? masking ?

Post all political posts here.

Moderators: Hobie, AmBraCol

Forum rules
The rules are simple...
- no advocation of violence to anyone
- no cursing

Violation of the rules will result in deletion of the topic.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

news someone can use
The New England Journal of Medicine, April 1, 2020 www.NEJM.orgIt is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks arenot only tools, they are also talismansthat may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety,especially during times of crisis. One might arguethat fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask, particularly in light of the worldwide mask shortage, but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis. Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety,over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19.Masks do notprevent virus respiratory illness.Size matters!Viruses are 50x smaller than bacteria and 1000x smaller than a hairsize of bacteria = 5 micrometer (5 μm)size of particles in wood smoke (wildfire): 0.4-0.7 micrometers (0.5 μm)size of virus= 0.1 micrometer (Influenza and SARS-CoV-2)(0.1μm)comparison: human hair is 100micrometers(100μm)(one million micrometers = one meter)CDC: “Cloth masks do not catch small harmful particles in smoke.”Transmission of SARS-CoV-2Droplets•Virus is transmitted through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks. Larger respiratory droplets (>5 μm) remain in the air for only a short time and travel only short distances, generally <1 meter. They fall to the ground quickly.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanr ... ltext•This idea guides the CDC’s advice to maintain at least a 6-foot distance.•Virus-laden small (<5 μm) aerosolized droplets can remain in the air for at least 3 hours and travel long distances. •https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NE ... ls=trueAir currents•In air-conditioned environment these large droplets may travel farther.•However, ventilation —even the opening of an entrance door and a small window can dilute the number of small droplets to one half after 30 seconds.
(This study looked at droplets from uninfected persons). This is clinically relevant because poorly ventilated and populated spaces, like public transport and nursing homes, have high SARS-CoV-2 disease transmission despite physical distancing.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanr ... 9/fulltext
https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.co ... cience.pdf

haven't i been saying it all along?

and more, here's the same info with regards to fires:

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.co ... rences.pdf


Oh Yeah, here's a Doctor weighing in:
Masks –Civil LibertiesSimone Gold, MD, JD, FABEMIt is clear to me as a physician-lawyer that the disinformation about both Covid-19 and the Constitution has caused us to turn a medical issue into a legal crisis.The scientific usefulness of a mask has been so aggressively overstated, and the foundational importance of the Constitution has been so aggressively understated, that wehave normalized people screaming obscenities at each other while hiking.The Covid virus was supposed to be contained in the kind of lab where people wear astronaut suits and go through triple sealed doors. It is a con of massive proportion to assert that now, having escaped those environs, a bandana will magically do the trick.After all, size matters.\The pore size of cloth face coverings range from ~ 20-100 microns. The Covid virus is 200-1000x smaller than that, at 0.1 microns. Putting up a chain link fence will not keep out a mosquito. Even the most esteemed medical journals admit their purpose is to calm anxiety. “Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety ...” Of course, by knowledge or common sense observation, most Americans already know that masking everyone is superstition. But unlike privately carrying a lucky charm, mandating facial coverings requires the consent of the governed.Many cultures mandate clothing that appears totally irrational to outsiders. Never have those cultures pretended that there is a scientific basis for their clothing requirement. Their leaders rule, and their citizens accept, that their choice of clothing is due to religious or cultural preference.Not wearing a mask is not mere “personal choice” like deciding between a head covering or a t-shirt. It is a flashpoint for being a free human being who has consented to be governed but has not consented to be ruled. We do not consent to a masked America, because that is a fundamental change in American society, culture, norms, and rights.People who are apathetic toward their own liberty cannot eliminate Constitutional rights for those who are not. This is not the first (or last) time that people who believe in superstition are screaming the loudest. The Constitution exists precisely to protect all people during times of mass hysteria.The mask has become the most visible symbol of #socialconditioning to Americans determined to preserve individual freedom. Thus far most Americans have continued to give their consent to be governed. But you are trying our patience.
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 27692
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by AJMD429 »

The same sphincters who scream that we have to "follow the science" and that "science is settled" are the ones who completely IGNORE actual science, and ignore any actual facts that don't support their twisted agenda.

Masks are 'useful' for virtue-signaling, and keeping drool or nose-hairs from falling into the surgical field from operating-room staff. IF USED AS PART OF A COMPLETE SYSTEM of gowning, shoe-covers, gloving, hair-covers, controlled air-flow, and disinfectants, they can be helpful. Otherwise they are not only a waste of resources, one more 'disposable' thing to mess up the environment, and may in fact make the spread of disease WORSE due to misdirected resources, false sense of security, and parking 'droplets' in front of exhalations so they can become the much-more-dangerous 'aerosols' instead of settling to the floor.

The same people becoming obsessed with forcing others to wear masks are the ones ignoring REAL science that suggests people should take vitamin D, zinc, and quite possibly ivermectin or other safe and simple things that may seriously limit the contagion and damage of CoVid-19. They are the ones telling us a vaccine of a type never before used in humans (mRNA vaccine) is 'completely safe' and we should all rush out and get it. They are the same ones who advise us to over-test everyone, and base treatment decisions on those tests as if they are 100% accurate.

It is so very, very, very difficult to come up with reasons to respect 'liberals'..... :roll:
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
stretch
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2083
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by stretch »

.......and may in fact make the spread of disease WORSE due to misdirected resources
Masks are mostly theater - just like the TSA.

Staying away from other people - particularly indoors - is still the best defense against any respiratory
infection transmitted by humans.

If everybody wears a mask, washes their hands, and maintains distance to his fellow man - an entire
'system' as mentioned above - then the rate of infection will drop.

I'm unlikely to contact the disease from someone in Beijing, for example.

