benefit. The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the COVID-19 pandemic

California did indeed have some success with their lockdown, but is having a tough time now.  

https://ktla.com/news/california/california-once-quelled-covid-19-with-stay-at-home-order-why-this-one-isn't-working-as-well/

I'm not sure sure there many Democrat inspired super spreader events.  Democrat politicians were very aware of covid, wore a mask and had events from their cars. 

BLM matters have proven to not be super spreader events.

Trump held rallies of large amounts of people not wearing masks in close proximity

Other super speeder events were tied to events like the Sturgiss bike rally.  

Pretty much all regions of the country have had their turn at having high rates of infection.  New York was one of the first so it them them a bit to get it under control but their efforts were extremely successful towards the end.  

Florida, Texas, and Arizona took their turn as did the Northeast.  

The midwest took their turn at a different time. 

It's really hard to say that one part of the country did better than others.  

Some of the highest rates of infection per capita are in rural towns.  

https://247wallst.com/healthcare-economy/2021/01/05/covid-19-the-5-deadliest-counties-in-america/

Where I live, Florida, has no lockdown or restrictions and has had over 10,000 cases a day for weeks on end, and often over 15,000.  It isn't pretty.  Two local hospitals are at capacity for ICU beds.

9 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Do you have some evidence that the mitigation measures attempted didn't save lives or slow the spread?

The data seems to imply that the mitigation strategies do have benefit. The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the COVID-19 pandemic

 

No evidence at all nor is that what I am seeking/posintg about. . I am not going to debate anyone on here about covid/the validity of whether the current administration handled things well or not nor if the incoming administration will do any better or worse. Just asking for advice/suggestions on how to best answer questions I am being asked by patients about the situation overall. And the questions they are asking are valid.

11 hours ago, nursej22 said:

I do not have any hard data to support my suppositions but I have a few guesses as to why there is a difference in infections/hospitalizations. 

1. Each state has its own method for gathering and reporting data, as well as identifying COVID deaths.Comparing data between states is apples to oranges, or maybe Red Delicious to Granny Smith.  I am skeptical that we are getting accurate reports from Florida, which has few restrictions and a governor who does not seem interested in knowing about rates. 

2. California and NY have denser populations, making spread easier. They also have more media, who can publicize the ill effects of COVID.  The Dakotas and the Navajo nation have been hit hard, but you don't hear that much about them. 

3. Certain populations seem to fair much worse with COVID infection, and I am going to guess that the hardest hit areas have a higher percentage of those populations. For instance, my area has relatively low percentage of persons of color, and our hospitalization and  death rates are far below those of California. 

To the original poster, why do you think there seems to be a difference? 

I am asking about how to answer patients who question me or my coworkers about why some events are deemed super spreaders while others are not an about masks/lockdowns in general not seeming to work in places like NY & Calif. We have answered them w/the CDC/FDA information but thought they may be more information we could utilize in responding.

As far as what I think personally? Yes, I think there is hypocrisy/two sets of standards on BOTH political sides. I do not see how one side can say BLM protests or the protests in Chicago/Portland/elsewhere were not spreader events (super or otherwise) where political rallies for a candidate (Trump or otherwise) were spreader events..Is the Inauguration not a large event that could be a super spreader? 

There is an singer, Chesca, who is positive for Covid but is still going to sing at the upcoming Inauguration. Social distanced or not, what message does this send? Where is the outrage or concern about her performing while positive? Should she not quarantine? Others that will be with her are positive according to her own statements. I am not asking for these questions to be answered, just posing them to highlight that when there appears to be double standards.

ALL of those put people at risk and the people who chose to attend  rallies/protest made the choice to attend thus putting themselves and others at risk and ignoring the CDC guidelines for distancing/masks. The unfortunate thing is a major public health crisis has become political and it's the general public who are suffering because of BOTH sides inability to lead as they should - by example.

11 hours ago, nursej22 said:

3. Certain populations seem to fair much worse with COVID infection, and I am going to guess that the hardest hit areas have a higher percentage of those populations.

Southern California has a lot of Latino workers - some are USA citizens, some Mexican. I have not researched this, but this is what I've heard: many of these people live in high density areas, with multigenerational families living in cramped quarters. 

COVID would spread easily in these conditions.

1 hour ago, Peachpit said:

As far as what I think personally? Yes, I think there is hypocrisy/two sets of standards on BOTH political sides. I do not see how one side can say BLM protests or the protests in Chicago/Portland/elsewhere were not spreader events (super or otherwise) where political rallies for a candidate (Trump or otherwise) were spreader events..Is the Inauguration not a large event that could be a super spreader? 

I'm basing what I said about BLM on studies that I remember reading over the Summer.  We had a lot of protests here and they were always outside and people for the most part stayed apart and wore masks.  I can only speak to the ones that I personally saw myself here.  I know elsewhere this wasn't true.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/black-lives-matter-protests-didn't-contribute-to-covid19-surge

Trump rallys, as I pointed out had people in close proximity, maskless and often indoors.  There have been some studies that have linked them to further spread of covid.  Many people in the Trump administration, attending Trump meetings and gatherings got covid.

https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-election-coronavirus-rallies-explain-idUSKBN27H1IG

A traditional inauguration might indeed be a super spreader event.  I'm not sure what Biden is doing about that, but I'm sure there will be some social distancing and masks.  Being outside with masks, with social distancing seems to not be a "super spreader" scenario.   It would be hypocrisy if he acted like covid didn't exist, had the inauguration in the traditional way with all the traditional parties.  

Chesca tested positive and no symptoms but performed at Biden's MLK event virtually and the event kept in mind CDC guidelines.  Doubtful she's going to get anywhere near the inauguration where she isn't scheduled so no outrage necessary.

1 hour ago, Peachpit said:

I am asking about how to answer patients who question me or my coworkers about why some events are deemed super spreaders while others are not an about masks/lockdowns in general not seeming to work in places like NY & Calif. We have answered them w/the CDC/FDA information but thought they may be more information we could utilize in responding.

As far as what I think personally? Yes, I think there is hypocrisy/two sets of standards on BOTH political sides. I do not see how one side can say BLM protests or the protests in Chicago/Portland/elsewhere were not spreader events (super or otherwise) where political rallies for a candidate (Trump or otherwise) were spreader events..Is the Inauguration not a large event that could be a super spreader? 

There is an singer, Chesca, who is positive for Covid but is still going to sing at the upcoming Inauguration. Social distanced or not, what message does this send? Where is the outrage or concern about her performing while positive? Should she not quarantine? Others that will be with her are positive according to her own statements. I am not asking for these questions to be answered, just posing them to highlight that when there appears to be double standards.

ALL of those put people at risk and the people who chose to attend  rallies/protest made the choice to attend thus putting themselves and others at risk and ignoring the CDC guidelines for distancing/masks. The unfortunate thing is a major public health crisis has become political and it's the general public who are suffering because of BOTH sides inability to lead as they should - by example.

Your patients are asking you odd and partisan questions. 

A super spreader event is a gathering where the covid mitigation strategies are ignored and the spread of the disease was easily documented among the gatherers...a large wedding or white house event, for example. 

Chesca singing remotely, into a camera, exposes no one to covid. 

Nah...the leadership failure in federal covid response is Trump's alone.