Viruses / Vaccines 2

19293959798159

Comments

  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,627
    edited February 2023
    As you  might expect, Stephens took an inconclusive study, drew conclusions, and then levied a political weapon against the CDC to advance his argument.  Here is the actual conclusion by the authors of the study:

    Authors' conclusions

    The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under‐investigated.

    There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. 

  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,479
    edited February 2023
    something from the op-ed that jumped out to me....


    No study — or study of studies — is ever perfect. Science is never absolutely settled. What’s more, the analysis does not prove that proper masks, properly worn, had no benefit at an individual level. People may have good personal reasons to wear masks, and they may have the discipline to wear them consistently. Their choices are their own.

    But when it comes to the population-level benefits of masking, the verdict is in: Mask mandates were a bust. Those skeptics who were furiously mocked as cranks and occasionally censored as “misinformers” for opposing mandates were right. The mainstream experts and pundits who supported mandates were wrong. In a better world, it would behoove the latter group to acknowledge their error, along with its considerable physicalpsychologicalpedagogical and political costs.


    Post edited by mickeyrat on
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mrussel1 said:
    As you  might expect, Stephens took an inconclusive study, drew conclusions, and then levied a political weapon against the CDC to advance his argument.  Here is the actual conclusion by the authors of the study:

    Authors' conclusions

    The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under‐investigated.

    There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. 

    Crazy....I have seen him on Bill Maher a few times. He is generally a pretty fair interview. I really don't understand why he is resurrecting this bullshit.
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,627
    mrussel1 said:
    As you  might expect, Stephens took an inconclusive study, drew conclusions, and then levied a political weapon against the CDC to advance his argument.  Here is the actual conclusion by the authors of the study:

    Authors' conclusions

    The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under‐investigated.

    There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. 

    Crazy....I have seen him on Bill Maher a few times. He is generally a pretty fair interview. I really don't understand why he is resurrecting this bullshit.
    Opinion piece..that's how it goes. 
  • mrussel1 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    As you  might expect, Stephens took an inconclusive study, drew conclusions, and then levied a political weapon against the CDC to advance his argument.  Here is the actual conclusion by the authors of the study:

    Authors' conclusions

    The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under‐investigated.

    There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. 

    Crazy....I have seen him on Bill Maher a few times. He is generally a pretty fair interview. I really don't understand why he is resurrecting this bullshit.
    Opinion piece..that's how it goes. 
    Always a solid conservative argument I guess.
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,479
    mrussel1 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    As you  might expect, Stephens took an inconclusive study, drew conclusions, and then levied a political weapon against the CDC to advance his argument.  Here is the actual conclusion by the authors of the study:

    Authors' conclusions

    The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under‐investigated.

    There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. 

    Crazy....I have seen him on Bill Maher a few times. He is generally a pretty fair interview. I really don't understand why he is resurrecting this bullshit.
    Opinion piece..that's how it goes. 
    Always a solid conservative argument I guess.

    coming in to 2024 election season, gotta push culture war shit and I think this is at least adjacent
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyrat said:
    mrussel1 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    As you  might expect, Stephens took an inconclusive study, drew conclusions, and then levied a political weapon against the CDC to advance his argument.  Here is the actual conclusion by the authors of the study:

    Authors' conclusions

    The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under‐investigated.

    There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. 

    Crazy....I have seen him on Bill Maher a few times. He is generally a pretty fair interview. I really don't understand why he is resurrecting this bullshit.
    Opinion piece..that's how it goes. 
    Always a solid conservative argument I guess.

    coming in to 2024 election season, gotta push culture war shit and I think this is at least adjacent
    I will say that it's interesting to see tRump pushing Desantis over his virus response. Of course now Desantis acts like FL didn't react to the virus at all but tRump is quick to point out that he's full of shit.

    I love watching snakes eat rats.
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
  • jwhjr17jwhjr17 Posts: 1,994
    Can't the argument still be made that the mask mandates didn't work because they weren't followed closely enough?

    Of course it would work if done correctly. It just seems so elementary to me I don't understand why it creates such an argument.

