An analysis by the US CDC found that 85% of peopleinfected with the new coronavirus reported wearing a mask “always” (70.6%) or “often” (14.4%). Compared to the control group of uninfected people, always wearing a mask did not reduce the risk of infection.
Researchers from the University of Minnesota found that the infectious dose of SARS-CoV-2 is just 300 virions (virus particles), whereas a single minute of normal speaking may generate more than 750,000 virions, making cloth face masks unlikely to prevent an infection.
Japan, despite its widespread use of face masks, experienced its most recent influenza epidemicwith more than 5 million people falling ill just one year ago, in January and February 2019. However, unlike SARS-CoV-2, the influenza virus is easily transmitted by children, too.
In the US state of Kansas, the 90 counties without mask mandates had lower coronavirus infection rates than the 15 counties with mask mandates. To hide this fact, the Kansas health department tried to manipulatethe official statistics and data presentation.
Contrary to common belief, studies in hospitals found thatthe wearing of a medical mask by surgeons during operations didn’t reducepost-operative bacterial wound infections in patients.
During the notorious 1918 influenza pandemic, the use of cloth face masks among the general population was widespread and in some places mandatory, but they made no difference.
Asian countries with low covid infection rates, most of them neighboring China, benefited not from face masks but mainly from early border closures. This is confirmed by Scandinavian countries Norway, Finland and Denmark, which didn’t introduce mask mandates but closed borders earlyand saw very low covid infection and death rates, too.
0
delaying its publication by several months.
An analysis by the US CDC found that 85% of peopleinfected with the new coronavirus reported wearing a mask “always” (70.6%) or “often” (14.4%). Compared to the control group of uninfected people, always wearing a mask did not reduce the risk of infection.
Researchers from the University of Minnesota found that the infectious dose of SARS-CoV-2 is just 300 virions (virus particles), whereas a single minute of normal speaking may generate more than 750,000 virions, making cloth face masks unlikely to prevent an infection.
Japan, despite its widespread use of face masks, experienced its most recent influenza epidemicwith more than 5 million people falling ill just one year ago, in January and February 2019. However, unlike SARS-CoV-2, the influenza virus is easily transmitted by children, too.
In the US state of Kansas, the 90 counties without mask mandates had lower coronavirus infection rates than the 15 counties with mask mandates. To hide this fact, the Kansas health department tried to manipulatethe official statistics and data presentation.
Contrary to common belief, studies in hospitals found thatthe wearing of a medical mask by surgeons during operations didn’t reducepost-operative bacterial wound infections in patients.
During the notorious 1918 influenza pandemic, the use of cloth face masks among the general population was widespread and in some places mandatory, but they made no difference.
Asian countries with low covid infection rates, most of them neighboring China, benefited not from face masks but mainly from early border closures. This is confirmed by Scandinavian countries Norway, Finland and Denmark, which didn’t introduce mask mandates but closed borders earlyand saw very low covid infection and death rates, too.
So far, most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.
A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the US CDC found that face masks had no effect, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control. (Source)
A Danish randomized controlled trial with 6000 participants, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in November 2020, found no statistically significant effect of high-quality medical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection in a community setting. (Source)
A large randomized controlled trial with close to 8000 participants, published in October 2020 in PLOS One, found that face masks “did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections nor against clinical respiratory infection.” (Source)
A February 2021 review by the European CDC found no significant evidence supporting the effectiveness of non-medical and medical face masks in the community. Furthermore, the European CDC advised against the use of FFP2/N95 masks by the general public. (Source)
A July 2020 review by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine found that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth masks against virus infection or transmission. (Source)
A November 2020 Cochrane review found that face masks did not reduce influenza-like illness (ILI) cases, neither in the general population nor in health care workers. (Source)
An April 2020 review by two US professors in respiratory and infectious disease from the University of Illinois concluded that face masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). (Source)
An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 came to the conclusion that cloth face masks offer little to no protection in everyday life. (Source)
A 2015 study in the British Medical Journal BMJ Open found that cloth masks were penetrated by 97% of particles and may increase infection risk by retaining moisture or repeated use. (Source)
An August 2020 review by a German professor in virology, epidemiology and hygiene found that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth face masks and that the improper daily use of masks by the public may in fact lead to an increase in infections. (Source)
So far, most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.
