Page 923 of 1526
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 8:48 am
by Farva
The virus can spread from person to person through:
close contact with an infectious person (including in the 48 hours before they had symptoms)
contact with droplets from an infected person’s cough or sneeze
touching objects or surfaces (like doorknobs or tables) that have droplets from an infected person, and then touching your mouth or face.
https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-a ... r%20sneeze.
Is the Australian Department of Health wrong?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 10:00 am
by Jensrsa
South Africa has received the first batch of the Pfizer vaccine. This amid renewed concerns that the Johnson and Johnson vaccine rollout may be somewhat delayed again
SA receives first batch of Pfizer vaccine
Still pisses me off that the J&J vaccines manufactured in SA are exported and then we have to import it again
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 10:03 am
by bimboman
contact with droplets from an infected person’s cough or sneeze
Or much more likely contact with someone’s breath .....
Why haven’t they said that?
Or that masks do nothing to contain a sneeze....
Were the British and America governments and health departments and chief scientists wrong last year advising that masks made little or no difference in community spreading ?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 10:19 am
by Farva
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:03 am
contact with droplets from an infected person’s cough or sneeze
Or much more likely contact with someone’s breath .....
Why haven’t they said that?
Or that masks do nothing to contain a sneeze....
Were the British and America governments and health departments and chief scientists wrong last year advising that masks made little or no difference in community spreading ?
Holey shit you actually think that virus cells just float around as individual cells don’t you.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 10:56 am
by bimboman
Farva wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:19 am
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:03 am
contact with droplets from an infected person’s cough or sneeze
Or much more likely contact with someone’s breath .....
Why haven’t they said that?
Or that masks do nothing to contain a sneeze....
Were the British and America governments and health departments and chief scientists wrong last year advising that masks made little or no difference in community spreading ?
Holey shit you actually think that virus cells just float around as individual cells don’t you.
So the answer to health department advice for a corona virus less than 12 months ago is some weird answer about where the virus lives .
You can’t answer the question then regarding the advice from the US and UK governments
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:02 am
by message #2527204
A virus isn't a cellular organism.
Anyone shedding virus will fill a room within 1/2 hour with aerosols containing viral particles, simply from breathing ... mask or no mask.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:22 am
by bimboman
You can choose :
A) masks are important and our scientists and politicians chose to lie to us for months as people were infected and died.
B) our scientists and politicians are lying about masks now.
It’s A or B folks.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:24 am
by JB1981
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:56 am
Farva wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:19 am
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:03 am
contact with droplets from an infected person’s cough or sneeze
Or much more likely contact with someone’s breath .....
Why haven’t they said that?
Or that masks do nothing to contain a sneeze....
Were the British and America governments and health departments and chief scientists wrong last year advising that masks made little or no difference in community spreading ?
Holey shit you actually think that virus cells just float around as individual cells don’t you.
So the answer to health department advice for a corona virus less than 12 months ago is some weird answer about where the virus lives .
You can’t answer the question then regarding the advice from the US and UK governments
I don’t know about the UK but hasn’t Fauci said the US advice was partially due to concerns about mask supply for medical professionals (i.e. wanting to ensure supply wasn’t all taken by the public) and has also added that more is now known about the effectiveness of different types of masks (cloth etc) from the early days of the pandemic?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:32 am
by ovalball
Farva wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:19 am
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:03 am
contact with droplets from an infected person’s cough or sneeze
Were the British and America governments and health departments and chief scientists wrong last year advising that masks made little or no difference in community spreading ?
Holey shit you actually think that virus cells just float around as individual cells don’t you.
Unlike some idiots on here, those Governments (and the WHO) change their advice based on new evidence, and scientific opinion, which has concluded that masks provide some protection in certain circumstances.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:33 am
by bimboman
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:31 am
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:22 am
You can choose :
A) masks are important and our scientists and politicians chose to lie to us for months as people were infected and died.
B) our scientists and politicians are lying about masks now.
It’s A or B folks.
No it’s not, they may have not had enough evidence to support mask wearing at the time for the general public and it was only as more research was released that recommendation changed, I don’t know and neither do you.
They’ve neither backed nor published anything to suggest this would be the case. There’s only been one controlled study since covid. Plenty of studies existed for Corona viruses before 2019 (were they so inept they never looked).
