Lifting Masks = Back to Getting Down With The Sickness

[crimson5pheonix]

When and where?

I'm not going to go back through the pages and quote you again when I've already said each and every time you've posted something that actually supports masking up. Learn to read.

That article is constantly comparing apples and oranges like severe cases in Taiwan to flu cases in the US where people sought medical attention. That could be two completely different categorizations. Plus, Taiwan has less than a tenth the population of the US so US numbers will look way higher until you do per capita. I'm not seeing anything showing that any Asian countries have "solved" the flu basically.

Even if you adjust to per capita, 84 deaths means a much much much lower rate of death for Taiwan compared to the US.

The study I linked to about all the states also used survey data and not just went based off mask mandates.

Literally does not matter as it's based around how the people around you mask up. None of what you post actually addresses the issue, apart from your anecdotes which aren't scientific.

Yeah, N95s are for airborne particles, that's what I alluded to by saying if normal masks help so much against infection, then why are there N95 masks?

If you don't know by now, you will never know. You are completely incapable of understanding even basic logic and the difference between spreading a disease and catching a disease.

 

[Silvanus]

Yeah, N95s are for airborne particles, that's what I alluded to by saying if normal masks help so much against infection, then why are there N95 masks?

"If pencils are so good at writing, then why do pens exist? Eh? Ehhhh?"

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I'm not going to go back through the pages and quote you again when I've already said each and every time you've posted something that actually supports masking up. Learn to read.

I'm just saying why would I post data that shows masks work when arguing that they don't.

Even if you adjust to per capita, 84 deaths means a much much much lower rate of death for Taiwan compared to the US.

US numbers are way better than Taiwans.

FastStats - Influenza

www.cdc.gov

Pneumonia and influenza deaths in Taiwan at 10-year low: Annals of Internal Medicine | Taiwan News | 2021-02-03 20:23:00

Slight rise in traffic deaths might be result of move away from public transport | 2021-02-03 20:23:00

www.taiwannews.com.tw

Literally does not matter as it's based around how the people around you mask up. None of what you post actually addresses the issue, apart from your anecdotes which aren't scientific.

And your anecdotes that say Asians wear masks better than Westerners are not anecdotes? And just about everyone I've seen in public has worn masks properly (outside of kids obviously) because at the start I actually looked for people wearing the mask below the nose because if people around me weren't wearing the mask over the nose, I was going to the same (since I had covid so I didn't care about wearing a mask or wearing it properly). Over the last month (since the CDC announcement), quite a lot that are still wearing masks now are wearing them poorly, I don't get why they're even wearing them anymore. I went to Jersey Mike's for lunch today and literally not a single mask in the whole place.

If you don't know by now, you will never know. You are completely incapable of understanding even basic logic and the difference between spreading a disease and catching a disease.

No, I fully understand that. I'm not sure if you said it in our back and forth but I know it's been said that masks also protect the wearer (the catching) as well. That's why I've been saying what I've been saying. Again, I'm not sure if it linked this video to you already or someone else. Like I said, I bought into the whole masks lowering viral load and all that jazz but the data after now a year just isn't there to support it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/11/12/covid-masks-protect-wearers/

"If pencils are so good at writing, then why do pens exist? Eh? Ehhhh?"

For the short time nurses and doctors go into a room, they wouldn't need N95s if normal masks worked so well.

 

[Silvanus]

For the short time nurses and doctors go into a room, they wouldn't need N95s if normal masks worked so well.

Shocking suggestion: perhaps the quality of PPE that's advisable in a particularly high-risk environment such as a hospital is greater than elsewhere.

 

[Kwak]

For the short time nurses and doctors go into a room, they wouldn't need N95s if normal masks worked so well.

On them or the infectious patient who has been filling the room with expiration particles before they enter?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

I'm just saying why would I post data that shows masks work when arguing that they don't.

It's a very excellent question. My theory has been that you don't read.

US numbers are way better than Taiwans.

