That was March 2020, based on info from our "friends" at the CCP.
Wearing a mask is becoming a symbol of solidarity for people that knows someone dead from SAS/CoV2. For the US with over 720,00 dead, its a lot of people wearing masks.
No. Based on all info about respiratory viruses forever. Did the virus grow? Do you shave your hair for the greater number of cancer deaths? Paint a pink heart on your shirt for the greater number of heart diseases? What do you do for the millions of my fellow Africans who die of malaria?
I don't wear a mask for solidarity. I do wear one because I know I'm susceptible to severe symptoms, my vaccine is wearing off, and law enforcement has better things to do than intervene because I feel entitled.
Many people around the western world wear ribbons for breast cancer, HIV/AIDS, and other uncontrolled maladies. Let people do things that lets them feel they are part of something. It doesn't hurt anyone.
Spend a day in a classroom and see if it does not hurt anybody. Masks have not been shown to have a positive impact on viral spread. And obviously reducing fresh air is not great. Stop encouraging healthy people and kids to participate in your fetish
We're not talking about masks in classrooms here. You don't know if anyone has been hurt, because many western countries don't trace infections sources. Because the data is not collected, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The tenet of science and methods is disproving theories. It can't be disproven unless data in collected.
We were discussing testing and lockdowns. In the UK, US, and Canada and many other countries there's never been a "true" lockdown, where cohorts are fully isolated. Testing is not mature enough to warrant decisions abandoning masks in moderately distant cohorts.
My personal opinion, it is ridiculous to expect small children classrooms to wear masks and continually sanitize their hands. However, it's a (political) compromise between covid deniers and full lockdown advocates, which current, extreme political and social partisanships has only served to further polarize positions surrounding frustrations. Until we know "who" is infected AND susceptible, the most conservative and extreme approaches will be promoted.
You may consider conservative actions a fetish, however it doesn't harm anyone where the deniers' position may. This debate would not be so strongly polarized if it wasn't strongly politicized. If govts don't mandate PIs and NPIs, they stand accused of negligence and called to resign by political opponents. If govts mandate PIs and NPIs, they stand accused of infringing on personal freedoms and called to resign by political opponents. Its the politicization of response and media outlets with political goals amplified by secondary outlets (for a variety of reasons including just wanting to see the world burn) further inflaming and entrenching extreme positions. Moderate narratives will help quell the social discord except for media outlets that are political shills.
As pointed out the medial/politics are fanning the flames. Why are you a conduit for the rage? Masks are theater, worn out in public for no purpose other than to wear a position. Stop playing and let it fade away.
Thanks for linking to Justin Hart's posting. You can plainly see the references are 'cherry picked", and little work as been done to research the funding and other authors' affiliations.
Regularly working with public health research, its become an imperative to background check author affiliations. Business biased research has always been an ethical trouble spot for research papers. Politically biased research has become a new business in its own right. Don't trust research on either side of the covid story unless you examine the history of the author's publications and fact check the citations. Often you find conclusions in cited papers do not match its application in referring paper. ( who reviewed these papers ? )
Justin Hart, like many other outlets, are being manipulated. Opinion outlets aggregate biases making them appear to be authoritative and true when in fact the truth falls somewhere in the middle. The readers must actually read an understand the research papers and identify critical differentiators, such as types of cohorts, missing mechanisms from the analysis, and the effects of statistical algorithms which in inherently creates a bias.
As for mask wearing, if people feel safer let them wear masks. Forcing preschoolers to wear masks is a bit silly, sometimes its hard enough getting them to keep clothes on and relieving themselves in "inappropriate areas". Yet, almost everyone learned to wear clothes in public and use restrooms, the ones that didn't are usually 'sequestered' away somewhere. ;)
As for masks being ineffective, I tend to disagree in certain circumstances. High density populations with low infection rates wear a super spreader is present is the best case scenario for masks. For full disclosure, the definition of "effective masks" has been a sore spot for me. Most people do not know how masks work and any political recommendation should be suspect.
Single use masks should not be considered effective after a few hours of use. Bandanas and scarfs are completely useless as PPE, yet considered legal, another political 'concession'. Most people believe masks work like a screen or a colander, a certain size will not penetrate. That is a complete invalid assumption. Masks work by "slowing" the propagation of certain size particles. That means after a few hours, the slowed particles will penetrate the mask.
Then there are mask wearing habits and fit. Some people wear masks under their noses invalidating any level of effectiveness. Improper fit and beards allows for "blow by" and leaks lowering effectiveness. Public health studies that do not consider cohort wear habits should be considered suspect, biased or incompetently executed.
Comply Sheep! The PSY Ops are insane !!! Masks are 💯 worthless except to brainwash the Masses into Submission
That was March 2020, based on info from our "friends" at the CCP.
Wearing a mask is becoming a symbol of solidarity for people that knows someone dead from SAS/CoV2. For the US with over 720,00 dead, its a lot of people wearing masks.
No. Based on all info about respiratory viruses forever. Did the virus grow? Do you shave your hair for the greater number of cancer deaths? Paint a pink heart on your shirt for the greater number of heart diseases? What do you do for the millions of my fellow Africans who die of malaria?
