Fun fact: Massachusetts COVID case #s virtually identical to the same time last year

Dems and Leftist LOOVVVVEE masks, they just do... science doesn't matter, studies don't matter, and real life experiences don't matter... honestly I think the ONLY way to get Dems and the Left to get off the mask fetish is to have Trump become very ProMask.

NotPC wrote:

Dems and Leftist LOOVVVVEE masks, they just do... science doesn't matter, studies don't matter, and real life experiences don't matter... honestly I think the ONLY way to get Dems and the Left to get off the mask fetish is to have Trump become very ProMask.

Dems (don't call them Leftists - they ain't) were opposed to vaccines when Trump was pushing them.

That we know

carmine9 wrote:

The Lily Hammer wrote:

So, masks do nothing. And the vaccines do nothing.

And yet, in MA, 76% of those hospitalized for Covid are unvaccinated, and about 62% of those dying from Covid are unvaccinated, when only 31.5% of the population is unvaccinated. Just a random coincidence, I suppose?

And can you give us the studies and data that you mention in your post, please?

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/47-studies-confirm-inefectiveness-of-masks-for-covid-and-32-more-confirm-their-negative-health-effects/https://coldstreams.com/2021/04/23/mit-study-says-masks-distancing-dont-work/https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policyhttps://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/do-masks-actually-work-the-best-studies-suggest-they-dont

Against my better judgment, I clicked on one of your links. As expected, it was a waste of time.

You claimed that masks do nothing, and studies back that up. The MIT study discussed in your coldstreams link doesn't examine the efficacy of masks, it assesses social distancing guidelines when indoors, and specifically argues that such guidelines should take into account factors such as time spent indoors, the size/ventilation of the space, and the density of people. It does not say or suggest that masks do nothing.

carmine9 wrote:

The Lily Hammer wrote:

So, masks do nothing. And the vaccines do nothing.

And yet, in MA, 76% of those hospitalized for Covid are unvaccinated, and about 62% of those dying from Covid are unvaccinated, when only 31.5% of the population is unvaccinated. Just a random coincidence, I suppose?

And can you give us the studies and data that you mention in your post, please?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/covid-cases-are-surging-in-the-five-most-vaccinated-states/ar-AAR7UpZhttps://www.mercurynews.com/2021/07/24/covid-spreading-fast-in-well-vaccinated-california-counties/https://theconversation.com/covid-is-surging-in-the-worlds-most-vaccinated-country-why-160869https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/https://www.theburningplatform.com/2021/10/21/81-research-studies-confirm-natural-immunity-to-covid-equal-or-superior-to-vaccine-immunity/

As our great President would say, "Come on, man!"

Read kibitzer's post and get back to me about hospitalizations and deaths.

You ask for studies.

I give you ten.

Your reply:

Against my better judgment, I clicked on one of your links. As expected, it was a waste of time.

Why against your better judgement? You asked for studies. Didn't you want to see them?

Almost as if your mind was made up in advance.

Such world class denial among the Big Pharma dupes

carmine9 wrote:

You ask for studies.

I give you ten.

Your reply:

Against my better judgment, I clicked on one of your links. As expected, it was a waste of time.

Why against your better judgement? You asked for studies. Didn't you want to see them?

Almost as if your mind was made up in advance.

They were from fly by night websites. I'm not as gullible as you may be, I don't believe everything I read on the internet.

Not surprisingly, you misrepresented the purpose and conclusions of the MIT study.

Why try? wrote:

I will HAPPILY accept a slightly higher risk of death in exchange for the freedom to live normally and mask-free. Easy choice for me.

The issue is that we all pay for your stupid decisions....yeah you could choose to "live normally" and speed limit free.

carmine9 wrote:

Such world class denial among the Big Pharma dupes

Why was your other handke banned?

Simple question for a simple person.

carmine9 wrote:

Such world class denial among the Big Pharma dupes

your the one quoting the washington examiner. Talk about being duped into being a mouthpiece for billionaires

The Lily Hammer wrote:

carmine9 wrote:

You ask for studies.

I give you ten.

Your reply:

Against my better judgment, I clicked on one of your links. As expected, it was a waste of time.

Why against your better judgement? You asked for studies. Didn't you want to see them?

Almost as if your mind was made up in advance.

They were from fly by night websites. I'm not as gullible as you may be, I don't believe everything I read on the internet.

Not surprisingly, you misrepresented the purpose and conclusions of the MIT study.

I copied and pasted it. How is that a misrepresentation?

Here are some others

The US Centre for Disease Control performed a study which showed that 85 percent of those who contracted Covid-19 during July 2020 were mask wearers. Just 3.9 percent of the study participants never wore a mask.