Again, I can find plenty of counter examples, that's why I said I wasn't going to bring it up any more.

And your anecdotes that say Asians wear masks better than Westerners are not anecdotes? And just about everyone I've seen in public has worn masks properly (outside of kids obviously) because at the start I actually looked for people wearing the mask below the nose because if people around me weren't wearing the mask over the nose, I was going to the same (since I had covid so I didn't care about wearing a mask or wearing it properly). Over the last month (since the CDC announcement), quite a lot that are still wearing masks now are wearing them poorly, I don't get why they're even wearing them anymore. I went to Jersey Mike's for lunch today and literally not a single mask in the whole place.

Neat, but SE Asia does have better pandemic discipline than the west and thusly, SE Asia has faced far far less issues from the pandemic. You can talk about Jersey Mikes all you like, but it doesn't matter.

No, I fully understand that. I'm not sure if you said it in our back and forth but I know it's been said that masks also protect the wearer (the catching) as well. That's why I've been saying what I've been saying. Again, I'm not sure if it linked this to you already or someone else. Like I said, I bought into the whole masks lowering viral load and all that jazz but the data after now a year just isn't there to support it.

Your own source spends half it's talking time saying that it prevents the spread first and foremost. You're just brainwashed by youtube videos.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Shocking suggestion: perhaps the quality of PPE that's advisable in a particularly high-risk environment such as a hospital is greater than elsewhere.

On them or the infectious patient who has been filling the room with expiration particles before they enter?

I wasn't the one saying masks work for the wearer, the experts were, I posted links to said articles. If masks work as well as everyone claims, then why do you need an N95 for airborne diseases to go into a room for a few minutes? Surely, an indoor place where you're with someone for hours is more dangerous than a patient room for a few minutes and a normal cloth mask is all that's required there.

It's a very excellent question. My theory has been that you don't read.

Again, I haven't posted anything that said masks work. Sure, some of my articles are basically like 2 studies showed masks did something, then 2 studies showed they didn't. But that's the point, we've never had consistent data over decades showing masks do much of anything.

Again, I can find plenty of counter examples, that's why I said I wasn't going to bring it up any more.

I'm just saying I don't think anyone has solved the flu by masking as I think we'd know like how the flu vanished last season. If the flu has been basically gone from Japan or China or Taiwan, we'd probably know that. Sure, Asian countries might do a bit better against the flu than us but I very much doubt it's some major difference. And, there's probably different reporting in different countries for the flu so it's probably hard to compare anyway and come to a solid conclusion.

Neat, but SE Asia does have better pandemic discipline than the west and thusly, SE Asia has faced far far less issues from the pandemic. You can talk about Jersey Mikes all you like, but it doesn't matter.

I'm just telling you what the pandemic has been like in northwest Indiana and central Indiana, which I'm not sure how close to average that is in comparison to the rest of the US. SE Asia has had way better procedures and policies in place because of previous SARS and other outbreaks. Here's what Taiwan was doing very early in the pandemic. And look at what South Korea had setup with contact tracing and way better testing out the gate than the US. Many measures were put in place beyond masking in Asian countries that it's kinda ridiculous to claim masking is the reason they've done so well. Limiting the amount of virus in your country is the one key thing that links every country that did very well together. New Zealand did better than South Korea and didn't mask, the main difference is that less virus was in New Zealand.

Your own source spends half it's talking time saying that it prevents the spread first and foremost. You're just brainwashed by youtube videos.

How am I brainwashed by watching a Youtube video and then disagreeing with it? If I was brainwashed, wouldn't I just agree with it? I read/listen/watch many different takes on something to before forming my opinion on anything. Nobody is consistently right about everything so I don't blindly trust anyone. The CDC literally has said that "wearing a mask blocks you from inhaling potential virus-containing particles in the air". Basically, yes I understand the difference between wearing a mask to prevent "spreading" and "catching". I'm only saying that masks are supposed to work (somewhat) against "catching" because that's what the freaking CDC said and other experts. Yet there's no real-world data showing masks have done much of anything.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Again, I haven't posted anything that said masks work. Sure, some of my articles are basically like 2 studies showed masks did something, then 2 studies showed they didn't. But that's the point, we've never had consistent data over decades showing masks do much of anything.