    And this Bret Stephens guy is the one that threw a fit and quit Twitter for awhile because someone called him a "bedbug."
    We don't know this do we?
    1998-06-30 Mpls | 2006-07-06 Las Vegas | 2010-05-03 Kansas City | 2011-07-01 St. Louis EV | 2011-07-02 Mpls EV | 2011-09-03 PJ20
    2011-09-04 PJ20 | 2011-09-17 Winnipeg | 2012-09-30 Missoula | 2012-11-18 Tulsa EV | 2013-07-19 Chicago | 2013-11-15 Dallas
    2013-11-16 OKC | 2014-10-09 Lincoln | 2014-10-17 Moline | 2014-10-19 St. Paul | 2014-10-20 Milwaukee | 2016-08-20 Chicago
    2016-08-22 Chicago | 2018-08-18 Chicago | 2018-08-20 Chicago | 2022-05-09 Phoenix | 2022-05-20 Las Vegas | 2022-09-18 St. Louis 
    2022-09-20 OKC | 2023-08-31 St. Paul | 2023-09-02 St. Paul | 2024-05-16 Las Vegas | 2024-05-18 Las Vegas | 2024-08-31 Chicago
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,627
    mickeyrat said:
    mrussel1 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    As you  might expect, Stephens took an inconclusive study, drew conclusions, and then levied a political weapon against the CDC to advance his argument.  Here is the actual conclusion by the authors of the study:

    Authors' conclusions

    The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under‐investigated.

    There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. 

    Crazy....I have seen him on Bill Maher a few times. He is generally a pretty fair interview. I really don't understand why he is resurrecting this bullshit.
    Opinion piece..that's how it goes. 
    Always a solid conservative argument I guess.

    coming in to 2024 election season, gotta push culture war shit and I think this is at least adjacent
    Litigating masks, vaccines and the pandemic is red meat for the base, but the rest of the country, including the swing voters, have moved way past that.  It's a political loser, but that never stopped the GOP.  Look how the "Stop the Steal" candidates did last fall. 


  • A good breakdown of that Stephens piece here...
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
  • benjsbenjs Posts: 9,130
    jwhjr17 said:
    Can't the argument still be made that the mask mandates didn't work because they weren't followed closely enough?

    Of course it would work if done correctly. It just seems so elementary to me I don't understand why it creates such an argument.

    And this Bret Stephens guy is the one that threw a fit and quit Twitter for awhile because someone called him a "bedbug."
    We don't know this do we?
    Propensity to contract an airborne disease is proportional to viral load a person is exposed to, which spreads easier (and a greater amount of viral load travels) without a mask than with one. If you know anyone who needs to sneeze, you could do an experiment right now to prove that.

    What part of this are you uncertain about?
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,479
    edited February 2023
    will point out too, the vaccine also reduces the viral load of someone vaxxed who test positive thereby REDUCING transmission... ..
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • Hold up…. covering your mouth when you cough or sneeze helps prevent the spread of germs? 

    Mind = blown 
  • Hold up…. covering your mouth when you cough or sneeze helps prevent the spread of germs? 

    Mind = blown 
    Not if you cover your mouth with my face. Fake science!
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
  • Hold up…. covering your mouth when you cough or sneeze helps prevent the spread of germs? 

    Mind = blown 
    Not if you cover your mouth with my face. Fake science!
    I’ve come around on appreciating the entertainment value in this thread. It really is the gift that keeps on giving. 
  • benjsbenjs Posts: 9,130
    Hold up…. covering your mouth when you cough or sneeze helps prevent the spread of germs? 

    Mind = blown 
    I had to stop while I was writing my explanation to ask myself - am I really having to explain this to an adult human? Did the education system fail them that much? Tragically, the answer was yes.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,627
    benjs said:
    Hold up…. covering your mouth when you cough or sneeze helps prevent the spread of germs? 