I don't wear a mask for solidarity. I do wear one because I know I'm susceptible to severe symptoms, my vaccine is wearing off, and law enforcement has better things to do than intervene because I feel entitled.
Many people around the western world wear ribbons for breast cancer, HIV/AIDS, and other uncontrolled maladies. Let people do things that lets them feel they are part of something. It doesn't hurt anyone.
Spend a day in a classroom and see if it does not hurt anybody. Masks have not been shown to have a positive impact on viral spread. And obviously reducing fresh air is not great. Stop encouraging healthy people and kids to participate in your fetish
We're not talking about masks in classrooms here. You don't know if anyone has been hurt, because many western countries don't trace infections sources. Because the data is not collected, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The tenet of science and methods is disproving theories. It can't be disproven unless data in collected.
We were discussing testing and lockdowns. In the UK, US, and Canada and many other countries there's never been a "true" lockdown, where cohorts are fully isolated. Testing is not mature enough to warrant decisions abandoning masks in moderately distant cohorts.
My personal opinion, it is ridiculous to expect small children classrooms to wear masks and continually sanitize their hands. However, it's a (political) compromise between covid deniers and full lockdown advocates, which current, extreme political and social partisanships has only served to further polarize positions surrounding frustrations. Until we know "who" is infected AND susceptible, the most conservative and extreme approaches will be promoted.
You may consider conservative actions a fetish, however it doesn't harm anyone where the deniers' position may. This debate would not be so strongly polarized if it wasn't strongly politicized. If govts don't mandate PIs and NPIs, they stand accused of negligence and called to resign by political opponents. If govts mandate PIs and NPIs, they stand accused of infringing on personal freedoms and called to resign by political opponents. Its the politicization of response and media outlets with political goals amplified by secondary outlets (for a variety of reasons including just wanting to see the world burn) further inflaming and entrenching extreme positions. Moderate narratives will help quell the social discord except for media outlets that are political shills.
Justin Hart from Rational Ground just dropped an article, 'Your Mask Study Cheatsheet -12 studies and articles about the fecklessness of masking society and children" https://covidreason.substack.com/p/your-mask-study-cheetsheet?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxMzUzNjk5NiwicG9zdF9pZCI6NDI4NTEwMTMsIl8iOiJVNVlybyIsImlhdCI6MTYzNDczNjQ5MSwiZXhwIjoxNjM0NzQwMDkxLCJpc3MiOiJwdWItNjQyOTUiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0._UtBxVzYSQK0nCGJqTHHD-ScmhPHQ6bsj0ul3b4aHt0
As pointed out the medial/politics are fanning the flames. Why are you a conduit for the rage? Masks are theater, worn out in public for no purpose other than to wear a position. Stop playing and let it fade away.
Thanks for linking to Justin Hart's posting. You can plainly see the references are 'cherry picked", and little work as been done to research the funding and other authors' affiliations.
Regularly working with public health research, its become an imperative to background check author affiliations. Business biased research has always been an ethical trouble spot for research papers. Politically biased research has become a new business in its own right. Don't trust research on either side of the covid story unless you examine the history of the author's publications and fact check the citations. Often you find conclusions in cited papers do not match its application in referring paper. ( who reviewed these papers ? )
Justin Hart, like many other outlets, are being manipulated. Opinion outlets aggregate biases making them appear to be authoritative and true when in fact the truth falls somewhere in the middle. The readers must actually read an understand the research papers and identify critical differentiators, such as types of cohorts, missing mechanisms from the analysis, and the effects of statistical algorithms which in inherently creates a bias.
As for mask wearing, if people feel safer let them wear masks. Forcing preschoolers to wear masks is a bit silly, sometimes its hard enough getting them to keep clothes on and relieving themselves in "inappropriate areas". Yet, almost everyone learned to wear clothes in public and use restrooms, the ones that didn't are usually 'sequestered' away somewhere. ;)
As for masks being ineffective, I tend to disagree in certain circumstances. High density populations with low infection rates wear a super spreader is present is the best case scenario for masks. For full disclosure, the definition of "effective masks" has been a sore spot for me. Most people do not know how masks work and any political recommendation should be suspect.
Single use masks should not be considered effective after a few hours of use. Bandanas and scarfs are completely useless as PPE, yet considered legal, another political 'concession'. Most people believe masks work like a screen or a colander, a certain size will not penetrate. That is a complete invalid assumption. Masks work by "slowing" the propagation of certain size particles. That means after a few hours, the slowed particles will penetrate the mask.
Then there are mask wearing habits and fit. Some people wear masks under their noses invalidating any level of effectiveness. Improper fit and beards allows for "blow by" and leaks lowering effectiveness. Public health studies that do not consider cohort wear habits should be considered suspect, biased or incompetently executed.
Don't you love how "science" changes so quickly and irrationally.
Ha!
Insane....the tyranny has to stop
I am from Canada, and ran a quick search on a gov website:
https://www.canada.ca/en/sr/srb.html?cdn=canada&st=s&num=10&langs=en&st1rt=1&s5bm3ts21rch=x&q=Tear+gas&wb-srch-sub=
The tender for tear gas for their covid 19 response, was put out in 2016.
Chris, please look into this one. The Canadian gov knew about covid 3 years beforehand.