You have tho. Several times. You just don't read the part that says masks work.

Limiting the amount of virus in your country is the one key thing that links every country that did very well together.

This is what masking does, yes, thank you for agreeing.

How am I brainwashed by watching a Youtube video and then disagreeing with it? If I was brainwashed, wouldn't I just agree with it? I read/listen/watch many different takes on something to before forming my opinion on anything. Nobody is consistently right about everything so I don't blindly trust anyone. The CDC literally has said that "wearing a mask blocks you from inhaling potential virus-containing particles in the air". Basically, yes I understand the difference between wearing a mask to prevent "spreading" and "catching". I'm only saying that masks are supposed to work (somewhat) against "catching" because that's what the freaking CDC said and other experts. Yet there's no real-world data showing masks have done much of anything.

They've published the data to show that it's true, but still secondary to spreading it. They say the primary purpose is to stop spreading it. They say the most important part is to not spread it. They say the mechanics are to prevent spread.

They just also say there's a minor incidental benefit to stop from catching it, but you should still wear a mask to prevent spreading it.

You're putting undo weight on something because you're prejudiced against it. Watching funny beany man.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You have tho. Several times. You just don't read the part that says masks work.

You don't seem to read the part that says masks don't work.

This is what masking does, yes, thank you for agreeing.

There's no evidence that masking reduces infections.

I wonder why Taiwan just recently saw a spike in cases then? I thought masks offer such amazing protection!!! Funny when you let more virus in, cases go up basically irregardless if you mask or not.

They've published the data to show that it's true, but still secondary to spreading it. They say the primary purpose is to stop spreading it. They say the most important part is to not spread it. They say the mechanics are to prevent spread.

They just also say there's a minor incidental benefit to stop from catching it, but you should still wear a mask to prevent spreading it.

You're putting undo weight on something because you're prejudiced against it. Watching funny beany man.

How am I prejudiced against masks when I was very much for masks before? I went along with the mechanics and with the "better safe than sorry" approach because we didn't know. Now, after a year, show me the fucking data that shows masks have done anything because I ain't seeing any.

Just because the mechanics say something works doesn't mean it works in the real-world. The mechanics of many drugs say they work but that doesn't equate to them working.

"So there's this huge gap between mechanistic science and actual empirical data on what actually works in the real world."

 

[crimson5pheonix]

You don't seem to read the part that says masks don't work.

I did, there's very very little evidence masks don't work in the face of evidence for masks working.

There's no evidence that masking reduces infections.

Apart from all the evidence you've posted.

I wonder why Taiwan just recently saw a spike in cases then? I thought masks offer such amazing protection!!! Funny when you let more virus in, cases go up basically irregardless if you mask or not.

Why Taiwan's COVID-19 Defenses Finally Faltered

A Lions Club meeting and tea houses in Taipei's red light district helped break down the world's most vaunted COVID-19 protections.

time.com

Because there was an outbreak in a social area that basically can't mask.

Ta-da, you played yourself.

How am I prejudiced against masks when I was very much for masks before? I went along with the mechanics and with the "better safe than sorry" approach because we didn't know. Now, after a year, show me the fucking data that shows masks have done anything because I ain't seeing any.

Just because the mechanics say something works doesn't mean it works in the real-world. The mechanics of many drugs say they work but that doesn't equate to them working.

"So there's this huge gap between mechanistic science and actual empirical data on what actually works in the real world."

There isn't a gap. you're just illiterate to the science.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I did, there's very very little evidence masks don't work in the face of evidence for masks working.


There isn't a gap. you're just illiterate to the science.

Where is all of this evidence of masks working?

