Study of 1 million students finds that universal masking works

[COTO]

Your child having COVID vs vaccine has a factor of probably at least a 1000 in favor of vaccine as far as both short- and long-term effects

Considering we don't even know what the long-term effects of the vaccine are yet, and "probably at least a 1000" is suspiciously close to "a million bajillion", I'll hold on to my skepticism a while longer.

 

[tempest62]

Ranting... Nothing but ranting.

Why don't you want people to help prevent the transmission of COVID?

Because thats exactly whats behind the entire mask joke of a lie.

Why do you fall for it?

Any notion of preventing transmission of the CCP-Wuhan-Fauchi-Gates bio attack is the big lie. It was developed to transmit no matter how much you idolize masks and the injections, and neither one are relevant.

No matter how much a population tapes a chinese face diaper and shoots the pathenogenic toxin into their bloodstreams, covid-19 will have its way

Natural herd immunity is the winner here, not oxygen starvation or voluntary/soon to be involuntary injections of a toxic poison.

 

[COTO]

I have the feeling the authors were more interested in !earning if it was safe to send kids back to school at all with Delta raging in a community. What they used for comparison was the incidence of Covid in the community. The same was used in the other states' studies. Even in areas with very high incidence in the community, schools with universal masking did not spread the disease to any degree. This was true even in schools that couldn't social distance. What it does say is that it's safe to send kids to school with adequate precautions.

Again, how do we know that it was masking specifically that was responsible for transmission rates in schools? There were no controls.

A better question might be: If COVID is "raging in a community" despite kids masking in schools, does this not suggest that kids masking in schools--even presuming the measure is effective--is like applying a band-aid to a gaping wound?

 

[Fledermaus]

Because thats exactly whats behind the entire mask joke of a lie.

Why do you fall for it?

Any notion of preventing transmission of the CCP-Wuhan-Fauchi-Gates bio attack is the big lie. It was developed to transmit no matter how much you idolize masks and the injections, and neither one are relevant.

No matter how much a population tapes a chinese face diaper and shoots the pathenogenic toxin into their bloodstreams, covid-19 will have its way

Natural herd immunity is the winner here, not oxygen starvation or voluntary/soon to be involuntary injections of a toxic poison.

Nice rant. I give you 7 out of 10 on the Gish Gallop scale.

The whole bio weapon thing. You went full CT.

And what "pathenogenic toxin" are you babing about?

The oxygen starvation thing has been debunked eight ways to Sunday.

Natural immunity has been proven to have failed as people who have had COVID caught it again.

Seems like you can't get much right about COVID prevention.

 

[Slavister]

Considering we don't even know what the long-term effects of the vaccine are yet,

From short- to intermediate-term effects we know vaccine is over 1000 times safer. Easily

and "probably at least a 1000" is suspiciously close to "a million bajillion", I'll hold on to my skepticism a while longer.

I have no doubts that you will.

 

[COTO]

From short- to intermediate-term effects we know vaccine is over 1000 times safer. Easily

The CDC numbers indicate that child ICU admittance due to COVID-19 was 0.1% (mortality rate <0.01%). Also, that the percentage of vaccinated persons who experienced "serious adverse events", which are defined as "any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability/incapacity", was 0.6% for adults and 0.4% for children.

True, the serious adverse events can't be definitively attributed to the vaccination. However: i) if the data indicate anything, it's certainly not that the vaccination presents less of a risk of serious harm than COVID, and ii) it shouldn't be lost on you that the percentage of kids who experienced serious adverse events as a routine consequence of living during the test period is 400% as large as the number of kids who went into the ICU as a result of COVID, and over 40 times as large as the number of kids who died from COVID.

Hence I'd really like to see where you get your "Over 1,000 times safer. Easily." from.

 

[Slavister]

Hence I'd really like to see where you get your "Over 1,000 times safer. Easily." from.

For starters, what percentage of kids died from covid and what percentage of kids died from vaccines so far? As far as I know the second number is 0.

It's also not lost on me that you chose 0.1% for ICU admissions for kids but somehow "forgot" the more comparable 1.2% number for kids that requires hospitalizations due to covid. As for vaccines, as you pointed out, serious adverse events has not shown causal relationship to vaccine itself. I am sure it's more than 0 for these but we can't attribute all of them at all.

The other difference relates not just to effect on kids but also kids spreading covid to their families / friends thus making virus circulate a lot more (let alone mutate). We want to stop community transmission - having kids spread them around through schools will significantly obstruct our progress in that regard.