-Stretch
mickbr
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 535
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:29 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by mickbr »

Look at those places in the world with no masks, no increased transmission, some less cases and deaths than mask wearing. I get tired of this virus that needs so many excuses to explain why it doesnt make sense. 160 x 3rd world countries barely hit, black, white, asian, starving communities, all apparently shrug it off. While the 1st world torches our kids future to save geriatrics.
Last edited by mickbr on Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 27692
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by AJMD429 »

The fact that those maskless Third World countries did so well was one of the things that led to the discovery of ivermectin being so helpful, because it’s been heavily used in many of those places, and the people who take it very rarely get COVID-19.
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
mickbr
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 535
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:29 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by mickbr »

Doc I worked in international relief. The idea that ivermectin saturation really occurred througout the 3rd world is erroneous. We are talking 130+ countries, many regions not covered, some countries not interested, the usual issues of delivering medical and aid programs, a vast number o folks on the ground dont get it. There is no penetration into many hostile areas, tribal areas, remote islands, or mega-slums specfically. Throughout the thousands of reporting areas we are talking, there should be hundreds of 'misses'. Aka the virus hitting full force, unrestricted, six figure + deaths in individual areas. But there isnt. This had 12 months to prove what it can do and what it can do is barely beat TB and diaorhea for global deaths. its a bad regular flu, according to the numbers. Most people I know in the 3rd world just want to get back to work. The real issue for them now is global supply shut down putting 250 million in starvation risk.if they dont open things up we are going to have a catastophe to match the black death.
Bullard4075
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:14 pm
Location: Billings, Montana

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Bullard4075 »

Good info. Looks like losing sight of their goals they redouble their efforts. Or ....what are their goals ??
"Any man who covers his face and packs a gun is a legitimate target for any decent citizen"
Jeff Cooper
Larkbill
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 643
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:31 pm
Location: St Peters, Mo.

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Larkbill »

All you have to look at is our own "third world". The homeless communities seem to be largely unaffected by The Wuhan.

I've yet to get an answer to my question, "if masks are so effective then why don't they just swab the mask to test?" The tests have a high enough failure rate that it can't possibly matter.

I love the ones who say "follow the science". Scientists for the most part give you their opinion. What is the last thing your Doc often says? "You might want to get a second opinion". This is an engineering challenge. What engineer will tell you to use a filter with holes 100 times larger than the contaminant to be excluded?
___________________________________________________________________
I'm not paranoid because I carry a gun. Why should I be paranoid. I've got a gun.
User avatar
mikld
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:46 pm
Location: So. Orygun!

Re: ? masking ?

Post by mikld »

I'm just an old mechanic with a bit of common sense. I am not an infectious disease specialist, but I do think for myself and don't believe the government is "out to get us", wearing mask mandates aren't tyranny, or any of the other conspiracy theories. So, this exemplifies my thinking on mask wearing;
Mask explaination.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Mike
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit...
I've learned how to stand on my own two knees...
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

nice try Mike.

mask mandates are in fact tyranny, unless you can find a mask mandate clause in the Constitution.

the ones making the mandates have no legal authority to do so, so that too qualifies the mandates as tyranny.

if your opinion is what makes you decide for me and my family what we wear when and where, that too is tyranny.

the pee poster is cute and crudely funny, but has zero application to virii passing through masks

it is a matter of scientific fact that the masks you recommend cannot and do not impede the spread of wuhaanflu. scientific fact based on explicit experimentation to determine whether or not the masks stop the spread of the virus.

maybe ignorance is bliss, but why would you think that your level of analysis supercedes the actual relevant science?

and, "you don't believe the government is out to get us"? ? ? what then is the government out to get? it has constantly, daily lied to us nonstop for four straight years, including stampeding gullible people who can "think for themselves", into tolerating a shutdown of their jobs, their property, and their opportunities, their freedom of assembly and their freedom to worship. which means to me that the government already got us.

perhaps you could offer a suggestion of what would constitute a government out to get us in your mind.

Agape,
User avatar
mikld
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:46 pm
Location: So. Orygun!

Re: ? masking ?

Post by mikld »

Boy! Have I been put in "my" place. I'm thankful that an epidemiologists and Constitutional Scholar straightened me out. So, by your definition seat belts are tyranny? Bicycle and motorcycle helmets tyranny? Food/FDA requirements for everything sold to be eaten is tyranny? REBEL! STOP SIGNS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS ARE TYRANNY!

I'll just go back, quietly sit on my stool, and watch all the experts on Levergunz and ignore the rest of this thread...
Mike
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit...
I've learned how to stand on my own two knees...
Larkbill
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 643
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:31 pm
Location: St Peters, Mo.

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Larkbill »

mikld wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:07 pm
Boy! Have I been put in "my" place. I'm thankful that an epidemiologists and Constitutional Scholar straightened me out. So, by your definition seat belts are tyranny? Bicycle and motorcycle helmets tyranny? Food/FDA requirements for everything sold to be eaten is tyranny? REBEL! STOP SIGNS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS ARE TYRANNY!

I'll just go back, quietly sit on my stool, and watch all the experts on Levergunz and ignore the rest of this thread...
Sorry, but all the things you chose to compare to masks are proven to have a benefit. The masks are not. Most of the masks I see people wearing are labeled as "unclassified by NIOSH". Why do you suppose that is? The "pretty" and "distinctive" masks made from ordinary knit cloth are even worse, nothing but sugar pills. And btw, I'm fine with not requiring motorcycle helmets. I've always said if you think you don't need one then you probably don't.

I'm actually surprised that someone like the nejm is admitting what several friends and I have been asking. What happens when the mask becomes saturated? Yep. Atomization. That fluid dynamics study that was passed around came close to admitting it when they admitted that a sneeze or cough should still be contained into one's bent elbow. The mask doesn't contain it at all.

