Imagine If They Hadn’t Lied To Us For The Last 18 Months

[VySky]

Healthcare workers don’t deserve this.

You’re right. They should find another job if they can’t handle it.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Wait, how do you know? Do you have access to any studies that demonstrate the opposite of what I'm saying? I refer specifically to the rate of the spread of Covid-19 in a population. I agree that wearing a cloth around your face isn't a perfect solution. But I am not trying to prove it's a perfect solution. I am only saying that for a population as a whole if everyone is encouraged to wear masks, the rate of the spread of Covid-19 declines as compared to a situation where no one is encouraged to wear masks.

Yes. I have read several studies related to masks and covid-19 in general.

Look. Improperly wearing a mask still allows about half of the aerosols to circulate in the air. Half the concentration is almost as likely to affect someon than the full concentration from an infected person. The approximately half of the aerosols does not equate to approximately half the infection. It approximates close to 95% of the infections.

It could be true that temperature/humidity and other variables influence the rate of the spread of Covid-19 and also true that masks help reduce the spread of the virus amongst an entire population.

It is an undisputed scientific observation that temperature and humidity play a factor for virus transmission in an aerosol form. Improperly worn masks are almost no help if you are already practicing the 6 foot distancing, as face coverings are only effective for spittle. Only a properly worn N95 mask has any functional credibility against covid-19.

 

[redbeer]

Bullshit. Fer chrissakes, educate yourself.
Here-- https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/the-wuhan-lab-and-the-gain-of-function-disagreement/

Lol, factcheck.org....that's funny.

Republicans argue Fauci emails show NIH funded gain-of-function research at Wuhan lab

Top House Republicans argue that emails and other evidence show that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases funded gain-of-function

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Anthony Fauci Defends Funding of Wuhan Lab: 'Would Be Negligent' to Not 'Pursue That Research'

Dr. Anthony Fauci is once more making his rounds on the Sunday Shows. During this most recent appear

townhall.com

Emails Show Fauci Downplayed Funding Gain Of Function Research At Wuhan Lab

Dr. Anthony Fauci knew about U.S. funding for the gain of function research occurring at the Wuhan lab in China but downplayed its role in the COVID-19 pandemic, new emails show.

thefederalist.com

 

[redbeer]

What 'facts'? One day you might learn that gain-of-function research isn't the evil thing you clearly believe it is, and is essential in understanding how viruses behave and how, by increasing their virulence in a laboratory setting, we can learn how to combat them as they mutate. But keep reading the New York Comic for your 'facts'.

Yeah, like censoring, canceling, and suppressing anything to do with the Wuhan Lab leak......all lying sack of shits, period.

 

[snakestretcher]

Yeah, like censoring, canceling, and suppressing anything to do with the Wuhan Lab leak......all lying sack of shits, period.

So, if something was allegedly suppressed, how would you know?

 

[redbeer]

So, if something was allegedly suppressed, how would you know?

Huh, where have you been living??.....posts deleted, accounts banned on Twitter or Facebook and Youtube, for even merely suggesting the leak came from the Wuhan Lab.....now we know better.

 

[snakestretcher]

Huh, where have you been living??.....posts deleted, accounts banned on Twitter or Facebook and Youtube, for even merely suggesting the leak came from the Wuhan Lab.....now we know better.

We know better? How? Are you privy to whatever you think went on in Wuhan? If Facebook etc., deleted anything it would be because it contravened their code of practise. Private businesses can do that. Don't like it? Tough.

 

[Luckyone]

That’s my biggest gripe. Except we call it moving the goal post.

Fauci should be escorted from the facilities today and fired
—————-
Everybody wrap something around your face again even though they said you wouldn’t need to if you got vaxxed!

But they didn’t lie – no, apparently a bunch of people – and not just those evil white nationalist-Christian-gun-Jesus-flag people – are refusing to get the vaccine, and the reason is that they are moral defectives somehow in thrall to Tucker Carlson’s Svengali-like powers of persuasion.

You see, the people who won’t get it are stupid people who hate science because they refuse to trust the people who have spent the last year-and-a-half lying to them.

Imagine If They Hadn’t Lied to Us for the Last 18 Months

Everybody wrap something around your face again even though they said you wouldn’t need to if you go

townhall.com

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Yes. I have read several studies related to masks and covid-19 in general.

Look. Improperly wearing a mask still allows about half of the aerosols to circulate in the air. Half the concentration is almost as likely to affect someon than the full concentration from an infected person. The approximately half of the aerosols does not equate to approximately half the infection. It approximates close to 95% of the infections.

