Coronavirus COVID-19

[Ivytalk]

More Great Pivot comedy. And these "mask mandates" being lifted are meaningless. We want the real "normal" back. Fuck these people.

And Rochelle Walensky at the CDC is still pulling her hair out and giving masked pressers.

[SeattleGriz]

Thank you for the links. I don't doubt you've read the studies. You've got a lot of logs in the fire currently in this discussion, so I'll be quick. The guy below says the latest CDC study is really poor.

I don't have the skills to determine if he's right or not, but here's the link to his article on the study. You probably talk similar language.

https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p ... scientific

I think that it's always possible to find lots of theoretical problems with case control studies, but they are well accepted in epidemiology. It is a very difficult thing. I also think the guy is being disingenuous in talking about randomized clinical trials because I think that is virtually impossible in this case. The idea of a randomized clinical trial is that some subjects are randomly assigned to the treatment and some are randomly assigned to the control group. And nobody knows which group they were assigned to.

So like with a vaccine, some subjects are randomly assigned to the treatment group that will receive the vaccine. Others are assigned to the control group that will receive the placebo. No member of either group knows which group they are in.

With masks, obviously, even if the treatment was wearing a mask there is no way people who were in the treatment group and the control group wouldn't know which group they are in. And the treatment isn't wearing a mask. Primarily, the treatment is defined by how many people around you are wearing a mask. So the treatment would be having everybody around each person in the treatment group wearing a mask at all times while the subject also wears a mask and the control group would be nobody around the person in the control group wearing a mask at all times and the control subject also not wearing a mask. It is an impossible experiment. Not going to happen. And you certainly couldn't have a situation where people in the treatment and control groups didn't know which group they were in.

To me, the fact that he makes a big deal about no randomized clinical trials means he's not writing in good faith.

Can't speak for the guy who is a professor, works in clinical trials, a biostatistician AND is in epidemiology, but if I'm right in speculating, the issue over the RCT is it is required at the highest levels for policy approval, but also used as a shield when opposing views are presented. IE Your study isn't an RCT, therefore it can't be included in our decision.

[SeattleGriz]

Antivax jerk kicks the bucket.

Luc Montagnier was (it is very strange for me that I am writing the verb in the past tense) a prolific French virologist and, in fact, a joint recipient of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV).

[JohnStOnge]

I think that it's always possible to find lots of theoretical problems with case control studies, but they are well accepted in epidemiology. It is a very difficult thing. I also think the guy is being disingenuous in talking about randomized clinical trials because I think that is virtually impossible in this case. The idea of a randomized clinical trial is that some subjects are randomly assigned to the treatment and some are randomly assigned to the control group. And nobody knows which group they were assigned to.

So like with a vaccine, some subjects are randomly assigned to the treatment group that will receive the vaccine. Others are assigned to the control group that will receive the placebo. No member of either group knows which group they are in.

With masks, obviously, even if the treatment was wearing a mask there is no way people who were in the treatment group and the control group wouldn't know which group they are in. And the treatment isn't wearing a mask. Primarily, the treatment is defined by how many people around you are wearing a mask. So the treatment would be having everybody around each person in the treatment group wearing a mask at all times while the subject also wears a mask and the control group would be nobody around the person in the control group wearing a mask at all times and the control subject also not wearing a mask. It is an impossible experiment. Not going to happen. And you certainly couldn't have a situation where people in the treatment and control groups didn't know which group they were in.

To me, the fact that he makes a big deal about no randomized clinical trials means he's not writing in good faith.

Can't speak for the guy who is a professor, works in clinical trials, a biostatistician AND is in epidemiology, but if I'm right in speculating, the issue over the RCT is it is required at the highest levels for policy approval, but also used as a shield when opposing views are presented. IE Your study isn't an RCT, therefore it can't be included in our decision.

The guy has credentials but if it's a credentials war I think the set of authors associated with the MMWR report he's talking about would do OK (see https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/ ... mm7106e1_w). He's an associate professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco. Among the authors of the MMWR report are people with the Cal Berkley Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Division of Infectious Diseases & Vaccinology, School of Public Health, Center for Computational Biology, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, California.So basically Cal San Francisco vs. Cal Berkley in terms of credentials.

Another thing that does not work for him is that when you click on the link to his "umbrella review of this topic," expecting to see some article that's published in some kind of scientific forum, you go to a CATO Institute page. I can pretty much assure you that, among the overwhelming majority of public health and medical professionals, the MMWR has more credibility than a CATO Institute page does.

Public health decisions are often made without randomized clinical trials (controlled experiments). There are, for example and to my knowledge, no controlled experiments showing that requiring self-closing doors in food processing facilities and restaurants reduce risk of food-borne illness.