Finally, it's yet to know what long term effects covid might have or vaccines but at least with vaccines we know they were not designed to have long term issues while covid... well, who knows - chances are you are safer with vaccine than covid in terms of years-away impact.

 

[MaryP]

Again, how do we know that it was masking specifically that was responsible for transmission rates in schools? There were no controls.

A better question might be: If COVID is "raging in a community" despite kids masking in schools, does this not suggest that kids masking in schools--even presuming the measure is effective--is like applying a band-aid to a gaping wound?

No, it allows the kids to go to school with minimum risk.

 

[reflechissez]

Lol, tell that to Fauci.

Fauci Said Masks 'Not Really Effective,' Email Reveals

The infectious diseases expert told a traveler in February 2020 that she did not need to wear a face covering as she was going to a "very low-risk location."

www.newsweek.com

So, do you wear a mask or not?

 

[tempest62]

Nice rant. I give you 7 out of 10 on the Gish Gallop scale.

The whole bio weapon thing. You went full CT.

And what "pathenogenic toxin" are you babing about?

The oxygen starvation thing has been debunked eight ways to Sunday.

Natural immunity has been proven to have failed as people who have had COVID caught it again.

Seems like you can't get much right about COVID prevention.

There is no such animal as covid prevention.

There are much better ways of addressing the bio attack, that's the treatments we have now.....actually treatments we had last year but were shitcanned by the asshole mother-****ers in the agenda driven medical establisment who should be hung and burned alive for what they've done.....and not injecting ones self with a pathogenic poison thats already proving to be weaksauce, or even sillier yet wearing the liberal "I'm better than you!" symbol of virtuous subjugation in the infamous assinine goofball worthless chinese diaper strapped to thy face.

 

[Fledermaus]

There is no such animal as covid prevention.

There are much better ways of addressing the bio attack, that's the treatments we have now.....actually treatments we had last year but were shitcanned by the asshole mother-****ers in the agenda driven medical establisment who should be hung and burned alive for what they've done.....and not injecting ones self with a pathogenic poison thats already proving to be weaksauce, or even sillier yet wearing the liberal "I'm better than you!" symbol of virtuous subjugation in the infamous assinine goofball worthless chinese diaper strapped to thy face.

Congratulations....

Your first sentence has topped the "Stupidest Statement of the Week" catagory.

The rest of your post is the usual melange of ignorance, Conspiracy Theory and accusations sans evidence.

And what is the "pathogenic toxin/poison" you keep babbling about?

 

[COTO]

For starters, what percentage of kids died from covid and what percentage of kids died from vaccines so far? As far as I know the second number is 0.

You're comparing numbers so close to zero that it doesn't really matter. If a child has a greater chance of dying in a car crash while driving to the vaccination center than of dying by the vaccine--or COVID--then the ratio between the latter two hardly matters, does it?

It's also not lost on me that you chose 0.1% for ICU admissions for kids but somehow "forgot" the more comparable 1.2% number for kids that requires hospitalizations due to covid. As for vaccines, as you pointed out, serious adverse events has not shown causal relationship to vaccine itself. I am sure it's more than 0 for these but we can't attribute all of them at all.

Two of my elderly friends were hospitalized for COVID. Neither was in any distress, but doctors wanted to monitor them because of their age and other factors. One was discharged after a day, the other after a few days, without incident, but both count as "COVID hospitalizations". I don't believe it appropriate to put this kind of abundance of caution into the same class as "serious adverse events". When somebody goes into the ICU, then it's serious.

The other difference relates not just to effect on kids but also kids spreading covid to their families / friends thus making virus circulate a lot more (let alone mutate). We want to stop community transmission - having kids spread them around through schools will significantly obstruct our progress in that regard.

This argument hinges on the claim that the vaccine meaningfully reduces transmission rates, which was evidently true for the original strain of COVID but not the case with the delta or lambda variants. Furthermore, it's not relevant to your "Over 1,000 times safer. Easily." claim.

Finally, it's yet to know what long term effects covid might have or vaccines but at least with vaccines we know they were not designed to have long term issues while covid... well, who knows - chances are you are safer with vaccine than covid in terms of years-away impact.

The long-term impacts of both COVID and COVID vaccines are known unknowns. You cannot quantify risks with unknowns. You can speculate, hope, and prognosticate, but you cannot quantify.