This is like pulling teeth. I am talking about studies that look at entire populations. I wrote, "I refer specifically to the rate of the spread of Covid-19 in a population"

I accept much of what you're saying -- in general (I have quibbles about some of your conclusions) -- about the inadequacies of cloth masks. But I am not trying to argue in favor of the idea that cloth masks are perfect or that people always perfectly wear cloth masks. I am trying to argue in favor of the idea that mask mandates, on the whole, work to bring down the rate of the spread of Covid-19 in population groups.

It is an undisputed scientific observation that temperature and humidity play a factor for virus transmission in an aerosol form. Improperly worn masks are almost no help if you are already practicing the 6 foot distancing, as face coverings are only effective for spittle. Only a properly worn N95 mask has any functional credibility against covid-19.

1. You keep thinking in terms of absolutes. The real world does not operate in terms of absolutes. The systems -- that is the population groups as a whole -- we are interacting with do not operate in terms of absolutes.

2. I am not arguing against the idea that temperature and humidity play a factor in virus transmission. I am arguing against the idea you promoted that a failure to take these variables into account somehow invalidates the study, or somehow invalidates the idea that despite the flaws of cloth masks the mask mandates still work for population groups as a whole. Why is this point I'm making important? The goal is not to make sure people are perfectly protected against every virus particle. The goal is to slow the rate of the spread of the disease in a population group. Does that make sense? I keep writing this, but it's like you're ignoring what I'm writing.

 

[Lord of Planar]

This is like pulling teeth. I am talking about studies that look at entire populations. I wrote, "I refer specifically to the rate of the spread of Covid-19 in a population"

And how can their conclusion be valid when not regarding seasons and climate?

I accept much of what you're saying -- in general (I have quibbles about some of your conclusions) -- about the inadequacies of cloth masks. But I am not trying to argue in favor of the idea that cloth masks are perfect or that people always perfectly wear cloth masks. I am trying to argue in favor of the idea that mask mandates, on the whole, work to bring down the rate of the spread of Covid-19 in population groups.

One of the studies I read had a simple homemade cloth mask as effect as the N95 mask. It consisted of a layer of 600 thread cotton, and a layer of natural silk. The minute static charge caused by the minor friction of these materials together created a static charge that dramatically helped stop aerosols from going through the mask, and was easy to breath through.

Do you understand how small these aerosols can be?

1. You keep thinking in terms of absolutes. The real world does not operate in terms of absolutes. The systems -- that is the population groups as a whole -- we are interacting with do not operate in terms of absolutes.

Hence a built in failure for some things.

2. I am not arguing against the idea that temperature and humidity play a factor in virus transmission. I am arguing against the idea you promoted that a failure to take these variables into account somehow invalidates the study, or somehow invalidates the idea that despite the flaws of cloth masks the mask mandates still work for population groups as a whole. Why is this point I'm making important? The goal is not to make sure people are perfectly protected against every virus particle. The goal is to slow the rate of the spread of the disease in a population group. Does that make sense? I keep writing this, but it's like you're ignoring what I'm writing.

It completely invalidates the quantification of a study. Sure, the study is probably accurate for what they considered. Invalid because important aspects were not considered.

 

[Lutherf]

Trump should have fired Fauci June 2020.

Unfortunately, if Trump had fired Fauci in the summer of 2020 that would have only poured gasoline on the propaganda and fear campaign.

 

[Rexedgar]

Unfortunately, if Trump had fired Fauci in the summer of 2020 that would have only poured gasoline on the propaganda and fear campaign.

In your opinion, what is the objective of this propaganda and fear campaign?

 

[Lord of Planar]

In your opinion, what is the objective of this propaganda and fear campaign?

For me, business as usual.

The world medias hat a hot story, and they kept making things worse.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

And how can their conclusion be valid when not regarding seasons and climate?

1. Conceptionally, philosophically, this isn't a yes/no or binary kind of thing. A study can be useful despite the fact it doesn't include or consider every variable that might be useful. I accept you are less willing to form a conclusion derived from the study because it lacks analysis or discussion of variables you consider important. But your lack of confidence in a conclusion derived from the study doesn't invalidate the study.

2. It's important to note that researchers have studied multiple states and multiple countries from different geographic areas and also at different periods of time. It makes consideration of temp/humidity less urgent because if you're looking at population groups experiencing divergent or different temp/humidity, and if you're looking at population groups at different moments in time, we can trust the fact that mask-wearing mandates are probably still useful despite lack of granular/detailed information about temp/humidity.