    Mind = blown 
    I had to stop while I was writing my explanation to ask myself - am I really having to explain this to an adult human? Did the education system fail them that much? Tragically, the answer was yes.
    Sneeze guards at the Golden Corral must be removed immediately.  It's nothing but virtual signaling and more proof that we've lost our country. 
  • TJ25487TJ25487 Posts: 1,479
    mickeyrat said:
    will point out too, the vaccine also reduces the viral load of someone vaxxed who test positive thereby REDUCING transmission... ..
    Will also point out that the vaccine may also reduce your life span thereby REDUCING transmission. 
  • TJ25487 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    will point out too, the vaccine also reduces the viral load of someone vaxxed who test positive thereby REDUCING transmission... ..
    Will also point out that the vaccine may also reduce your life span thereby REDUCING transmission. 
    lol
  • jwhjr17jwhjr17 Posts: 1,994
    benjs said:
    jwhjr17 said:
    Can't the argument still be made that the mask mandates didn't work because they weren't followed closely enough?

    Of course it would work if done correctly. It just seems so elementary to me I don't understand why it creates such an argument.

    And this Bret Stephens guy is the one that threw a fit and quit Twitter for awhile because someone called him a "bedbug."
    We don't know this do we?
    Propensity to contract an airborne disease is proportional to viral load a person is exposed to, which spreads easier (and a greater amount of viral load travels) without a mask than with one. If you know anyone who needs to sneeze, you could do an experiment right now to prove that.

    What part of this are you uncertain about?
    None of it.  Since it wasn't done correctly according to the comment we don't know what the impact would have been and can only speculate.
    1998-06-30 Mpls | 2006-07-06 Las Vegas | 2010-05-03 Kansas City | 2011-07-01 St. Louis EV | 2011-07-02 Mpls EV | 2011-09-03 PJ20
    2011-09-04 PJ20 | 2011-09-17 Winnipeg | 2012-09-30 Missoula | 2012-11-18 Tulsa EV | 2013-07-19 Chicago | 2013-11-15 Dallas
    2013-11-16 OKC | 2014-10-09 Lincoln | 2014-10-17 Moline | 2014-10-19 St. Paul | 2014-10-20 Milwaukee | 2016-08-20 Chicago
    2016-08-22 Chicago | 2018-08-18 Chicago | 2018-08-20 Chicago | 2022-05-09 Phoenix | 2022-05-20 Las Vegas | 2022-09-18 St. Louis 
    2022-09-20 OKC | 2023-08-31 St. Paul | 2023-09-02 St. Paul | 2024-05-16 Las Vegas | 2024-05-18 Las Vegas | 2024-08-31 Chicago
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,479
    edited February 2023
    jwhjr17 said:
    benjs said:
    jwhjr17 said:
    Can't the argument still be made that the mask mandates didn't work because they weren't followed closely enough?

    Of course it would work if done correctly. It just seems so elementary to me I don't understand why it creates such an argument.

    And this Bret Stephens guy is the one that threw a fit and quit Twitter for awhile because someone called him a "bedbug."
    We don't know this do we?
    Propensity to contract an airborne disease is proportional to viral load a person is exposed to, which spreads easier (and a greater amount of viral load travels) without a mask than with one. If you know anyone who needs to sneeze, you could do an experiment right now to prove that.

    What part of this are you uncertain about?
    None of it.  Since it wasn't done correctly according to the comment we don't know what the impact would have been and can only speculate.

    what we do know and have for over 100 yrs is during surgeries deaths from infection and other complications were drastically reduced with the adoption of surgical teams wearing masks.

    Certain Asian countries regularly wear masks to reduce the effects of pollution, to good effect apparently given the reported rates of asthma and other respiratory ailments being less than here.


    what seems apparent is the proper fitment and wearing of masks has positive effects on outcomes across a spectrum of uses.
    Post edited by mickeyrat on
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • jwhjr17jwhjr17 Posts: 1,994
    mickeyrat said:
    jwhjr17 said:
    benjs said:
    jwhjr17 said:
    Can't the argument still be made that the mask mandates didn't work because they weren't followed closely enough?

    Of course it would work if done correctly. It just seems so elementary to me I don't understand why it creates such an argument.

    And this Bret Stephens guy is the one that threw a fit and quit Twitter for awhile because someone called him a "bedbug."
    We don't know this do we?
    Propensity to contract an airborne disease is proportional to viral load a person is exposed to, which spreads easier (and a greater amount of viral load travels) without a mask than with one. If you know anyone who needs to sneeze, you could do an experiment right now to prove that.