I'm reminded of the Dr. Suess story with the Sneetches. Some with stars on their bellies who thought they were better.
___________________________________________________________________
I'm not paranoid because I carry a gun. Why should I be paranoid. I've got a gun.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

mikld wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:07 pm
Boy! Have I been put in "my" place. I'm thankful that an epidemiologists and Constitutional Scholar straightened me out. So, by your definition seat belts are tyranny? Bicycle and motorcycle helmets tyranny? Food/FDA requirements for everything sold to be eaten is tyranny? REBEL! STOP SIGNS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS ARE TYRANNY!

I'll just go back, quietly sit on my stool, and watch all the experts on Levergunz and ignore the rest of this thread...
one more chance Mike. and if you want to get into a peeing contest, you came to the wrong place. I asked you for evidence for your view.

and, "you don't believe the government is out to get us"? ? ? what then is the government out to get? it has constantly, daily lied to us nonstop for four straight years, including stampeding gullible people who can "think for themselves", into tolerating a shutdown of their jobs, their property, and their opportunities, their freedom of assembly and their freedom to worship. which means to me that the government already got us.

perhaps you could offer a suggestion of what would constitute a government out to get us in your mind.
what i listed, repeated above, is FACTS of the damage the out-of-control state and federal governments have caused. if you have no FACTS to offer it's ok by me. The FACTS i mentioned are EVIDENCE that can and will stand up in a court of law. not personal opinions. not misinformation. and not personal. it's not about you, it's about the criminal consequences of the "mandating" entities who have no legal authorization to do what they have done, their actions are unconstitutional and constitute a government out to get us.

if you have FACTS that could stand up in court as EVIDENCE, then by all means explain how the loss of jobs, loss of income, loss of the RIGHT of free assembly, loss of life in both adult and juvenile suicide, all those consequences of the unconstitutional "mandates", I would like to see it. Just the FACTS. thanks very much for participating.

Grizz
User avatar
mikld
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:46 pm
Location: So. Orygun!

Re: ? masking ?

Post by mikld »

I bow two the Almighty Anonymous Virologist and Constitutional Scholar. Arguing with a self appointed science expert on all things dealing with human beings is like wrestling with a pig...

It is so kind of you to offer me "one more chance", but unfortunately my credentials only include Substance Abuse Counseling, Heavy Equipment Electronics and advanced mechanical repair. Debating anonymously/via the web has never been my forte. I cannot convenience/sway any self appointed scientist/virus specialist. So, you have the last word...
Mike
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit...
I've learned how to stand on my own two knees...
jkbrea
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 983
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: S. of Jackson, Wyoming

Re: ? masking ?

Post by jkbrea »

I spoke with a trauma surgeon last week that came to our range to sight in a rifle. I asked him his opinion on masks. He said it was worthless. He explained that in his profession he wears them in surgery for a brief limited amount of time and even then, changes them. They are contaminated the second you touch them. The public is wearing the same mask for days until they lose them or they damage them. They store them in their pockets, glove box, counter tops, etc. Or get them from an open box handled by numerous strangers at business entrances.
Even if you put on a clean fresh mask when you go shopping and load your shopping cart , handling all kinds of goods, the mask is contaminated when you remove it. Most people keep using that contaminated mask/bandana over and over which is much worse than not wearing one.
I recently had the unpleasure to drive to Ca. I saw hundreds of homeless in LA area. They don't wear masks. Why haven't they been wiped out. They live in extremely unhealthy environments.
Most businesses only enforce the mask rules so they can stay open, not because they think it prevents covid. The fact that a government agency including town councils can enforce this on citizens on private property is insane.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

So, you have the last word...
thanks so much.

Sir, here is the last Word: PrayersUP that you might hear Christ's Spirit and yield to Him.

Jesus Came to Save Sinners

By David J. Stewart | September 2009

John 3:17, “For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world;
but that the world through him might be saved.”

The Bible teaches that Jesus DIDN'T come into the world to condemn anyone; but rather, to save sinners. What a precious truth! It is the Law of God that condemns all mankind. Many people mistakenly believe that the Ten Commandments are a plan of salvation, but they are not. God's Law condemns all of us as miserable failures and guilty sinners (Romans 3:10-23).

I certainly don't condemn anyone, for the Bible condemns all of us as guilty, dirty, rotten, hell-deserving sinners. My salvation solely rests in Christ's righteousness, because of the precious blood that He gave for our sins.

When the rich young man came to Jesus in Mark10:17-22, he was self-righteous. The young man thought that keeping God's Law could save him. He bragged to Jesus that he had kept all the commandments. Jesus pointed out to him that he was covetous, and had not kept the Law perfectly. The young man was very sad because Jesus told him to go sell and give away his worldly possessions. Jesus wasn't giving that young man a plan of salvation; He was using the Law as it was intended to be used—to show men their sinfulness and need for a Savior.

The Law condemns; Jesus saves!

There is so much false teaching today because people don't understand this basic Biblical truth. Salvation simply involves acknowledging one's guilt of sin under God's Law and then trusting upon the Savior for forgiveness. There is much condemnation today from religious folks, who put sinners on trial and demand that they clean up their life in order to be saved. Others teach that a person must "persevere" in holy living in order to get to Heaven. And then there are those religious folks who teach that a person can lose their salvation if they go into sin. All of these false doctrines are rooted in the keeping of the Law, which is a road to Hell.

The Bible says that JESUS CAME TO SAVE SINNERS!

In 1st Timothy 1:15 the Apostle Paul said, “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to SAVE SINNERS; of whom I am chief.” The reason why Jesus Christ came into this world was to SAVE SINNERS. May I say to all you religious folks who teach a false gospel... let Jesus SAVE SINNERS! Salvation is of the Lord. It is the Lord's job to save sinners.

It's time for Lordship Salvationists to stop condemning people and let JESUS SAVE SINNERS!

It's time for Calvinists to stop condemning people who fail to persevere and let JESUS SAVE SINNERS!