One of the studies I read had a simple homemade cloth mask as effect as the N95 mask. It consisted of a layer of 600 thread cotton, and a layer of natural silk. The minute static charge caused by the minor friction of these materials together created a static charge that dramatically helped stop aerosols from going through the mask, and was easy to breath through.

Do you understand how small these aerosols can be?

I am not disagreeing with you about the ineffectiveness of cloth masks or the inability of people to wear masks correctly. What you take from that is that because people's cloth masks are not 100% effective and because people do not wear masks correctly with 100% correctness that mask mandates, therefore, are then ENTIRELY useless. The large-scale population studies indicate this is not the case, and that despite everything, mask mandates probably work to bring down the rate of the spread of the disease.

A solution does not have to be perfectly optimized for it to be useful and lead to practical, positive results in the real world. Good enough is sometimes good enough. And we see that in the data with respect to masks.

A practical way of looking at this is that maybe a cloth mask doesn't stop a restaurant customer from spreading Covid-19 to dozens of people in the room, maybe it stops a restaurant customer from spreading it to most people in the room, and maybe he only infects, 2, or 3, or 5, or whatever. But because the spread is reduced on a per-incident basis as compared to what the spread would be without a mask mandate, this can result in lowering the total case rate in an entire population.

It completely invalidates the quantification of a study. Sure, the study is probably accurate for what they considered. Invalid because important aspects were not considered.

You keep looking at things from an all-or-nothing perspective. The study looked at the data and when a mask mandate was implemented in some particular state the authors of the study saw an immediate drop in new cases. That's it. There's nothing much more to the study. The "quantification" of the study isn't "invalidated" because it didn't take into account other factors.

You are CORRECT in suggesting it might simply be a coincidence. I think it's fair to say one might be less confident in forming a conclusion based solely on the study because other factors might be causing this drop in new cases and not the mask mandates, and that is a reasonable thing to suggest; however, to say the study is "completely invalidated" doesn't make any sense.

It may or may not be true that temp/humidity and other factors were the primary determinants that drove the number of new cases down in each of those areas.

It may or may not be true that the mask mandate drove the number of new cases down in each of those areas.

Hence a built in failure for some things.

This makes sense, in general, but how are you applying the concept of redundancy to the current discussion?

 

[uptower]

 

[Lord of Planar]

1. Conceptionally, philosophically, this isn't a yes/no or binary kind of thing. A study can be useful despite the fact it doesn't include or consider every variable that might be useful.

Oh please stop. When you have two different regions that treat masking different, but also have a temperature/humidity difference, the study is invalid when you cannot separate between the two variables.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Oh please stop. When you have two different regions that treat masking different, but also have a temperature/humidity difference, the study is invalid when you cannot separate between the two variables.

We have two competing theories.

One theory says mask mandates work to lower cases in a population.

Another theory says mask mandates do not work to lower cases in a population.

You say the study I referenced is "invalid" because it doesn't delve into an analysis of temp/humidity differences and other variables. But "invalid" is not the right word. Absent evidence to the contrary, the worst you can say is that it is incomplete.

 

[Lord of Planar]

We have two competing theories.

One theory says mask mandates work to lower cases in a population.

Another theory says mask mandates do not work to lower cases in a population.

You say the study I referenced is "invalid" because it doesn't delve into an analysis of temp/humidity differences and other variables. But "invalid" is not the right word. Absent evidence to the contrary, the worst you can say is that it is incomplete.

How about we leave it at that.

 

[bluesmoke]

How about we leave it at that.

Hence, leaving it at that, your claim of "invalid" is unfounded and evidence given that is "incomplete" nonetheless does support, to whatever limited extent due to reasons given, the effectiveness of mask wearing in controlling the spread of COVID.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Hence, leaving it at that, your claim of "invalid" is unfounded and evidence given that is "incomplete" nonetheless does support, to whatever limited extent due to reasons given, the effectiveness of mask wearing in controlling the spread of COVID.

Not at all. I just understand that this is an endless debate and I will not convince people with facts.

 

[bluesmoke]

Not at all. I just understand that this is an endless debate and I will not convince people with facts.

Convince them of what? I used fact to prove that your claim of "invalid" was unfounded and that even if evidence is, instead, "incomplete" can still support the claim made. "Invalid" is not a fact. Efficacy is a fact. Low efficacy does not mean not effective at all is also fact.