So, then you're pro hydroxychloroquine then?

 

[Kwak]

Oh no...

Is Ivermectin for Covid-19 Based on Fraudulent Research?

A tale of what could be, if true, the most consequential medical fraud ever committed

gidmk.medium.com

-
The rather horrifying reality is that there have been enormous numbers of people treated with ivermectin largely based on a trial that, if it is not entirely fraudulent, is so flawed that it should never have been used for any treatment decisions anyway. Even if we ignore the fake data uploaded with the study, it is hard to walk past the innumerable other issues that the research has.

Where does that leave us on the question of whether ivermectin works for COVID-19? Well, firstly, once you exclude Elgazzar from the research pool the current best evidence shows a fairly consistent lack of benefit. There are still one or two small, very positive trials, but in general ivermectin does not appear to reduce your risk of death from COVID-19.

Now, there are much larger trials ongoing to answer this question with certainty, and I eagerly await their results — as I’ve said before, the main problem right now is that the evidence simply isn’t good enough to be sure either way. However, if the single largest trial so far on a drug turns out to have been fraudulent, it is not a promising sign.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Where is all of this evidence of masks working?

You've posted it all, study after study saying masks work.

So, then you're pro hydroxychloroquine then?

To be honest I haven't looked into it. Masks are simple, but I'm not a biochemist.

 

[Catfood220]

Britain basically gets rid of all its Covid restrictions on Monday including the wearing of masks. Now, I hate wearing masks, but seeing as I haven't had so much as a sniffle all year, I think I'm going to keep wearing mine in shops or where there are a lot of people and see if I can hold off having a cold for as long as possible.

 

[Agema]

Britain basically gets rid of all its Covid restrictions on Monday including the wearing of masks. Now, I hate wearing masks, but seeing as I haven't had so much as a sniffle all year, I think I'm going to keep wearing mine in shops or where there are a lot of people and see if I can hold off having a cold for as long as possible.

Correction: all legal requirements from central government to wear masks cease, but in fact many other organisations will retain mask mandates - transport companies may still require passengers to wear masks when travelling, shops may demands shoppers wear masks, etc. It is the government's way of saying "it's not our problem, it's your problem: so if things go wrong it's your fault." This is an act of mass cowardice by the UK government. Never mind they say things like "this is the irrevocable end of covid restrictions! (Unless circumstances dictate)" - so, not at all irrevocable, then.

Just to remind everyone where we are, the UK is back to over 40,000 daily covid infections. To put this in context, this is pretty much peak awfulness from back in January after the Christmas get-along led to skyrocketing cases, with subsequent deaths of over 1000 people a day from covid-19. Thankfully, due to vaccination, the casualty rates from this surge are likely to be an order of magnitude lower. Hospitalisations will likewise be vastly lower than January, but they are already getting quite high and will be a persistent and frustrating burden on an already exhausted health system. As usual, the Tory government's only interest is squeezing every last drop from the health service and putting barely anything in. I would not be surprised if over the next few years this ends in mass staff exodus and major, lasting institutional damage. Which is of course fantastic for the Tories, because then they can do what they've always wanted and privatise services. That's what the Tories do, after all. They break public services in order to create a justification for privatisation.

 

[Agema]

Oh no...

Is Ivermectin for Covid-19 Based on Fraudulent Research?

A tale of what could be, if true, the most consequential medical fraud ever committed

gidmk.medium.com

Oh. Oh wow. That is bad.

The article is right to say that this indicates a major problem in science. Science functions on an implicit assumption that researchers are honest. Assuming the allegations are true, this indicates how serious it can be when they are not.