"Over 1,000 times safer. Easily." is a quantitative statement. I sincerely hope there are no long-term effects ultimately linked to the vaccines, and I dare even hope it's likely there will be no long-term effects, but vaccines normally go through rigorous testing for many years precisely because we do not know this.

The risk is magnified by the fact that the percentage of kids getting stuck for COVID is a large multiple of the kids who will actually contract COVID. If this factor is 8, say, then the vaccine has to be at least 8 times as safe as a COVID infection just to break even. That includes both short and long-term consequences.

 

[Hafnium1979]

Considering we don't even know what the long-term effects of the vaccine are yet, and "probably at least a 1000" is suspiciously close to "a million bajillion", I'll hold on to my skepticism a while longer.

This is one of those aspects of the whole thing that causes me some concern. I got the vaccine because I sense the risk is lower for it than COVID which we know can do some damage. But I would be the last person to force anyone to take a risk with their own bodies they don't feel safe about.

The only thing I think is reasonable to ask of people who find the vax too risky is that they voluntarily remove themselves from society since there are people out there who cannot get the vax due to immunosuppression and anyone who "voluntarily" doesn't take the vax is an unnecessary threat to those who cannot take the vaccine.

Everyone can make a choice, but every choice has a cost.

 

[COTO]

This is one of those aspects of the whole thing that causes me some concern. I got the vaccine because I sense the risk is lower for it than COVID which we know can do some damage. But I would be the last person to force anyone to take a risk with their own bodies they don't feel safe about.

The only thing I think is reasonable to ask of people who find the vax too risky is that they voluntarily remove themselves from society since there are people out there who cannot get the vax due to immunosuppression and anyone who "voluntarily" doesn't take the vax is an unnecessary threat to those who cannot take the vaccine.

Everyone can make a choice, but every choice has a cost.

I have no opposition to things like a mandatory "negative" COVID test prior to boarding a plane, for example.

Given the vaccines are showing progressively less effectiveness of preventing transmission of the disease as time passes and new variants emerge, I daresay a negative COVID test to travel--for everyone, not just the unvaccinated--would be a far better way of containing the disease.

People worried about the unknowns associated with the vaccines aren't divested of their bodily autonomy, and vaccinated persons who are nevertheless infected with COVID aren't blithely wandering around the nation infecting everyone because they believe the vaccine prevents this from happening.

ETA: My main problem with masking is that we can't do it forever, and we have no exit strategy. I stand by my comparison of bailing out a sinking ship. We cannot bail forever, and if there's no hope that the ship won't eventually sink, why not stop bailing sooner than later?

 

[Ethel2]

I have no opposition to things like a mandatory "negative" COVID test prior to boarding a plane, for example.

Given the vaccines are showing progressively less effectiveness of preventing transmission of the disease as time passes and new variants emerge, I daresay a negative COVID test to travel--for everyone, not just the unvaccinated--would be a far better way of containing the disease.

People worried about the unknowns associated with the vaccines aren't divested of their bodily autonomy, and vaccinated persons who are nevertheless infected with COVID aren't blithely wandering around the nation infecting everyone because they believe the vaccine prevents this from happening.

ETA: My main problem with masking is that we can't do it forever, and we have no exit strategy. I stand by my comparison of bailing out a sinking ship. We cannot bail forever, and if there's no hope that the ship won't eventually sink, why not stop bailing sooner than later?

Vaccines + infections in the covidiots will reduce the pandemic to scattered outbreaks.
This won’t last forever.

 

[Ethel2]

You're comparing numbers so close to zero that it doesn't really matter. If a child has a greater chance of dying in a car crash while driving to the vaccination center than of dying by the vaccine--or COVID--then the ratio between the latter two hardly matters, does it?


Two of my elderly friends were hospitalized for COVID. Neither was in any distress, but doctors wanted to monitor them because of their age and other factors. One was discharged after a day, the other after a few days, without incident, but both count as "COVID hospitalizations". I don't believe it appropriate to put this kind of abundance of caution into the same class as "serious adverse events". When somebody goes into the ICU, then it's serious.


This argument hinges on the claim that the vaccine meaningfully reduces transmission rates, which was evidently true for the original strain of COVID but not the case with the delta or lambda variants. Furthermore, it's not relevant to your "Over 1,000 times safer. Easily." claim.


The long-term impacts of both COVID and COVID vaccines are known unknowns. You cannot quantify risks with unknowns. You can speculate, hope, and prognosticate, but you cannot quantify.