Also, when it comes to masks, there are controlled experiments pertaining to their physical effects on particle emission. One example is at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-91487-7.

[JohnStOnge]

Just as an FYI, here is a quote from the American Academy of Pediatrics page on COVID-19 Guidance for Safe Schools and Promotion of In-Person Learning (https://www.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel ... n-schools/):

All students older than 2 years and all school staff should wear well-fitting face masks at school (unless medical or developmental conditions prohibit use), regardless  of vaccination status. The AAP currently recommends universal masking in school, with an emphasis on indoor masking.

[BDKJMU]

All other things aside, the author shows their own ignorance in making this statement:

I don't know what it is going to take to make so many of the anti-mask people understand that the primary purpose of wearing a mask is to protect OTHER people in case you are infected and don't know it.

I think it would have been wise for her to wear a mask for PR purposes, but the current CDC recommendation is this:

CDC defines "up to date" as follows:

i couldn't quickly find something saying Abrahams has been vaccinated and boosted but i did find something saying she's vaccinated and also stuff saying she's involved in outreach efforts to get other Black people vaccinated. If I had to bet I'd bet she's up to date on her vaccinations and is following CDC recommendations in that picture.

Of course, it's easy for an extremely biased entity like Hot Air to take a shot like that and create a quick impression that all of the rational context in the world won't change with the people who are already inclined not to like Democrats.

HotAir is well known to be moderate conservative and anti-Trump.

spin the hypocrisy all you want - those school kids were required to be masked and she flaunted a photo op without a mask

School mask mandates are not following the science and Abrams is a proponent of them. She, like most of the Ctrl-Left, is a hypocrite

Have fun this November

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And she claimed she only took the mask off for the photo…A couple of days ago photos released that showed her not wearing a mask the entire time.




https://www.outkick.com/more-maskless-s ... ol-photos/
Abrams is a big, fat, lying hypocrite. Or maybe she was just holding her breath the whole time..

[JohnStOnge]

I think that it's always possible to find lots of theoretical problems with case control studies, but they are well accepted in epidemiology. It is a very difficult thing. I also think the guy is being disingenuous in talking about randomized clinical trials because I think that is virtually impossible in this case. The idea of a randomized clinical trial is that some subjects are randomly assigned to the treatment and some are randomly assigned to the control group. And nobody knows which group they were assigned to.

So like with a vaccine, some subjects are randomly assigned to the treatment group that will receive the vaccine. Others are assigned to the control group that will receive the placebo. No member of either group knows which group they are in.

With masks, obviously, even if the treatment was wearing a mask there is no way people who were in the treatment group and the control group wouldn't know which group they are in. And the treatment isn't wearing a mask. Primarily, the treatment is defined by how many people around you are wearing a mask. So the treatment would be having everybody around each person in the treatment group wearing a mask at all times while the subject also wears a mask and the control group would be nobody around the person in the control group wearing a mask at all times and the control subject also not wearing a mask. It is an impossible experiment. Not going to happen. And you certainly couldn't have a situation where people in the treatment and control groups didn't know which group they were in.

To me, the fact that he makes a big deal about no randomized clinical trials means he's not writing in good faith.

Can't speak for the guy who is a professor, works in clinical trials, a biostatistician AND is in epidemiology, but if I'm right in speculating, the issue over the RCT is it is required at the highest levels for policy approval, but also used as a shield when opposing views are presented. IE Your study isn't an RCT, therefore it can't be included in our decision.

BTW I think the guy was being disingenuous when he wrote this:

Pre-pandemic, community masking was discouraged because the pre-existing evidence was negative. This is why Fauci was critical of it in early March 2020 on 60 minutes.

That interview was conducted before it was widely recognized that infected people without symptoms could transmit the disease. Fauci very clearly said that the purpose of wearing a mask was to prevent an infected individual from spreading the disease to others. He clearly supported the idea of wearing masks as source control. He kind of criticized the idea of wearing a mask because of the idea that it will protect the wearer. But he was definitely NOT critical of the idea of wearing a mask to prevent an infected individual from transmitting to others.

[SeattleGriz]

Can't speak for the guy who is a professor, works in clinical trials, a biostatistician AND is in epidemiology, but if I'm right in speculating, the issue over the RCT is it is required at the highest levels for policy approval, but also used as a shield when opposing views are presented. IE Your study isn't an RCT, therefore it can't be included in our decision.

BTW I think the guy was being disingenuous when he wrote this:

Pre-pandemic, community masking was discouraged because the pre-existing evidence was negative. This is why Fauci was critical of it in early March 2020 on 60 minutes.