It's time for those who teach that salvation can be lost to stop condemning people and let JESUS SAVE SINNERS!

If Jesus didn't come into the world to condemn sinners, then neither should we. Jesus came to SAVE SINNERS and that is the wonderful message of the Gospel. Romans 4:5 wonderfully proclaims, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” Amen and amen! A man's faith is COUNTED for righteousness, because we have no self-righteousness of our own to offer God (Isaiah 64:6). The Bible says here that Jesus justifieth THE UNGODLY, by faith. That is the only type of person that Jesus ever saves, an ungodly person, for to be anything else is self-righteousness.

Lordship Salvationists errantly teach that a person must have intent to reform or else they cannot be saved. That is not what the Bible teaches. The Bible teaches that an ungodly man's faith is counted for righteousness. Thus, he needs no righteousness of his own, and a good thing, because we have none to offer. JESUS CAME TO SAVE SINNERS!

Luke 19:10, “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.”

You Need HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS!
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

Grizz wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:48 pm
Larger respiratory droplets (>5 μm) remain in the air for only a short time and travel only short distances, generally <1 meter... Virus-laden small (<5 μm) aerosolized droplets can remain in the air for at least 3 hours and travel long distances.
The obvious question is, then: In a room, how is the concentration of the various sizes of respiratory droplets in the air affected by wearing good quality masks?
Trailboss
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2012 1:57 am

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Trailboss »

mikld wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:38 am
I'm just an old mechanic with a bit of common sense. I am not an infectious disease specialist, but I do think for myself and don't believe the government is "out to get us", wearing mask mandates aren't tyranny, or any of the other conspiracy theories. So, this exemplifies my thinking on mask wearing; Mask explaination.jpg
Mike,

If you want to wear a mask over your junk, I say go for it. You may start a new trend and stop liberals from peeing on others.

tb
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 27692
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by AJMD429 »

mikld wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:07 pm
Boy! Have I been put in "my" place. I'm thankful that an epidemiologists and Constitutional Scholar straightened me out. So, by your definition seat belts are tyranny? Bicycle and motorcycle helmets tyranny? Food/FDA requirements for everything sold to be eaten is tyranny? REBEL! STOP SIGNS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS ARE TYRANNY!
Human nature is that when we understand something well (like 'gun control'), we may see through the smoke-and-mirrors of those who would abuse their authority, but in other areas, we "trust the experts", often displaying the same naivete we notice so easily when others follow the sheep herd being manipulated in the area we know about (like when physicians advocate for 'gun control').

Keep in mind that these same "experts" - including epidemiologists, and Constitutional scholars, ALSO tell us that:

"a gun in the house is 26 times more likely to be used to kill a family member than stop an intruder"
"Glocks can go through metal detectors without setting them off"
"nobody needs an AR-15 to hunt with"
"prohibiting semiautomatic rifles is perfectly Constitutional, and is not tyranny"
"registering guns is just to catch criminals - we wouldn't dream of ever taking them away"


So - NO, many of us DON'T believe the epidemiologists and Constitutional scholars....!!!
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
Larkbill
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 643
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:31 pm
Location: St Peters, Mo.

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Larkbill »

KWK wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Grizz wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:48 pm
Larger respiratory droplets (>5 μm) remain in the air for only a short time and travel only short distances, generally <1 meter... Virus-laden small (<5 μm) aerosolized droplets can remain in the air for at least 3 hours and travel long distances.
The obvious question is, then: In a room, how is the concentration of the various sizes of respiratory droplets in the air affected by wearing good quality masks?
The short answer is that there are no masks effective at keeping out the virus. An article by a researcher said that it's a time and concentration equation. You aren't going to catch the Wuhan from a person who passes you in the store or on a trail. But if you are in a small area with someone who is contagious then chances are you'll eventually test positive. You might even get sick. Or you might not. My son's uncle in law got sick, tested positive, just about when he started feeling better his wife got sick. Their teenage son never got it or tested positive. Everyone better now.

"Experts" like the CDC have squandered their reputations by making things up then having to walk them back instead of saying "we don't know". Sometimes "we don't know" is the best answer even if it's not what people want to hear.
___________________________________________________________________
I'm not paranoid because I carry a gun. Why should I be paranoid. I've got a gun.
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

Larkbill, as you say, it's a matter of time and concentration. My question was, how much does having everyone masking affect concentration? Karl
piller
Posting leader...
Posts: 12189
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:49 pm
Location: South of Dallas

Re: ? masking ?

Post by piller »

The cloth masks have such big pores that they do not really stop the virus at all. It is unlikely that anything other than the N95 masks even have a measurable effect.
D. Brian Casady
Quid Llatine Dictum Sit, Altum Viditur.
Advanced is being able to do the basics while your leg is on fire---Bill Jeans
Don't ever take a fence down until you know why it was put up---Robert Frost
piller
Posting leader...
Posts: 12189
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:49 pm
Location: South of Dallas

Re: ? masking ?

Post by piller »

There are people who get it and show no symptoms. They can be wearing cloth masks and be spreading the virus all over.
D. Brian Casady
Quid Llatine Dictum Sit, Altum Viditur.
Advanced is being able to do the basics while your leg is on fire---Bill Jeans
Don't ever take a fence down until you know why it was put up---Robert Frost
Larkbill
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 643
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:31 pm
Location: St Peters, Mo.

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Larkbill »

KWK wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 4:11 pm
Larkbill, as you say, it's a matter of time and concentration. My question was, how much does having everyone masking affect concentration? Karl
I think piller and my reference to the research article both say masks have no effect in a contaminated environment. Mask or no, if you are there long enough you will be infected. The example that comes to mind is Major League Baseball, in particular our local Cardinals. When they were allowed back in the clubhouse they were masked 10 ways from Sunday. They were following ALL the CDC recommendations. They were also limiting people in the offices and the front office people were denied any direct access to the clubhouse. Yet in the first week 8-9 of the players tested positive. Of course as so often happens 2-3 tested negative a week later. Yeah, that testing is so useful.