We do know the answer considering this.
I do enjoy the likes of you defending the Tory politicians though. It’s quite amusing,
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:41 am
by Farva
JB1981 wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:24 am
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:56 am
Farva wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:19 am
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:03 am
contact with droplets from an infected person’s cough or sneeze
Or much more likely contact with someone’s breath .....
Why haven’t they said that?
Or that masks do nothing to contain a sneeze....
Were the British and America governments and health departments and chief scientists wrong last year advising that masks made little or no difference in community spreading ?
Holey shit you actually think that virus cells just float around as individual cells don’t you.
So the answer to health department advice for a corona virus less than 12 months ago is some weird answer about where the virus lives .
You can’t answer the question then regarding the advice from the US and UK governments
I don’t know about the UK but hasn’t Fauci said the US advice was partially due to concerns about mask supply for medical professionals (i.e. wanting to ensure supply wasn’t all taken by the public) and has also added that more is now known about the effectiveness of different types of masks (cloth etc) from the early days of the pandemic?
I’ve said this to bimbo before. We are going around in circles again.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:42 am
by Botha Boy
The empirical evidence is in and you can't see where masks of themselves have caused an inflection in infection rates.
You can continue to believe in their effectiveness against respiratory viruses if you must, but the data is not there. And yes, I realise that a fitted N95 style mask can protect you from infection in a hazardous environment, but that is not what is being proscribed for the public.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:48 am
by Jensrsa
The arguments about wearing masks are political not scientific. Masks have been worn by medical personnel since the late 19th century "as a result of increasing awareness of germ theory and the importance of antiseptic procedures in medicine"
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:48 am
by Botha Boy
What ones are recommended for say going to Tescos ?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:50 am
by bimboman
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:37 am
Saying we don’t know is not defending anybody, it’s saying we don’t know, you might have to always feel that life is full of simplistic dichotomies but the rest of us know there is nuance, priorities and limited knowledge and resources.
You’d think for such a major change in position they’d be something quite obvious other than the obvious politics. It’s quite remarkable what people will just wave away as logical when they’re scared.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:52 am
by bimboman
Mask sellers in supporting the sale of masks.
You can see how the NHS burns through nearly 500 million quid a day.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:54 am
by Duff Paddy
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:42 am
The empirical evidence is in and you can't see where masks of themselves have caused an inflection in infection rates.
You can continue to believe in their effectiveness against respiratory viruses if you must, but the data is not there. And yes, I realise that a fitted N95 style mask can protect you from infection in a hazardous environment, but that is not what is being proscribed for the public.
I can’t read the dates on those pictures. What’s your source? Oh it’s a website called “lockdown sceptics”
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 11:58 am
by bimboman
Duff Paddy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:54 am
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:42 am
The empirical evidence is in and you can't see where masks of themselves have caused an inflection in infection rates.
You can continue to believe in their effectiveness against respiratory viruses if you must, but the data is not there. And yes, I realise that a fitted N95 style mask can protect you from infection in a hazardous environment, but that is not what is being proscribed for the public.
I can’t read the dates on those pictures. What’s your source? Oh it’s a website called “lockdown sceptics”
The graphs are accurate though. The comparable states in the US quite obvious.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:11 pm
by bimboman
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:02 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:50 am
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:37 am
Saying we don’t know is not defending anybody, it’s saying we don’t know, you might have to always feel that life is full of simplistic dichotomies but the rest of us know there is nuance, priorities and limited knowledge and resources.
You’d think for such a major change in position they’d be something quite obvious other than the obvious politics. It’s quite remarkable what people will just wave away as logical when they’re scared.
Again, I’m saying we don’t know, you could be right, you could be wrong but as usual you are full of certainty in your own opinion.
“We don’t know”
“Scientific research is kept secret”
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:21 pm
by Botha Boy
Duff Paddy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:54 am
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:42 am
The empirical evidence is in and you can't see where masks of themselves have caused an inflection in infection rates.
You can continue to believe in their effectiveness against respiratory viruses if you must, but the data is not there. And yes, I realise that a fitted N95 style mask can protect you from infection in a hazardous environment, but that is not what is being proscribed for the public.
