You think that having no public health measures is data driven? Go read some data. Seriously. Or, just go to pre-1950s graveyards and gather data on how many dead children there were before public health measures. Or look at the data on how the public health measures ran extinct a strain of flu so it is no longer being included in the vaccine formula.
I don't see anybody advocating for no public health measures - perhaps you might consider that the views of others are as nuanced as yours.
> Or, just go to pre-1950s graveyards and gather data on how many dead children there were before public health measures.
Indeed! But this doesn't mean that every measure undertaken was reasonable or evidence-based. Germane to the thread at hand: at the height of the polio epidemic, some states sprayed DDT in a bizarre and mistaken belief that it was likely to reduce transmission of the virus. As with lockdowns and masks and surface 'disinfectants' and other unproven measures today, this happened over the objection of a chorus of experts who had already begun to unearth the fecal-oral route of transmission of polio.
Yes, in retrospect, this seems silly and trivial. But at the time, it must have been very frustrating to spend your life (or even your hobby time, as I do) studying public health only to have a hairbrained idea with no empirical basis become the framework on which policy was decided.
> Or look at the data on how the public health measures ran extinct a strain of flu so it is no longer being included in the vaccine formula.
I... presume you are talking about the B/Yamagata lineage of Influenza B?
Nobody knows why this lineage disappeared, and anybody who claims to is trying to sell you something or influence you.
One exciting prospect is that it is the result of viral interference, a phenomenon frequently observed but not yet understood, and potentially the basis of future immune therapy.
In any case, the disappearance of a particular lineage of Influenza B or of H3N2 (which of course is the current endemic influenza, but began as an epidemic subtype in the 1960s) is not an overall public health win or loss; it just means that other lineages (in this case, B/Victoria) will present the endemic strains in future years unless B/Yamagata re-emerges.
EXACTLY, the Flu strain had a lower R value than COVID-19. So, the experiment has been done, proving that masks work as expected, even badly implemented.
Two different airborne diseases, F and C, with R0 values under unprotected conditions of something like F=3 and C=9, and masking very badly implemented [0,1,2,3,4]. The results are that disease F went completely extinct, but disease C was slowed in areas with better compliance, but still persevered, and mutated in favor of better-spreading strains such that the unprotected R0 of current strains is ~15.
This unequivocally shows that there is a real public health benefit to simple measures of using N95 masks, and strongly suggests that better implementation (e.g., full supply and broader use) would improve containment, reducing cases, and reducing the rate of cases, allowing for better treatment.
There is no requirement that the measures be perfect, indeed it is a multi-layered approach that works for public health, due to the dynamics of disease.
>>Again, listen to me. I'm not telling you merely that I disagree with you. I'm telling you that you have no power over me, and you never will.
Yes, that was evident from the beginning, and you've confirmed it.
Your attitude has nothing to do with actual science, and everything to do with serious ignorance about how public health works, a hard unwillingness to help your fellow citizens, hostility to anyone who might slightly inconvenience you, and a misguided idea of "muh fredumbs' mixed with entitlement.
The fact is no one GAF about controlling you; you are just not that important to anyone but you (I'm not either, and contrary to your assertion, IDGAF abt "controlling" you either).
Wearing N95s is no different a safety measure than hard hats or steel-toed shoes on a worksite, or seat belts in a car or airplane. If you think that is somehow an affront to your manhood or whatever, shows you have real issues. Seriously. Perhaps you will learn to join society as a contributing member and stop acting like a spoiled petulant child. We can all hope so.
[0] WHO and CDC failed to emphasize the importance of N95-quality masks, likely in an effort to preserve limited stocks for the healthcare workers (they knew N95s work)
[1] the supply of N95-level masks was constrained so many people used only makeshift or lower-quality masks.
[2] many people were very lax about using masks, consistently failing to cover their nose, or just wearing them as a 'chin-diaper' to comply but not really.
[3] a significant part of the population turned it into a misguided political event, adamantly refusing to wear masks and belligerently intimidation others and businesses to not wear them and not require them.
[4] inconsistent measures implemented in different countries, some much stronger and some much weaker.
It's a difficult time to be empirically-driven, though hopefully we will come out better for it.