I know this to be true, my son does the payroll there.
___________________________________________________________________
I'm not paranoid because I carry a gun. Why should I be paranoid. I've got a gun.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

there is NO PANDEMIC. 99.9% survival rate to this day. Besides it is preventable and treatable with over the counter drugs. Proven facts. for the factually challenged, too bad, the pandemic is a lie, it is a nazi-like medical experiment being run against the world population. right now we can still obtain drugs that will prevent and or cure the virus. the vaccine is an experiment with UNPROVEN results. it functions by modifying your RNA gene code turning you into a GMO.

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuMbRBTZhCY
www.thehighwire.com
https://www.icandecide.org/
https://vrevealed.com/covid/trailer/?ref_id=Ye52308588
https://vrevealed.com/covid/trailer/?ref_id=Ye52308588
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/ ... treatments
https://secureservercdn.net/45.40.145.1 ... withHS.pdf

individuals who can think for themselves can become informed against the propaganda pandemic if so inclined...
Last edited by Grizz on Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

piller wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 6:59 pm
There are people who get it and show no symptoms. They can be wearing cloth masks and be spreading the virus all over.

the survival rate is 99.9%


let that sink in for a few microseconds

the entire mask discussion is only to foment panic and division
there IS NOTHING HEALTHY OR HEALING ABOUT ANY OF THIS
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

Grizz wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:04 am
the survival rate is 99.9%
That's 1 in 1000. The US has about .47 million dead and about 83 million infected or about 1 in 180, mostly old people, so 99.4%.

Personally, I think a half million dead is reasonably significant.

edit: I'd seen numbers suggesting 125 million infected, but I see today the CDC is currently thinks 83. While I suspect that is low, I'll use it.
Last edited by KWK on Fri Feb 05, 2021 10:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

I went back to Grizz's opening post, but I still don't see anything there that says masks are worthless for reducing overall transmission rates. It seems instead to address the odds a mask will protect a given individual, which isn't the same thing.

Playing around with the Bing search engine led me to a mid summer article summarizing transmission studies. The Hong Kong experiment cited there on infected people coughing through masks seems significant. The epidemiological study claiming masks might reduce transmission rates by only 2% is probably not too accurate given it's method, but even a 2% reduction would be significant for a disease that compounds every 7 to 10 days.

This UK tabloid article also suggests masks reduce the number of airborne contaminants, but of course that's not the same as the transmission rate, which is the figure of merit.

Then there's this article which about 1/3 the way down says "When it came to masks, an analysis of 29 unadjusted and 10 adjusted studies demonstrated that the use of masks was also associated with a large decrease in transmission, both for N95 masks and for disposable surgical masks or similar reusable 12- to 16-layer cotton masks."

It sure seems to me there is some indication masking helps, but that it is certainly no cure-all.
User avatar
vancelw
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3701
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:56 pm
Location: 90% NE Texas and 10% SE Montana

Re: ? masking ?

Post by vancelw »

Required wearing of masks, seat belts, helmets and life jackets is indeed, tyranny.

Stop signs and traffic light on public roads, not so much.

If a person can't discern the difference between those two groups, they probably like wrestling with pigs.
"Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world." - Thomas Carlyle
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

So, is a requirement to wear clothes in public also tyranny?

I don't care if someone doesn't wear a seat belt or a crash helmet, just so long as others are not held liable for the additional injuries he might incur in any accident.
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 27692
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by AJMD429 »

KWK wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:04 pm
Grizz wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:04 am
the survival rate is 99.9%
That's 1 in 1000. The US has about .45 million dead and about 125 million infected or about 1 in 250, mostly old people.

Personally, I think a half million dead is reasonably significant.
Keep in mind that one out of 80 of us will pass away every year. If you have something widespread like the COVID-19 virus, where between 12 and 25% of people test positive for the antibodies, then at a minimum one out of eight people who die will die “with Covid”.

Probably 12 to 25% of people also have toenail fungus, so we can equally as accurately claim that one out of eight people die “with toenail fungus.”

The problem is when the authorities say that they die “from” something as opposed to “with” some thing...

Just using rough numbers if there are 320,000,000 people and about one out of 80 dies per year, then you are going to have about 4,000,000 people die per year, and about 333,000 will die “with CoVid”. That’s nearly 1,000 per day.

Nearly all of the people who die with Covid are over 70 years old AND frail, or younger than that and have deficiencies in essential nutrients like vitamin D or zinc. Those are the people who are dying of something every day, and were dying of other viruses and other entities long before this particular one ever arrived on the scene.

That is not to trivialize their deaths, but politicizing them and pretending that this particular virus causing the death of those people means we have to completely shut down society and go through all the symbolic virtue signaling gestures to give more power to the wealthy and elite is a very dangerous approach.

I suppose if that were the only option, we would have to do it because we always have a need us a society to “do something” whenever there is a crisis, But the reality is there are far better things we could do than masking...!!!

The ‘science’ IS there and we should be doing D and Zn, and probably ivermectin and other things. Then very few would die. Masks and shutdowns are not saving lives, nor were they intended to; they are all about using fear and virtue-signaling to control the population so the wealthy and politically connected could gain even more power.

Timeless political concepts; just new technology.
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
Larkbill
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 643
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:31 pm
Location: St Peters, Mo.

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Larkbill »

One of the problems you run into when trying to analyze any of this is useful numbers.

Last summer the CDC was telling doctors and clinics to report cases based on patients presenting with any ONE of 18 symptoms WITHOUT any labs. At least 1/3 of the symptoms could just as easily been seasonal allergies. So the infection rate is garbage.