I can’t read the dates on those pictures. What’s your source? Oh it’s a website called “lockdown sceptics”
"There are none so blind as ... "
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:23 pm
by Farva
Here is a story stepping through the reasons for the changes.
Basically more information coming to light and the scientific method doing what it does best and changing its position when more information comes to light.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-53394525
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:26 pm
by Duff Paddy
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:21 pm
Duff Paddy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:54 am
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:42 am
The empirical evidence is in and you can't see where masks of themselves have caused an inflection in infection rates.
You can continue to believe in their effectiveness against respiratory viruses if you must, but the data is not there. And yes, I realise that a fitted N95 style mask can protect you from infection in a hazardous environment, but that is not what is being proscribed for the public.
I can’t read the dates on those pictures. What’s your source? Oh it’s a website called “lockdown sceptics”
"There are none so blind as ... "
That source is complete garbage. Look at the Italy graph for example - they were wearing masks in Italy during the first wave. They extended it to outdoor mask use in October so I presume that’s where the arrow is just before their second wave.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:31 pm
by bimboman
Farva wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:23 pm
Here is a story stepping through the reasons for the changes.
Basically more information coming to light and the scientific method doing what it does best and changing its position when more information comes to light.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-53394525
Yep, brilliant piece of no science . Does contain this nugget though.
Covid's not going anywhere - we'll probably have a vaccine in years, not months," says Prof Lavoie, who has been leading the iCARE Study, an international survey into Covid-19 related behaviours. "So all these principles need to be integrated and adapted to the new normal life."
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:44 pm
by Botha Boy
Duff Paddy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:26 pm
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:21 pm
Duff Paddy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:54 am
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:42 am
The empirical evidence is in and you can't see where masks of themselves have caused an inflection in infection rates.
You can continue to believe in their effectiveness against respiratory viruses if you must, but the data is not there. And yes, I realise that a fitted N95 style mask can protect you from infection in a hazardous environment, but that is not what is being proscribed for the public.
I can’t read the dates on those pictures. What’s your source? Oh it’s a website called “lockdown sceptics”
"There are none so blind as ... "
That source is complete garbage. Look at the Italy graph for example - they were wearing masks in Italy during the first wave. They extended it to outdoor mask use in October so I presume that’s where the arrow is just before their second wave.
"And the Party said it was your solemn duty to deny the evidence of your eyes and years ... "
You are a mask true-believer, Duff ... that's cute ...
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:47 pm
by bimboman
That source is complete garbage. Look at the Italy graph for example - they were wearing masks in Italy during the first wave. They extended it to outdoor mask use in October so I presume that’s where the arrow is just before their second wave.
So masks don’t work outside then. ?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:48 pm
by bimboman
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:43 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:11 pm
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:02 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:50 am
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 11:37 am
Saying we don’t know is not defending anybody, it’s saying we don’t know, you might have to always feel that life is full of simplistic dichotomies but the rest of us know there is nuance, priorities and limited knowledge and resources.
You’d think for such a major change in position they’d be something quite obvious other than the obvious politics. It’s quite remarkable what people will just wave away as logical when they’re scared.
Again, I’m saying we don’t know, you could be right, you could be wrong but as usual you are full of certainty in your own opinion.
“We don’t know”
“Scientific research is kept secret”
Why are you quoting something I didn’t say?
It’s called paraphrasing..... it’s my chosen method of addressing your post.
You’re argument is the science changed and has been kept super secret is a bit silly.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:53 pm
by bimboman
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:50 pm
I’ve not made that argument, there’s your problem.
Well you might not have intended to, but you have made that argument,
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 12:59 pm
by bimboman
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:56 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:53 pm
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:50 pm
I’ve not made that argument, there’s your problem.
Well you might not have intended to, but you have made that argument,
I clearly haven’t, I’ve made no argument about why information hasn’t been released yet and we’ll probably not get the full picture until there is a public enquiry into the handling of this pandemic, it’s just you being dishonest as usual.
And yes, even by saying we will be told more later on and things “haven’t been released” you’re saying that the science is being kept secret.
Yes because this change In advice and protocol was just in the U.K.