Spoiler: Some thoughts on scientific publishing

I once applied for a job with an academic publisher. They wanted a "managing editor" for one of their busiest journals to work alongside the scientific editors. This was about taking administrative burden off the scientific editors, and a major part of this was that the paper was plagued with a substantial proportion of studies it was concerned were fraudulent. There was one country in particular mentioned as a source of this flood of possibly fraudulent papers. In the same vein, we cannot ignore the profusion of predatory publishers, or even just the profusion of new journals - even some under reputable publishers - that may have disturbingly weak standards. In short, academic publishing is being flooded with bullshit like the rest of the internet. This is why when I teach students how to analyse papers, I tell them to check out the reputations of the journal, authors and institutions. I know it sounds a terrible thing to say that the university of Wherever has no reputation for quality work alone to put caveats on their work, and it certainly stands the risk of accusations of cultural superiority and even racism levelled at the West, but this indicates a lot of why. Particularly shitty data tends to come much more from low rank institutions, which are more in the developing world, and published in lower rank journals. We all know major papers also mistakenly publish fraud - it can be headline news because of the impact - but we have to remember that it is going on vastly more in less presitigious journals.

But this does perhaps indicate that science needs to be a lot more rigorous about paper analysis. The standard peer review process possibly needs to be reformed and expanded for a more forensic analysis of submitted studies, and authors should be expected to submit raw data accordingly. This also perhaps should be taken as a sign that we need to rethink how preprints are used. Potentially, this article would never have passed peer review - but it's potentially done a done of damage without having to. I certainly also hope that authors / journals who have written meta-analyses heavily reliant on it retract those too.

The rather horrifying reality is that there have been enormous numbers of people treated with ivermectin largely based on a trial that, if it is not entirely fraudulent, is so flawed that it should never have been used for any treatment decisions anyway. Even if we ignore the fake data uploaded with the study, it is hard to walk past the innumerable other issues that the research has.

Yes, and no. In reality, the bulk of the key decision-makers in science and medicine very rightly held the line against ivermectin, because they (like most scientists and doctors) could see any studies in the positive were so weak or flawed.

A lot of politicians folded, because they lacked the courage to tell their people that the quick fix and easy hope wasn't actually there. And a lot of medical professionals folded because they didn't really know any better (I have strong doubts about the capabilities of many medical professionals to analyse scientific literature) and didn't have any clear guidance. It's not just the developing world either: crankery has been in the West, too. As I said in the spoiler, I would hope those authors whose meta-analyses and reviews have their results heavily biased by this study voluntarily retract them too.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Due to surge in coronavirus cases, L.A. County reimposing indoor mask requirement

Due to surge in coronavirus cases, L.A. County reimposing indoor mask requirement

www.yahoo.com

Barely 1 month after removing the mandate, L.A. County is putting them back on. Hooray. Everyone rejoice.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You've posted it all, study after study saying masks work.

Can't any harder...

Just to remind everyone where we are, the UK is back to over 40,000 daily covid infections. To put this in context, this is pretty much peak awfulness from back in January after the Christmas get-along led to skyrocketing cases, with subsequent deaths of over 1000 people a day from covid-19. Thankfully, due to vaccination, the casualty rates from this surge are likely to be an order of magnitude lower. Hospitalisations will likewise be vastly lower than January, but they are already getting quite high and will be a persistent and frustrating burden on an already exhausted health system. As usual, the Tory government's only interest is squeezing every last drop from the health service and putting barely anything in. I would not be surprised if over the next few years this ends in mass staff exodus and major, lasting institutional damage. Which is of course fantastic for the Tories, because then they can do what they've always wanted and privatise services. That's what the Tories do, after all. They break public services in order to create a justification for privatisation.

A large chuck of those infections are from vaccinated people to where the infections are basically meaningless. Once you have either natural or vaccine immunity, "infection" is no longer a bad word. The amount of infections in unvaccinated people are down 22% actually.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Can't any harder...

I feel that's how everyone here feels about your posts. We can all go back and see your sources which almost all say masks work.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I feel that's how everyone here feels about your posts. We can all go back and see your sources which almost all say masks work.

Yes, an article that goes over studies for surgical masks and concludes that they are mainly worn for tradition and "better safe than sorry" because the data says they don't really do anything somehow is "proof" that masks work...