My doc told me he had a wife of an elderly patient who recently passed who called him to tell him her husband, with a history of coronary issues, had died of a heart attack in the ambulance before reaching the hospital. Cause of death on the certificate was listed as Covid-19. She was really mad and wanted the doc to help her pursue fraud charges. He told her to pick battles she could win because it's a money thing, the hospitals have incentive to lie. So the death rate is garbage.

So how do you prove whether masks work or not? You choose to believe they do. Great. So wear one. I choose to believe they don't. I wear one only when I have no other choice. I wear one in stores that require it if I really want to shop there. My county doesn't demand it. The neighboring county does demand it. I don't go there. Surprise, the neighboring county is complaining that their residents come to our county to dine out and shop and it's costing them tax revenue. Boo Hoo.
___________________________________________________________________
I'm not paranoid because I carry a gun. Why should I be paranoid. I've got a gun.
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

AJMD429 wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 8:28 pm
The problem is when the authorities say that they die “from” something as opposed to “with” some thing...
Quite true, which is why comparing the claims for Covid deaths for 2020 to the "excess deaths" for 2020 is of interest. There's some variation in total deaths year to year, so the "excess deaths" calculation isn't exact, but the two came out close enough.

It would be interesting to see a break down of deaths. Some people needing doctors no doubt shied away and became worse. On the other hand, people have likely driven less as well.
Last edited by KWK on Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

Larkbill wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 8:39 pm
So how do you prove whether masks work or not?
A straightforward way would be to put 20 people in each of several rooms. In every room a known infected Covid patient is added and asked to read aloud the day's newspaper. In some rooms that person would be masked, in others not. With 20 such rooms, you might get some useful numbers. I doubt there are many volunteers for such.

Instead, people are looking at how masks affect generation of airborne Covid laced moisture. You'd have to combine that with the exposure needed to cause infection. The British, I read a couple months ago, had young volunteers willing to be exposed to varying doses of Covid. I haven't seen the results.

I look at it this way: No one disputes the virus travels in exhaled moisture, either droplets or aerosols. If I put a mask on, it gets moist from my breathing. I figure it must be reducing the amount of moisture I'm putting in the room. Questions immediately arise: As this trapped moisture evaporates, does it leave viral particles trapped behind, or can moisture in the mask be blown off carrying it's "payload?" I haven't seen the answers to these and other questions.
Last edited by KWK on Wed Feb 03, 2021 11:12 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
vancelw
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3701
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:56 pm
Location: 90% NE Texas and 10% SE Montana

Re: ? masking ?

Post by vancelw »

KWK wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 6:13 pm
So, is a requirement to wear clothes in public also tyranny?

I don't care if someone doesn't wear a seat belt or a crash helmet, just so long as others are not held liable for the additional injuries he might incur in any accident.
Where is that requirement?
Not even in Texas, middle of the Bible belt, is wearing clothes the law.

See the insanity, yet?
"Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world." - Thomas Carlyle
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

vancelw wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:54 pm
Where is that requirement?
Well, according to these folks: "Generally, in America, nudity is against the law in public places. Moreover, nudity is also generally illegal on a person’s own property if the nude person is visible to the public, such as through an open window or sunbathing nude in someone's yard." Texas does seem, in their list, to be more permissive than some states.
User avatar
vancelw
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 3701
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:56 pm
Location: 90% NE Texas and 10% SE Montana

Re: ? masking ?

Post by vancelw »

KWK wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:58 pm
vancelw wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:54 pm
Where is that requirement?
Well, according to these folks: "Generally, in America, nudity is against the law in public places. Moreover, nudity is also generally illegal on a person’s own property if the nude person is visible to the public, such as through an open window or sunbathing nude in someone's yard." Texas does seem, in their list, to be more permissive than some states.
:lol:

Show me the statute. You can't.

Don't confuse "it's the law to wear clothes" with lewdness. Totally separate things.
"Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world." - Thomas Carlyle
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

KWK wrote,
I went back to Grizz's opening post, but I still don't see anything there that says masks are worthless for reducing overall transmission rates. It seems instead to address the odds a mask will protect a given individual, which isn't the same thing.
Thanks for reading and thinking about these things. I have posted somewhere the Army study where they did a strict double-blind study of the efficacy of masks. One group, no masks, same living conditions in base housing. Other group wore masks strictly, changed them for new ones after so many hours, 6 i think. The result of that study is that the infection rate was exactly the same for the masked group and the unmasked group. If I rediscover the link I will post it here.

The thing about masks is that it defies logic as well as scientific studies, to say that masks stop virii, and to my knowledge there is zero scientific evidence that they do. Doctors admit this. Nurses admit this. There is a video link that discusses facts about viruses.

If I can smell cigarette smoke or car exhaust, then there is a two-way open door for virii to pass through and join the cloud of shared air that we all experience in any store or cafe. We breathe each others exhaust. The epidemiologists I've read and heard talking about this state that this is how our immune systems are tuned up to deal with disease. I was using a power sander with the recommended mask and I could smell the wood scent. That mask is far better at controlling the air I breathe, but could not prevent the fresh wood odor from getting in. Viruses are far smaller than those wood molecules. The masks most people are wearing are far less effective than my mask, which has to stop super fine ceramic particles that are a by product of power grinding and sanding.



Thanks again for considering this. Good night owls :)
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

vancelw wrote:
Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:33 am
Show me the statute. You can't.
As I had said, Texas is relatively liberal, at least in the state laws. Given the wording, it appears they had a spate of moonings in the past, for the state law prohibits nude only if lewd. However, there is a blanket ban on nudity in TX state parks. I'll guess they wanted to discourage nudity at the beaches.