You’re the dishonest one again and that’s because once again your logic fails.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 1:03 pm
by bimboman
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 1:01 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:59 pm
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:56 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:53 pm
Sefton wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:50 pm
I’ve not made that argument, there’s your problem.
Well you might not have intended to, but you have made that argument,
I clearly haven’t, I’ve made no argument about why information hasn’t been released yet and we’ll probably not get the full picture until there is a public enquiry into the handling of this pandemic, it’s just you being dishonest as usual.
Yes because this change In advice and protocol was just in the U.K.
You’re the dishonest one again and that’s because once again your logic fails.
Just know what, I can’t be arsed, you continue with your life on here.
.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 1:05 pm
by Botha Boy
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:47 pm
That source is complete garbage. Look at the Italy graph for example - they were wearing masks in Italy during the first wave. They extended it to outdoor mask use in October so I presume that’s where the arrow is just before their second wave.
So masks don’t work outside then. ?
They have lifted mask mandates across a number of US states.
President Biden, Fauci from the NIH and Walensky from the CDC said it would end badly ...
that is was "Neanderthal Thinking" ...
So far ...
Source: The New York Times (/Duff mode
)
Maybe masks are not doing as much to protect us as the public healthcare experts expected ...
Meanwhile people in Florida and Texas go about their lives normally ...
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 1:10 pm
by bimboman
Yep.
You’ve been a voice of reason Botha, that’s for sure.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 1:54 pm
by Botha Boy
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 1:10 pm
Yep.
You’ve been a voice of reason Botha, that’s for sure.
It's just the data.
Everyone wishes that masks worked and protected us, I want them to protect us so we can get back to life, but masks ,or certainly the way we have been using masks, have not been effective at preventing the general transmission of this air-borne respiratory virus.
We want masks to work in the same way we want God to exist. You can continue to believe in both but at some point you have to accept that these are simply well-intended acts of faith. Sure, we can show how disposable fitted N95 masks can protect someone from getting infected in a hazardous hospital environment, but that is not what people are doing when they go to the supermarket.
The real reason that masks are recommended is coming from public healthcare officials. They need to control behaviours to best address the spread of the virus and the use of masks is a very effective way of signalling that we are in a crisis that demands that we modify our behaviours. People are willing to comply with restrictions but only if they see others complying as well. Getting people to wear masks helps to drive the required signalling and mandating mask wearing makes it looks like everyone has bought in when in fact many haven't.
Gabriel Scally, one of the public healthcare pundits driving policy in the UK & Ireland, discusses in this BBC piece last August about how masks should continue to be mandated in public areas even when the evidence for the effectiveness of masks is weak. It is about signalling that we are in a crisis and must modify our behaviours.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-53690540
You can get banned on many social media sites for suggesting that masks are not effective. You can see now that it is just part of a propaganda war.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 1:54 pm
by message #2527204
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 1:05 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:47 pm
That source is complete garbage. Look at the Italy graph for example - they were wearing masks in Italy during the first wave. They extended it to outdoor mask use in October so I presume that’s where the arrow is just before their second wave.
So masks don’t work outside then. ?
They have lifted mask mandates across a number of US states.
President Biden, Fauci from the NIH and Walensky from the CDC said it would end badly ...
that is was "Neanderthal Thinking" ...
So far ...
Source: The New York Times (/Duff mode
)
Maybe masks are not doing as much to protect us as the public healthcare experts expected ...
Meanwhile people in Florida and Texas go about their lives normally ...
Mask usage is used as a sop to those who get really, really anxious about others not following the rules they think they should because "it's obvious".
I wear my mask in Tesco for the same reason. Doesn't do me any harm, and helps the weak-minded
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 1:59 pm
by bimboman
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 1:54 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 1:10 pm
Yep.
You’ve been a voice of reason Botha, that’s for sure.
It's just the data.
Everyone wishes that masks worked and protected us, I want them to protect us so we can get back to life, but masks ,or certainly the way we have been using masks, have not been effective at preventing the general transmission of this air-borne respiratory virus.
We want masks to work in the same way we want God to exist. You can continue to believe in both but at some point you have to accept that these are simply well-intended acts of faith. Sure, we can show how disposable fitted N95 masks can protect someone from getting infected in a hazardous hospital environment, but that is not what people are doing when they go to the supermarket.