That interview was conducted before it was widely recognized that infected people without symptoms could transmit the disease. Fauci very clearly said that the purpose of wearing a mask was to prevent an infected individual from spreading the disease to others. He clearly supported the idea of wearing masks as source control. He kind of criticized the idea of wearing a mask because of the idea that it will protect the wearer. But he was definitely NOT critical of the idea of wearing a mask to prevent an infected individual from transmitting to others.

Just stop. You've now told me I don't understand Evolutionary pressure, sterilizing immunity, vaccine waning, ineffective masking and now a well reputed, cited scientist.

[AZGrizFan]

BTW I think the guy was being disingenuous when he wrote this:



That interview was conducted before it was widely recognized that infected people without symptoms could transmit the disease. Fauci very clearly said that the purpose of wearing a mask was to prevent an infected individual from spreading the disease to others. He clearly supported the idea of wearing masks as source control. He kind of criticized the idea of wearing a mask because of the idea that it will protect the wearer. But he was definitely NOT critical of the idea of wearing a mask to prevent an infected individual from transmitting to others.

Just stop. You've now told me I don't understand Evolutionary pressure, sterilizing immunity, vaccine waning, ineffective masking and now a well reputed, cited scientist.

When John drinks the koolaid, he REALLY drinks the koolaid.

[SeattleGriz]

Just stop. You've now told me I don't understand Evolutionary pressure, sterilizing immunity, vaccine waning, ineffective masking and now a well reputed, cited scientist.

When John drinks the koolaid, he REALLY drinks the koolaid.

Guy has over 300 academic articles, works in the industry, but he's all wet.

[SDHornet]

Just stop. You've now told me I don't understand Evolutionary pressure, sterilizing immunity, vaccine waning, ineffective masking and now a well reputed, cited scientist.

When John drinks the koolaid, he REALLY drinks the koolaid.

JSO's mind must be melting with all these "in the know donk politicians" pivoting on a dime and disavowing everything he has been arguing for for the last 2 years.

[SDHornet]

This is what they did to kids. Fuck anyone who supported and thought masking kids ( the data shown there was no risk to kids 3 months into this "pandemic") to open schools was a good idea. Fuck these people.

[CAA Flagship]

Damn. If that's not the definition of "a keg with legs", I don't know what is.

[Gil Dobie]

This is what they did to kids. Fuck anyone who supported and thought masking kids ( the data shown there was no risk to kids 3 months into this "pandemic") to open schools was a good idea. Fuck these people.

No one said masks by themselves worked. It was never about kids wearing masks to protect themselves from covid. It was about the spread to adults. Very few wore masks as recommended. It was the original Trump recommendatios that led to mandates that people hated. Trump crawled into a bunker shortly after, with Brandon. Later came out when he could blame the dems for what he started.

[AZGrizFan]

This is what they did to kids. Fuck anyone who supported and thought masking kids ( the data shown there was no risk to kids 3 months into this "pandemic") to open schools was a good idea. Fuck these people.

I love those two kids in the front saying "fuck you and your mask-wearing sheep"...

[89Hen]

This is what they did to kids. Fuck anyone who supported and thought masking kids ( the data shown there was no risk to kids 3 months into this "pandemic") to open schools was a good idea. Fuck these people.

To be fair, the teacher could have emphatically said "We're wearing pajamas to school tomorrow" and it would have elicited the exact same reaction.

[CID1990]

This is what they did to kids. Fuck anyone who supported and thought masking kids ( the data shown there was no risk to kids 3 months into this "pandemic") to open schools was a good idea. Fuck these people.

No one said masks by themselves worked. It was never about kids wearing masks to protect themselves from covid. It was about the spread to adults. Very few wore masks as recommended. It was the original Trump recommendatios that led to mandates that people hated. Trump crawled into a bunker shortly after, with Brandon. Later came out when he could blame the dems for what he started.

Well that’s not true.

Here in Loudoun County VA you could hear the whole litany of reasons

Kids get sick and die too
Spread to the adults
Keeps teachers and staff safe
Kids spread it among themselves

There was so much unscientific, political bullshit flying around… at at the end of the day not one shred of data about how masking elementary children in schools had even the slightest impact on the original spread or any of the variants. And there’s plenty of data to be had too, because we had on full year of distance learning and now we have nearly one full year of in person school.

The data will be overwhelming one day but good luck getting a research grant for it while the Biden admin is around


Here’s a parting question….