Other states, such as TN have a ban on all public nudity. My state's laws are for nude with lewd, but local ordinances apply, and probably in TX, too. There's an older gent across the river who ends up in court (and the newspaper) every few years to be fined for mowing his lawn in the buff.
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

Grizz wrote:
Thu Feb 04, 2021 2:15 am
... the Army study where they did a strict double-blind study of the efficacy of masks.
You did post that here many months ago. At the time, I read the report you linked and concluded the test was flawed. As I recall, both groups ate in a common mess, unmasked of course.
The thing about masks is that it defies logic as well as scientific studies, to say that masks stop virii...
While there have been claims for limited protection by masks, you are missing the point of masking laws. Masks don't protect you directly, only indirectly. There appears to be evidence they reduce the amount of contagion spewed into the air, but once in the air, the mask is unlikely to save you from the contagion.

I'm not convinced the cigarette analogy is valid. The virus travels in water, which I imagine will stick to a filter better than a particle of smoke.

One thing that annoys me is the learned ethicists here in the US who say we can't test by exposing people to the virus. The UK has shown people are willing to volunteer. Many young men died after volunteering to fight the radiation at Chernobyl. Young people at schools willingly party together sans masks. Instead of trying to extrapolate from limited tests, we should allow some young people to do controlled tests of masking among infected individuals.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

One thing that annoys me is the learned ethicists here in the US who say we can't test by exposing people to the virus.
ACTUALLY, the vaccine IS EXPOSING PEOPLE TO THE VIRUS. It works by genetically modifying your RNA to tell your immune system TO MAKE THE VIRUS, on the theory that THEN your immune system will respond by killing the virus it manufactured.

they are not planting dead or crippled virii, they are genetically manipulating people's gene code. this is NOT THE SAME THING AS ANY OTHER VACCINE.

The vaccine is a risky scheme, an unproven and unapproved experiment, and the volunteers are the guinea pigs. The people who know this and are trying to save lives with drugs that work are being censored, banned, and "deplatformed" so that the volunteer guineas can't make an informed decision, and are flocking to be "shot" with no idea that it's an experimental drug that re-engineers their DNA . . .

i'm not volunteering for That...

thanks for the input
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

The descriptions I've seen of the RNA vaccines don't match yours.

Both vaccines use special coatings to allow a manufactured strand of RNA to slip into cells. Your cells then go about producing the protein coded by it, just as they do with RNA released from the cell's nucleus. The RNA injected is not coded for the entire virus, only a protein which is part of the spike which allows the virus to enter cells.

As I understand it, cells are constantly generating RNA to replace those strands which have naturally decayed. The injected strands from the vaccine also decay. This his been studied in animals for what, a decade now, and recently in humans on a large scale.

Until your post, I've never seen a claim either vaccine monkeys with the DNA in the nucleus. Now, I have seen proposals to do just that, but they have to my knowledge never been tested on people, for obvious reasons.

The J&J, UK, and Russian vaccines use a live virus which has been genetically engineered to enter a cell in its normal way, but when it releases its genetic payload, it's not for itself but for a more limited encoding, just for the spike protein. I can't imagine how they manage such engineering. I can imagine there's more room for error here.

The Chinese vaccines use a damaged version of The Virus. These haven't proven as effective, but it is a traditional approach.

The Novavax approach seems the safest. They manufacture the spike protein and that is injected, instead of tricking the body's cells into making the protein.

All of these approaches try to create copies of the spike from The Virus and get that flowing though your veins. I don't know what the consequences of that particular protein might be. No one can be absolutely certain. Millions have been injected with it, seemingly without serious side effects. A microbiologist might know what sort of junk protein is typically flowing about you and what effects those can have.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

The descriptions I've seen of the RNA vaccines don't match yours.
The description I gave is the view that Dell Bigtree presented on live tv a day or two ago.

We naturally pick our sources for myriad reasons. Bigtree, Kennedy, and others are giving the same explanation, and i believe them.

naturally it is possible that i misunderstood what they've been saying, but i think not.

here is a short video with some actual experts. it's not all of the evidence, but there is plenty more, i will update this note when i find more.

https://vrevealed.com/covid/trailer/?ref_id=Ye52308588
an expert talking about masking...
Last edited by Grizz on Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

I don't know to which Kennedy you refer, but I was able to locate who Del Bigtree is. I see nothing in his resume to indicate he will have penetrating insights into biochemistry. He studied film and has worked in that industry. That's not to say he's incapable of understanding biochemisty, just that it's not so likely as others who've worked decades on it.

You're welcome to take your chances with the virus. I'll take my chances with the vaccine once offered. Hopefully we both survive.

I forgot to mention, I, too, don't understand why the officials aren't more carefully considering the use of existing medications as treatments. They seem to have a laser focus on only vaccines, probably because vaccines have proven so effective in the past.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

They seem to have a laser focus on only vaccines, probably because vaccines have proven so effective in the past.
follow the money. already there is a billion dollars or so in profits from the experimental and unnecesary vaccine.

I present evidence that you seem to refute with your opinion, or someone elses opinion about the info I've shared. You are an adult, you can experiment with your immune system if you want to. But you knock Bigtree with this: "I see nothing in his resume to indicate he will have penetrating insights into biochemistry." Which indicates to me than you haven't listened to him, because your opinion suggests there is "nothing to see here". You have not argued against his own positions, and appear to have no actual knowledge, or shared knowledge with Bigtree.

Anyway, how about watching the masking video I linked and argue against that info, v.s. presenting your thesis about what's wrong with those doctors. it's the link that ends in 'myths'. At least hear them out so you can be on the actual topic when you reply with your opinion about their presentation.