The real reason that masks are recommended is coming from public healthcare officials. They need to control behaviours to best address the spread of the virus and the use of masks is a very effective way of signalling that we are in a crisis that demands that we modify our behaviours. People are willing to comply with restrictions but only if they see others complying as well. Getting people to wear masks helps to drive the required signalling and mandating mask wearing makes it looks like everyone has bought in when in fact many haven't.
Gabriel Scally, one of the public healthcare pundits driving policy in the UK & Ireland, discusses in this BBC piece last August about how masks should continue to be mandated in public areas even when the evidence for the effectiveness of masks is weak. It is about signalling that we are in a crisis and must modify our behaviours.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-53690540
You can get banned on many social media sites for suggesting that masks are not effective. You can see now that it is just part of a propaganda war.
Thank you for explaining what I’ve suspected.
Scally scares me witless to be honest.
Fingers crossed we get an easier European summer.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 2:16 pm
by AND-y
Go give your family some attention you sad case.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 2:21 pm
by bimboman
AND-y wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 2:16 pm
Go give your family some attention you sad case.
They’re ironing , and playing mine craft. I’m on sofa watching repeat of yesterday GP. I’m certainly not interrupting any of that.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 2:23 pm
by Mick Mannock
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 2:21 pm
AND-y wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 2:16 pm
Go give your family some attention you sad case.
They’re ironing , and playing mine craft. I’m on sofa watching repeat of yesterday GP. I’m certainly not interrupting any of that.
AND-y is a sad man who invents FB stalkers as he is a narc
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 2:28 pm
by iarmhiman
Giro starts next week folks. Watch a proper sport
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 4:47 pm
by Jensrsa
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 1:05 pm
They have lifted mask mandates across a number of US states.
President Biden, Fauci from the NIH and Walensky from the CDC said it would end badly ...
that is was "Neanderthal Thinking" ...
So far ...
Source: The New York Times (/Duff mode
)
Maybe masks are not doing as much to protect us as the public healthcare experts expected ...
Meanwhile people in Florida and Texas go about their lives normally ...
The country stats shown in above posts are outdated. Anyway, to attribute any trend to masking/non-masking alone is plain stupid as there are a number of factors that influence trends - variants, vaccinations, masks, social distancing, socio-economics, immunity, etc. all play a role
Italy:
UK:
California:
Fact: Florida has the highest number of new cases per day in the US. They were on a decline until they lifted restrictions in March, when the plateaued at about 5000 per day instead of continuing on a downward trend
Texas:
Pennsylvania:
Michigan had a big problem, instituted strict policies and
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Mon May 03, 2021 5:05 pm
by TheFrog
Botha Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 1:05 pm
bimboman wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 12:47 pm
That source is complete garbage. Look at the Italy graph for example - they were wearing masks in Italy during the first wave. They extended it to outdoor mask use in October so I presume that’s where the arrow is just before their second wave.
So masks don’t work outside then. ?
They have lifted mask mandates across a number of US states.
President Biden, Fauci from the NIH and Walensky from the CDC said it would end badly ...
that is was "Neanderthal Thinking" ...
So far ...
Source: The New York Times (/Duff mode
)
Maybe masks are not doing as much to protect us as the public healthcare experts expected ...
Meanwhile people in Florida and Texas go about their lives normally ...
What is the bump on the orange curve attributed to?
On masks, I haven't been able to review the science and I think the analysis must be extremely difficult to perform as there are so many different factors to take into account from average age of the population to climate impact to other sanitary precautions (including working from home or lockdowns) to population's compliance.
What I find interesting is that at the hair dresser, or the various supermarkets I go to, I have never known of any employee catching COVID at work. Small sample, but made me curious to find out whether, if a study was run at nationwide scale, this would be confirmed and therefore whether this would (or not) confirm that masks have done their job as we expect them to do.
Same applies with my kids, since they went back to school in March, there have been a few cases of COVID reported, 8 that I know of that affected kids or teachers, but there were no occurrences of children or teachers being infected in class or at school. They all caught it outside, usually during social gatherings, but no transmission occurred in class so far. Again, to small a sample to draw conclusions, but if I wanted to analyze the impact of social distancing and masks, I would look at these data.