A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the US CDC found that face masks had no effect, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control. (Source)
A Danish randomized controlled trial with 6000 participants, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in November 2020, found no statistically significant effect of high-quality medical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection in a community setting. (Source)
A large randomized controlled trial with close to 8000 participants, published in October 2020 in PLOS One, found that face masks “did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections nor against clinical respiratory infection.” (Source)
A February 2021 review by the European CDC found no significant evidence supporting the effectiveness of non-medical and medical face masks in the community. Furthermore, the European CDC advised against the use of FFP2/N95 masks by the general public. (Source)
A July 2020 review by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine found that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth masks against virus infection or transmission. (Source)
A November 2020 Cochrane review found that face masks did not reduce influenza-like illness (ILI) cases, neither in the general population nor in health care workers. (Source)
An April 2020 review by two US professors in respiratory and infectious disease from the University of Illinois concluded that face masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). (Source)
An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 came to the conclusion that cloth face masks offer little to no protection in everyday life. (Source)
A 2015 study in the British Medical Journal BMJ Open found that cloth masks were penetrated by 97% of particles and may increase infection risk by retaining moisture or repeated use. (Source)
An August 2020 review by a German professor in virology, epidemiology and hygiene found that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth face masks and that the improper daily use of masks by the public may in fact lead to an increase in infections. (Source)
I have been breathing free inside and out for the past 14 months. Every single alleged covid positive person I know have worn masks for hours on end, sometimes their choice, others forced to keep a job. The oxygen deprivation, bacteria, and lint being breathed in will make people sick. I believe the masks are being forced to not only depersonalize people, but to make them sick. They get pneumonia from the mask and because everything from suicide to an every day cold is classified corona, it keeps the numbers up for the continued fear-mongering of the 99% survivable virus. Common sense and all historical science until March 2020 when science became political science has said masks do not stop viruses. It still says that on the CDC and NIH websites. And as for the jab, I truly hope it does help and doesn’t harm people. But why in the world would anyone take a jab where one does not know the long-term consequences - for a 99% survivable virus for which we have proven therapeutics? We have an immune system and as of March 2020 it ceased to exist according to the government. Unfortunately for the fear mongers, it does still exist and if you take care of your body, it will do an excellent job taking care of you,
0
I have been breathing free inside and out for the past 14 months. Every single alleged covid positive person I know have worn masks for hours on end, sometimes their choice, others forced to keep a job. The oxygen deprivation, bacteria, and lint being breathed in will make people sick. I believe the masks are being forced to not only depersonalize people, but to make them sick. They get pneumonia from the mask and because everything from suicide to an every day cold is classified corona, it keeps the numbers up for the continued fear-mongering of the 99% survivable virus. Common sense and all historical science until March 2020 when science became political science has said masks do not stop viruses. It still says that on the CDC and NIH websites. And as for the jab, I truly hope it does help and doesn’t harm people. But why in the world would anyone take a jab where one does not know the long-term consequences - for a 99% survivable virus for which we have proven therapeutics? We have an immune system and as of March 2020 it ceased to exist according to the government. Unfortunately for the fear mongers, it does still exist and if you take care of your body, it will do an excellent job taking care of you,
I have been breathing free inside and out for the past 14 months. Every single alleged covid positive person I know have worn masks for hours on end, sometimes their choice, others forced to keep a job. The oxygen deprivation, bacteria, and lint being breathed in will make people sick. I believe the masks are being forced to not only depersonalize people, but to make them sick. They get pneumonia from the mask and because everything from suicide to an every day cold is classified corona, it keeps the numbers up for the continued fear-mongering of the 99% survivable virus. Common sense and all historical science until March 2020 when science became political science has said masks do not stop viruses. It still says that on the CDC and NIH websites. And as for the jab, I truly hope it does help and doesn’t harm people. But why in the world would anyone take a jab where one does not know the long-term consequences - for a 99% survivable virus for which we have proven therapeutics? We have an immune system and as of March 2020 it ceased to exist according to the government. Unfortunately for the fear mongers, it does still exist and if you take care of your body, it will do an excellent job taking care of you,
0
I have been breathing free inside and out for the past 14 months. Every single alleged covid positive person I know have worn masks for hours on end, sometimes their choice, others forced to keep a job. The oxygen deprivation, bacteria, and lint being breathed in will make people sick. I believe the masks are being forced to not only depersonalize people, but to make them sick. They get pneumonia from the mask and because everything from suicide to an every day cold is classified corona, it keeps the numbers up for the continued fear-mongering of the 99% survivable virus. Common sense and all historical science until March 2020 when science became political science has said masks do not stop viruses. It still says that on the CDC and NIH websites. And as for the jab, I truly hope it does help and doesn’t harm people. But why in the world would anyone take a jab where one does not know the long-term consequences - for a 99% survivable virus for which we have proven therapeutics? We have an immune system and as of March 2020 it ceased to exist according to the government. Unfortunately for the fear mongers, it does still exist and if you take care of your body, it will do an excellent job taking care of you,
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Masks don’t work. Treatments for this disease have been available from the beginning. Doctors have determined many treatments, including HCQ and Ivermectin . After a year in pandemic, scientists know more about what works. Indoor mask mandates definitely work to reduce covid cases and death rates according to John Hopkins center, Hong Kong university and US center for disease control. Health affairs journal reach the same conclusion. Institute for health metrics found mask mandates have averted hundreds of thousands of covid cases. However Food drug administration and European drug agency no longer approve of hydroxylchloroquine and ivermectin for treating or preventing coronavirus because of insufficient evidence of safety and effectiveness in clinical trials. Also both drugs are rejected by Lancet, Cochrane review, New England journal of medicine, Frontiers in pharmacology journal, National institute of health and World health organization.