"Over 1,000 times safer. Easily." is a quantitative statement. I sincerely hope there are no long-term effects ultimately linked to the vaccines, and I dare even hope it's likely there will be no long-term effects, but vaccines normally go through rigorous testing for many years precisely because we do not know this.

The risk is magnified by the fact that the percentage of kids getting stuck for COVID is a large multiple of the kids who will actually contract COVID. If this factor is 8, say, then the vaccine has to be at least 8 times as safe as a COVID infection just to break even. That includes both short and long-term consequences.

No, you can’t know the long term side effects from the vaccine.
However, we do know this: number of vaccines that have side effects delayed by more than a few months:

ZERO

 

[tempest62]

This is one of those aspects of the whole thing that causes me some concern. I got the vaccine because I sense the risk is lower for it than COVID which we know can do some damage. But I would be the last person to force anyone to take a risk with their own bodies they don't feel safe about.

The only thing I think is reasonable to ask of people who find the vax too risky is that they voluntarily remove themselves from society since there are people out there who cannot get the vax due to immunosuppression and anyone who "voluntarily" doesn't take the vax is an unnecessary threat to those who cannot take the vaccine.

Everyone can make a choice, but every choice has a cost.

Those who refuse the injection voluntarily remove ones self from society? Excuse me not, but I consider YOU a threat to me because you fell for the jab, and you shedding on me is a threat to my own survival. As a healthy person, I absolutely consider the jab as nefarious in and of itself and being more dangerous than the CCP-Wuhan-Fauchi-Gates bio attack.

 

[tempest62]

No, you can’t know the long term side effects from the vaccine.
However, we do know this: number of vaccines that have side effects delayed by more than a few months:

ZERO

it is NOT a vaccine.

 

[Ethel2]

it is NOT a vaccine.

I have posted the definition of “vaccine” here several times. The mRNA fits every definition of the word. You look up the definition if you like. But if it makes you feel better you can call it anything you like.
let’s call it…..a commode. Would that work for you?

 

[tempest62]

I have posted the definition of “vaccine” here several times. The mRNA fits every definition of the word. You look up the definition if you like. But if it makes you feel better you can call it anything you like.
let’s call it…..a commode. Would that work for you?

No that doesn't work.

It is a genetic biologic, not a vaccine. A true vaccine provides immunity, which means the disease is entirely prevented.

There is no prevention, no immunity.

 

[Ethel2]

No that doesn't work.

It is a genetic biologic, not a vaccine.

Ok
One more time here is the definition. In the case of the mRNA vaccines the piece of “the causative agent “ is produced internally rather than externally. But it’s still a piece of the causative agent:

“a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.”

 

[tempest62]

Ok
One more time here is the definition. In the case of the mRNA vaccines the piece of “the causative agent “ is produced internally rather than externally. But it’s still a piece of the causative agent:

“a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.”

Your definition is irrelevant.

It DOES NOT provide immunity. Therefore it IS NOT a valid vaccine.

They openly LIE and you eat it up, and so do too many others.

 

[Ethel2]

Your definition is irrelevant.

It DOES NOT provide immunity. Therefore it IS NOT a valid vaccine.

They openly LIE and you eat it up, and so do too many others.

It’s highly protective against the virus, especially against severe disease. Like any other vaccine in existence it’s not 100% effective. The VACCINES raise antibody levels (like any other vaccine) to the point that the virus can’t cause symptomatic infection in a high percentage of people.

You have apparently swallowed the misinformation out there and therefore live in a different reality where masks and vaccines are ineffective and Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are real.
It’s impossible to have a rational discussion with people who live in a different reality; there are no intersecting points.
I don’t care what you call the Moderna and Pfizer products as long as you get your vaccine

 

[tempest62]

It’s highly protective against the virus, especially against severe disease. Like any other vaccine in existence it’s not 100% effective. The VACCINES raise antibody levels (like any other vaccine) to the point that the virus can’t cause symptomatic infection in a high percentage of people.

You have apparently swallowed the misinformation out there and therefore live in a different reality where masks and vaccines are ineffective and Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are real.
It’s impossible to have a rational discussion with people who live in a different reality; there are no intersecting points.
I don’t care what you call the Moderna and Pfizer products as long as you get your vaccine

I dont care what you call them either, and the answer is a steel-walled NO.

 

[tempest62]

When you get the measles vaccine, do you get the measles? The answer is NO, you dont get it at all. That means it is a vaccine.

Misinformation? You fell for the entire cabal. Now hurry up and get your booster shots, fill up on the spike proteins even more and enjoy your increased dose of graphene oxide.