If masks for children are to prevent them from spreading it to adults, then what is the purpose of vaccines for children down to age 2?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gil Dobie]

No one said masks by themselves worked. It was never about kids wearing masks to protect themselves from covid. It was about the spread to adults. Very few wore masks as recommended. It was the original Trump recommendatios that led to mandates that people hated. Trump crawled into a bunker shortly after, with Brandon. Later came out when he could blame the dems for what he started.

Well that’s not true.

Here in Loudoun County VA you could hear the whole litany of reasons

Kids get sick and die too
Spread to the adults
Keeps teachers and staff safe
Kids spread it among themselves

There was so much unscientific, political bullshit flying around… at at the end of the day not one shred of data about how masking elementary children in schools had even the slightest impact on the original spread or any of the variants. And there’s plenty of data to be had too, because we had on full year of distance learning and now we have nearly one full year of in person school.

The data will be overwhelming one day but good luck getting a research grant for it while the Biden admin is around


Here’s a parting question….

If masks for children are to prevent them from spreading it to adults, then what is the purpose of vaccines for children down to age 2?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I didn't see any medical links I follow say it was to prevent anyone from getting sick. Mayo Clinic has always said it was to reduce spread (Not Prevent). I wouldn't support vaccines for 2 year olds. 12 is young enough with parent permission. Where I saw masks implemented for kids, they had desks spread 6 feet apart. That may not be true in all cases. Like I said in my original post, most people, including children didn't were masks as recommended, and it was to be included with distances and other protocol. I just laugh at the political types, following their favorite social media, political oriented views. Mostly been following Mayo Clinic, and they don't agree with the Donks or the Conks on everything.

By Mayo Clinic Staff
Can face masks help slow the spread of the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)? Yes. Face masks combined with other preventive measures, such as getting vaccinated, frequent hand-washing and physical distancing, can help slow the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

[AZGrizFan]

This is what they did to kids. Fuck anyone who supported and thought masking kids ( the data shown there was no risk to kids 3 months into this "pandemic") to open schools was a good idea. Fuck these people.

To be fair, the teacher could have emphatically said "We're wearing pajamas to school tomorrow" and it would have elicited the exact same reaction.

And I had to laugh: "Starting tomorrow".....what the fuck is magical about "tomorrow"? Why not "beginning immediately, take those fucking things off!!"

[Gil Dobie]

To be fair, the teacher could have emphatically said "We're wearing pajamas to school tomorrow" and it would have elicited the exact same reaction.

And I had to laugh: "Starting tomorrow".....what the fuck is magical about "tomorrow"? Why not "beginning immediately, take those fucking things off!!"

I think they are mandated for the Dallas Stars game tonight.

[GannonFan]

By Mayo Clinic Staff
Can face masks help slow the spread of the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)? Yes. Face masks combined with other preventive measures, such as getting vaccinated, frequent hand-washing and physical distancing, can help slow the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

That's quite the qualifier, and gives no level of magnitude. No one has ever said that masks provide zero benefit to reducing the spread of the virus. The question has always been, how much protection does it give? Same as holding your hand in front of your face? Same as a piece of cloth? Same as an N95 mask? Obviously every little bit helps. The question is exactly how small is that little bit in terms of benefit. All evidence is now saying it's much smaller of a benefit than has been touted in the past (even though we knew then that it was a small benefit).

[SDHornet]

This is what they did to kids. Fuck anyone who supported and thought masking kids ( the data shown there was no risk to kids 3 months into this "pandemic") to open schools was a good idea. Fuck these people.

I love those two kids in the front saying "fuck you and your mask-wearing sheep"...

My kids daycare has a mask policy...

...and my kid is never dropped off in a mask. No one has said shit about it, and no one ever will. Do not comply.

[SDHornet]

[Gil Dobie]

By Mayo Clinic Staff
Can face masks help slow the spread of the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)? Yes. Face masks combined with other preventive measures, such as getting vaccinated, frequent hand-washing and physical distancing, can help slow the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

That's quite the qualifier, and gives no level of magnitude. No one has ever said that masks provide zero benefit to reducing the spread of the virus. The question has always been, how much protection does it give? Same as holding your hand in front of your face? Same as a piece of cloth? Same as an N95 mask? Obviously every little bit helps. The question is exactly how small is that little bit in terms of benefit. All evidence is now saying it's much smaller of a benefit than has been touted in the past (even though we knew then that it was a small benefit).

Social media on the anti mask side has been spouting mask are worthless, even against reducing spread. I don't think I have to look very far to find a lot of quotes from sources saying mask do nothing. Just read this thread. I don't believe masks provide much if and protection from incoming particulates. It's always been about slowing the spread as the Mayo article says.

[SDHornet]