How about calm down with the repeated non-scientific mask nonsense.
If you want to wear a mask — wear one. But please do not keep saying this is the answer to things like this.
Also, completely irresponsible to dismiss other medical experts opinions on treatments to support a political and money-making agenda.
0
@thirdperson
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Masks don’t work. Treatments for this disease have been available from the beginning. Doctors have determined many treatments, including HCQ and Ivermectin . After a year in pandemic, scientists know more about what works. Indoor mask mandates definitely work to reduce covid cases and death rates according to John Hopkins center, Hong Kong university and US center for disease control. Health affairs journal reach the same conclusion. Institute for health metrics found mask mandates have averted hundreds of thousands of covid cases. However Food drug administration and European drug agency no longer approve of hydroxylchloroquine and ivermectin for treating or preventing coronavirus because of insufficient evidence of safety and effectiveness in clinical trials. Also both drugs are rejected by Lancet, Cochrane review, New England journal of medicine, Frontiers in pharmacology journal, National institute of health and World health organization.
How about calm down with the repeated non-scientific mask nonsense.
If you want to wear a mask — wear one. But please do not keep saying this is the answer to things like this.
Also, completely irresponsible to dismiss other medical experts opinions on treatments to support a political and money-making agenda.
“This should come as no surprise.During the Spanish flu of 1918, people were told to get plenty of fresh air and sunshine and those who did so fared better.Maybe locking folks up in their homes for months during COVID was not such a good idea after all.”
0
“This should come as no surprise.During the Spanish flu of 1918, people were told to get plenty of fresh air and sunshine and those who did so fared better.Maybe locking folks up in their homes for months during COVID was not such a good idea after all.”
“This should come as no surprise. During the Spanish flu of 1918, people were told to get plenty of fresh air and sunshine and those who did so fared better. Maybe locking folks up in their homes for months during COVID was not such a good idea after all.”
Who was locked in their homes? All the way back in early 2020, experts said to get out. Take a walk. Take a hike? Like "going out" to fat ass Americans means getting fresh air. No, it means getting in their car and driving to Walmart. Or the bar. I was snowboarding AND hiking in June. Where else can you do that. And still going out for dinner, a drink, with the mrs. People weren't told to lock up in their homes. Americans just live sedentary lifestyles. They'd rather watch Tiger King than go for a jog.
TIME TO BRING BACK THE OBAMA CAGES!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
“This should come as no surprise. During the Spanish flu of 1918, people were told to get plenty of fresh air and sunshine and those who did so fared better. Maybe locking folks up in their homes for months during COVID was not such a good idea after all.”
Who was locked in their homes? All the way back in early 2020, experts said to get out. Take a walk. Take a hike? Like "going out" to fat ass Americans means getting fresh air. No, it means getting in their car and driving to Walmart. Or the bar. I was snowboarding AND hiking in June. Where else can you do that. And still going out for dinner, a drink, with the mrs. People weren't told to lock up in their homes. Americans just live sedentary lifestyles. They'd rather watch Tiger King than go for a jog.
Basically, I think the point he was making is that when folks are not allowed to be out and go to work — or even go eat — they are simply ‘forced’, by default, to spend more time inside — at home.
Same ad why more folks get colds and flus in winter — they spend more time inside, etc.
1
Basically, I think the point he was making is that when folks are not allowed to be out and go to work — or even go eat — they are simply ‘forced’, by default, to spend more time inside — at home.
Same ad why more folks get colds and flus in winter — they spend more time inside, etc.