“There is moderate certainty evidence that wearing a mask probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza compared to not wearing a mask”

“We included three trials, involving a total of 2106 participants. There was no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials”

Two randomized controlled trials were included involving a total of 1453 patients. In a small trial there was a trend towards masks being associated with fewer infections, whereas in a large trial there was no difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group.

“The filtration efficiency of the filter materials was good, over 95%, for particles above 5 micron in diameter but great variation existed for smaller particles.

Coronavirus is 0.125 microns. therefore these masks wouldn’t protect you from the virus”

Masks and respirators do not work. There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.

Furthermore, the relevant known physics and biology, which I review, are such that masks and respirators should not work. It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective-dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.

carmine9 wrote:

Such world class denial among the Big Pharma dupes

Instead of reading coldstreams' discussion of the MIT study, here's the study itself:

Although mask efficacy wasn't what this study was about, the authors did seem to think that wearing masks is a good idea in general:

"Finally, we reiterate that the wearing of masks largely eliminates the risk of respiratory jets, and so makes the well-mixed room approximation considered here all the more relevant."

Birkoboy wrote:

carmine9 wrote:

Such world class denial among the Big Pharma dupes

Why was your other handke banned?

Simple question for a simple person.

Hey Birko.

How many times have you gone to moderators to try to get posters banned?

The Lily Hammer wrote:

carmine9 wrote:

Such world class denial among the Big Pharma dupes

Instead of reading coldstreams' discussion of the MIT study, here's the study itself:

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/17/e2018995118

Although mask efficacy wasn't what this study was about, the authors did seem to think that wearing masks is a good idea in general:

"Finally, we reiterate that the wearing of masks largely eliminates the risk of respiratory jets, and so makes the well-mixed room approximation considered here all the more relevant."

Don't know what all those lines on a graph mean but we can find dozens of studies that prove masks don't work. In simple, easy to follow descriptions of the studied performed and the findings as well as comparisons of Covid problems in places that have not masked and those that have.

Wuzzle Wuzzle4 wrote:

carmine9 wrote:

Such world class denial among the Big Pharma dupes

your the one quoting the washington examiner. Talk about being duped into being a mouthpiece for billionaires

Love the way you guys focus on one of dozens of sources provided and claim it's not credible and think that destroys the reliability of dozens of studies.

Pure denial

carmine9 wrote:

The Lily Hammer wrote:

They were from fly by night websites. I'm not as gullible as you may be, I don't believe everything I read on the internet.

Not surprisingly, you misrepresented the purpose and conclusions of the MIT study.

I copied and pasted it. How is that a misrepresentation?

You claimed that studies show that masks and vaccines do not work. You provided a link to an article on some website called coldstreams about an MIT study, that supports your claim about masks (you haven't provided anything to back up your claim on vaccines, or even commented on the MA numbers that I provided).

I went to the actual study, which I have now provided to you. For the third time, the study does not say what you claim it says (that's the misrepresentation). In fact, the authors of the study seem to think wearing masks is a good idea, which is the opposite of what I think you're saying. So the study that you provided to support your claim actually disproves your claim. I guess you were hoping that I would rely on your coldstreams link without actually going to the source.

I'm out. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Here are some others

The US Centre for Disease Control performed a study which showed that 85 percent of those who contracted Covid-19 during July 2020 were mask wearers. Just 3.9 percent of the study participants never wore a mask.

“There is moderate certainty evidence that wearing a mask probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza compared to not wearing a mask”

“We included three trials, involving a total of 2106 participants. There was no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials”

Two randomized controlled trials were included involving a total of 1453 patients. In a small trial there was a trend towards masks being associated with fewer infections, whereas in a large trial there was no difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group.

“The filtration efficiency of the filter materials was good, over 95%, for particles above 5 micron in diameter but great variation existed for smaller particles.

Coronavirus is 0.125 microns. therefore these masks wouldn’t protect you from the virus”

Masks and respirators do not work. There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.

Furthermore, the relevant known physics and biology, which I review, are such that masks and respirators should not work. It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective-dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.

the only good news is that originally it was everyone getting very sick, but now it's just the darwinian losers who won't get a shot.

Masks and respirators do not work.

There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.

Furthermore, the relevant known physics and biology, which I review, are such that masks and respirators should not work. It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.

The present paper about masks illustrates the degree to which governments, the mainstream media, and institutional propagandists can decide to operate in a science vacuum, or select only incomplete science that serves their interests. Such recklessness is also certainly the case with the current global lockdown of over 1 billion people, an unprecedented experiment in medical and political history.