    What part of this are you uncertain about?
    None of it.  Since it wasn't done correctly according to the comment we don't know what the impact would have been and can only speculate.

    what we do know and have for over 100 yrs is during surgeries deaths from infection and other complications were drastically reduced with the afoption of surgicsl tesms wearing masks.

    Certain Asian countries regularly wear masks to reduce the effects of pollution, to good effect apprently given the reported rates of asthma and other respiratory ailments being less than here.


    what seems apparent is the proper fitment and wearing of masks has positive effects on outcomes across a spectrum of uses.
    100% agree
    1998-06-30 Mpls | 2006-07-06 Las Vegas | 2010-05-03 Kansas City | 2011-07-01 St. Louis EV | 2011-07-02 Mpls EV | 2011-09-03 PJ20
    2011-09-04 PJ20 | 2011-09-17 Winnipeg | 2012-09-30 Missoula | 2012-11-18 Tulsa EV | 2013-07-19 Chicago | 2013-11-15 Dallas
    2013-11-16 OKC | 2014-10-09 Lincoln | 2014-10-17 Moline | 2014-10-19 St. Paul | 2014-10-20 Milwaukee | 2016-08-20 Chicago
    2016-08-22 Chicago | 2018-08-18 Chicago | 2018-08-20 Chicago | 2022-05-09 Phoenix | 2022-05-20 Las Vegas | 2022-09-18 St. Louis 
    2022-09-20 OKC | 2023-08-31 St. Paul | 2023-09-02 St. Paul | 2024-05-16 Las Vegas | 2024-05-18 Las Vegas | 2024-08-31 Chicago
  • PoncierPoncier Posts: 16,872
    TJ25487 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    will point out too, the vaccine also reduces the viral load of someone vaxxed who test positive thereby REDUCING transmission... ..
    Will also point out that the vaccine may also reduce your life span thereby REDUCING transmission. 
    Athletes are dropping dead left and right on playing fields and courts. You can't swing a dead cat in America without hitting an athlete dying from the vaccine.


    This weekend we rock Portland
  • Poncier said:
    TJ25487 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    will point out too, the vaccine also reduces the viral load of someone vaxxed who test positive thereby REDUCING transmission... ..
    Will also point out that the vaccine may also reduce your life span thereby REDUCING transmission. 
    Athletes are dropping dead left and right on playing fields and courts. You can't swing a dead cat in America without hitting an athlete dying from the vaccine.



    Come on now… let’s not let Damar Hamlin’s death from the vaccine and replacement with a body double by Big Pharma be for naught… we need to take these unsubstantiated reports more seriously. 
  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    Can someone give me some info about how the tax will shorten your life span as a previous poster brought up.  I would like to see the science that this pronouncement was made on.
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Posts: 48,878
    static111 said:
    Can someone give me some info about how the tax will shorten your life span as a previous poster brought up.  I would like to see the science that this pronouncement was made on.
    Wouldn't a study like that have to take, like, 9 decades or so?
    www.myspace.com
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,627
    static111 said:
    Can someone give me some info about how the tax will shorten your life span as a previous poster brought up.  I would like to see the science that this pronouncement was made on.
    The science is anyone that has a heart attack, stroke, cancer or motorcycle accident under the age of 96 obviously died of the vax. That science is unassailable.  
  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    Can someone give me some info about how the tax will shorten your life span as a previous poster brought up.  I would like to see the science that this pronouncement was made on.
    The science is anyone that has a heart attack, stroke, cancer or motorcycle accident under the age of 96 obviously died of the vax. That science is unassailable.  
    Oh thanks so if I only live to 85 my family should be able to sue Pfizer for wrongfully cutting my 170 year natural lifespan short?
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 9,062
    static111 said:
    Can someone give me some info about how the tax will shorten your life span as a previous poster brought up.  I would like to see the science that this pronouncement was made on.
    Wouldn't a study like that have to take, like, 9 decades or so?
    Exactly what big pharma wants you to think! 
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,627
    static111 said:
    Can someone give me some info about how the tax will shorten your life span as a previous poster brought up.  I would like to see the science that this pronouncement was made on.
    Wouldn't a study like that have to take, like, 9 decades or so?
    Exactly what big pharma wants you to think! 
    There's always "next level" for conspiracies.  The argument can never be finished.  It's genius.  
Sign In or Register to comment.