I agree folks should get more exercise. But when they are not doing that in ‘normal’ times — there is even less of a chance of them doing it during a scamdemic.
Now instead of being fat and lazy at work or restaurants or shops — they are simply fat and lazy at home.
0
I agree folks should get more exercise. But when they are not doing that in ‘normal’ times — there is even less of a chance of them doing it during a scamdemic.
Now instead of being fat and lazy at work or restaurants or shops — they are simply fat and lazy at home.
Michigan governor says she has authority for stay-home order
In the spring of last year people were not allowed to travel to their northern cabins. Whitmer ordered travel ban.
"Stay at home" meant "stay at home!" Yet airports had people from ALL OVER THE WORLD departing and arriving. How does that make sense?????
If you look at each state on Worldometers you can see "lockdown" states didn't fair much better than "open" states.
As I have stated previously, believe virus takes it's course. Lockdowns and mask mandates is like throwing rocks in a river and expecting the flow to stop.
0
Headline from AP on Nov. 16th;
Michigan governor says she has authority for stay-home order
In the spring of last year people were not allowed to travel to their northern cabins. Whitmer ordered travel ban.
"Stay at home" meant "stay at home!" Yet airports had people from ALL OVER THE WORLD departing and arriving. How does that make sense?????
If you look at each state on Worldometers you can see "lockdown" states didn't fair much better than "open" states.
As I have stated previously, believe virus takes it's course. Lockdowns and mask mandates is like throwing rocks in a river and expecting the flow to stop.
Basically, I think the point he was making is that when folks are not allowed to be out and go to work — or even go eat — they are simply ‘forced’, by default, to spend more time inside — at home. Same ad why more folks get colds and flus in winter — they spend more time inside, etc.
The point i'm making is no one was forced to be inside. Nobody was against lockdowns as much as me but "lockdown" is a misnomer. Take a fucking walk, fatass.
TIME TO BRING BACK THE OBAMA CAGES!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
Basically, I think the point he was making is that when folks are not allowed to be out and go to work — or even go eat — they are simply ‘forced’, by default, to spend more time inside — at home. Same ad why more folks get colds and flus in winter — they spend more time inside, etc.
The point i'm making is no one was forced to be inside. Nobody was against lockdowns as much as me but "lockdown" is a misnomer. Take a fucking walk, fatass.
I agree folks should get more exercise. But when they are not doing that in ‘normal’ times — there is even less of a chance of them doing it during a scamdemic. Now instead of being fat and lazy at work or restaurants or shops — they are simply fat and lazy at home.
Is not that the American dream
.. And are we not supposed to defend such behaviours? As we defend all law abiding citizens??? Or has that escaped as principal as well Sir
..!!!!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
I agree folks should get more exercise. But when they are not doing that in ‘normal’ times — there is even less of a chance of them doing it during a scamdemic. Now instead of being fat and lazy at work or restaurants or shops — they are simply fat and lazy at home.
Is not that the American dream
.. And are we not supposed to defend such behaviours? As we defend all law abiding citizens??? Or has that escaped as principal as well Sir
Take a look at Aussie land if you want to see "true Lockdowns". Police checkpoints entering or leaving cities!!! Canada was going to try it too. Citizens and the police said no way!
0
I see your point Stu.
Take a look at Aussie land if you want to see "true Lockdowns". Police checkpoints entering or leaving cities!!! Canada was going to try it too. Citizens and the police said no way!
Ah, the whole charade has allowed the lemmings to self identify. People who mocked the vaccine when Trump predicted it now brag about getting the shot. Yet they continue to cling to their masks and distancing and feel superior for doing so. “Stay scared, stay stupid, stay home but get vaccinated” is the latest mantra for bumper sticker brained leftists.
0
Nature. Some truth in this I think:
Ah, the whole charade has allowed the lemmings to self identify. People who mocked the vaccine when Trump predicted it now brag about getting the shot. Yet they continue to cling to their masks and distancing and feel superior for doing so. “Stay scared, stay stupid, stay home but get vaccinated” is the latest mantra for bumper sticker brained leftists.
I see your point Stu. Take a look at Aussie land if you want to see "true Lockdowns". Police checkpoints entering or leaving cities!!! Canada was going to try it too. Citizens and the police said no way!
Exactly. I was back and forth between two of the most liberal states in the country. Well, one liberal state and another state with one liberal city that holds most of the population but I digress... No where that I know off had hard core enforced lockdowns. I sure there were some places but I was still seeing friends, going out, working out, taking hikes. The people who complain about lockdowns weren't very active to begin with.
TIME TO BRING BACK THE OBAMA CAGES!
0
Quote Originally Posted by UNIMAN:
I see your point Stu. Take a look at Aussie land if you want to see "true Lockdowns". Police checkpoints entering or leaving cities!!! Canada was going to try it too. Citizens and the police said no way!
Exactly. I was back and forth between two of the most liberal states in the country. Well, one liberal state and another state with one liberal city that holds most of the population but I digress... No where that I know off had hard core enforced lockdowns. I sure there were some places but I was still seeing friends, going out, working out, taking hikes. The people who complain about lockdowns weren't very active to begin with.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Basically, I think the point he was making is that when folks are not allowed to be out and go to work — or even go eat — they are simply ‘forced’, by default, to spend more time inside — at home. Same ad why more folks get colds and flus in winter — they spend more time inside, etc. The point i'm making is no one was forced to be inside. Nobody was against lockdowns as much as me but "lockdown" is a misnomer. Take a fucking walk, fatass.
Doesn't matter. Look at the tracking data. It simply shows people spent more time at home.
So, spent more time inside their homes!
Not at work, not at bars, not at shops, not at restaurants.
You CAN argue it is their own fault for not going jogging or hiking everyday. But that is tertiary issue at best.
They could NOT get out and go where they were used to goin is the point — so, simply stayed home and inside.
0
@StumpTownStu
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Basically, I think the point he was making is that when folks are not allowed to be out and go to work — or even go eat — they are simply ‘forced’, by default, to spend more time inside — at home. Same ad why more folks get colds and flus in winter — they spend more time inside, etc. The point i'm making is no one was forced to be inside. Nobody was against lockdowns as much as me but "lockdown" is a misnomer. Take a fucking walk, fatass.
Doesn't matter. Look at the tracking data. It simply shows people spent more time at home.
So, spent more time inside their homes!
Not at work, not at bars, not at shops, not at restaurants.
You CAN argue it is their own fault for not going jogging or hiking everyday. But that is tertiary issue at best.
They could NOT get out and go where they were used to goin is the point — so, simply stayed home and inside.
Our wonderful Michigan Gov. said people were letting their guard down when in Nov. the virus spiked and again in March. Then takes credit when the spikes recede.
Yet "open" states saw basically the same surge and regression.
Our wonderful Michigan Gov. said people were letting their guard down when in Nov. the virus spiked and again in March. Then takes credit when the spikes recede.
Yet "open" states saw basically the same surge and regression.
Fauci emails don't prove any conspiracy. Trump supporters are misleading by politicizing emails out of context. Smear campaigns against public health experts deflect from epic failure of Trump administration in handling of pandemic. In 2020, US has the most covid cases and deaths of any country in the world. According to Pew research, republicans are far more likely than democrats to be distrustful of science and believe conspiracy theories. This has been a recipe for disaster in a crisis.
0
Fauci emails don't prove any conspiracy. Trump supporters are misleading by politicizing emails out of context. Smear campaigns against public health experts deflect from epic failure of Trump administration in handling of pandemic. In 2020, US has the most covid cases and deaths of any country in the world. According to Pew research, republicans are far more likely than democrats to be distrustful of science and believe conspiracy theories. This has been a recipe for disaster in a crisis.
I believe a case could be made using eminent domain as the stradegy, the government can take property away yes, however they must compensate the owner that they aquire property.
Such as land for a road, or horse in purauuy of a criminal back in the day. This thesis would state say an owner of a gym or a bar or restaurant forced to close due to government mandates or operate at a quarter capacity, the government could be liable for seizing their ability to operate in a manner they once enjoyed. And it wouldn't be that far of a reach to use this emergency in same terms ad property secured in act of war, or most recently ex presidents need to charge secret service rent in their homes.
As such the government. Could be held liable for damages their policies inflicted on buisness forcing them close and indeed taking their property without compensating the owners.
0
I believe a case could be made using eminent domain as the stradegy, the government can take property away yes, however they must compensate the owner that they aquire property.
Such as land for a road, or horse in purauuy of a criminal back in the day. This thesis would state say an owner of a gym or a bar or restaurant forced to close due to government mandates or operate at a quarter capacity, the government could be liable for seizing their ability to operate in a manner they once enjoyed. And it wouldn't be that far of a reach to use this emergency in same terms ad property secured in act of war, or most recently ex presidents need to charge secret service rent in their homes.
As such the government. Could be held liable for damages their policies inflicted on buisness forcing them close and indeed taking their property without compensating the owners.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.