Thanks for participating
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuMbRBTZhCY

this is a partial interview with Kennedy, it's short but interesting. it's possible the entire segment is on Daystar's Joni Table Talk that runs at 0700 Eastern time...
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

https://dryburgh.com/ivermectin-pierre-kory/

another expert Dr with a treatment that cures the crud. he has testified to homeland (in)security concerning this information. there were links to his testimony where I found this when i searched for "Dr. Pierre Kory, MD"

but wait, there's more
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/02 ... sting-for/
here's interesting info about the "testing" itself.

here's Bigtree live from NYC
https://thehighwire.com/watch/

here is Dr Kory in person
https://lbry.tv/@Dryburgh:7/Ivermectin_Pierre_Kory:b
worth knowing

Oh Yeah, here's another one
https://rumble.com/vcv1ul-bio-warfare-a ... covid.html
Last edited by Grizz on Thu Feb 04, 2021 3:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

Okay, Grizz, I'll look at that video today. For the moment, I looked up Dr Merritt and found this right off. It's an interview dated a week ago.

After reading it, I'm not optimistic about her half hour video. In that brief article she cites as if it were current the results of early research, done about a decade ago. I've read there were spectacular failures in the earliest animal tests of RNA injections, but the researchers learned what went wrong and made adjustments. She then goes on to claim "We have never made it through an animal study successfully for this type of virus." This is preposterous! We've already had tens of thousands of primates (called humans) successfully injected and without a doubt hundreds then survived a Covid attack without the dire effects she lists. I'll give her video an airing, but...
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 8209
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: ? masking ?

Post by Grizz »

I am out of time for watching videos, but i think this is what you called preposterous:
In the following interview, Dr. Lee Merritt explains that mRNA technology is not a vaccine, mirroring what Dr. David Martin also stated recently.

In animal studies, after mRNA injections have been administered to cats, when the virus arrived once again into the body, it arrived like a Trojan Horse, undetected by the cats’ own immune system. The virus multiplied unchallenged and all animals involved in the experiment died from various causes.
she is talking about a study involving animals, which is part of scientific research protocols, and she states that there were cats killed by their own immune system. this effect is documented in other scientific studies and those studies are referenced by others in the field. there's a name for this that i don't recall. maybe it will come to me

to gainsay her statement you would need to read the study she cites. "preposterous" is an opinion and opinions are not facts. and expert's opinions are not facts either. just look at a clip of fauchi's declarations! that's meets my understanding of "preposterous" :!: :lol:

i have stuff i have to do so can't persue this any farther right now, but i am enjoying the dialog. Thanks
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: ? masking ?

Post by KWK »

Grizz, I've looked through her video and will make a number of comments, but first, I must reiterate, her claims in the interview I linked are preposterous. It's not an opinion. It's bare fact. She made a claim -- that mRNA has never been successfully tested -- which is clearly false: There are millions of people who've taken the treatment and not suffered the consequences she brings up, consequences years out of date. Last fall I read of that effect she mentions, and read it was in the early research.

Obviously then, I won't be inclined to trust her and will be in a mood to nit pick the video presentation. It's not so bad as that more recent interview, but I didn't find it convincing, just interesting. It was nice to be able to see some references, many of which I was able to check on. I'll reference time indexes into the video, which hopefully I copied correctly.

5:05 -- This is the doctor vaping into masks. She doesn't let us know if he's coughing, talking, blowing, or breathing relaxed. It makes a difference! Wearing glasses in the winter, I'm aware there's leakage around a mask. I can't quantify the amount, and this demonstration doesn't settle the matter.

6:18 -- The same guy is using a cloth mask. It is clearly not very effective, but over the last few months I'd already gathered that cloth masks are often a joke.

9:12 -- A South Korean doctor had people cough into petri dishes. She admits the mask made a difference but dismisses the difference; sorry, I want the numbers. I looked further and found a summary article titled "Cotton and surgical masks may be ineffective at stopping spread of virus through coughs". Only coughing was tested, and the authors note that this does not prove that masks have no effect for talking or breathing, which is what most people in a store are doing. The authors encourage more research.

15:00 -- There's several papers listed to reference, but I haven't looked yet at each.

15:14 -- She concludes the results of the paper "Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza..." show that "none of it made a difference," including masking. I found the paper and find it's a study of studies, not original research. In the masking section, this paper concludes the earlier studies they considered were poorly done, yet they feel "The overall reduction in ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza cases in the face mask group was not significant." I went on to follow one study they pointed to: "Mask use, hand hygiene, and seasonal influenza-like illness among young adults" and went to that author's conclusions: "These findings suggest that face masks and hand hygiene may reduce respiratory illnesses in shared living settings and mitigate the impact of the influenza A(H1N1) pandemic." Ms Merritt didn't mention that! In the results, they admit their test wasn't rigorous enough, which the study of studies also felt.

15:23 -- This study "A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks..." Merritt also cites as proving masks don't work, but instead it only establishes the relative effect of cloth vs surgical in protecting you. Others have already concluded that cloth masks you see at the stores have little effect. It doesn't address spread rates, regardless. It does note surgical masks cut transmission in half compared to cloth, but rates of disease spreading is the figure needed.

16:20 -- Once again, this looks at your chance of infection, not overall rates of disease spreading. It's looking at the problem in only one direction!

17:00 -- CO2 risks. I don't know what to make of that one. The test she cites isn't described adequately to judge it. I know I never feel winded under a surgical mask. It's a bit strange, though, to claim a mask will hold in CO2 molecules yet let aerosols readily pass.

19:30 -- She gives a conclusion that it's all about brain-washing. Sorry, I've worked in industry and have talked with friends who've worked in government. Incompetence explains far more than conspiracy theories ever will.

20:12 -- The new gal is remarkably chesty.

23:06 -- Merritt says "humidity is the number one predictor of flu outbreaks," yet Singapore and Hong Kong have suffered Covid outbreaks.

If you didn't follow one of the links I gave above, I'll quote one paragraph:
In May, a team led by Ben Cowling, an epidemiologist at the University of Hong Kong, had 246 people—all confirmed to be infected with at least one respiratory virus—exhale into a breath-collecting device called a Gesundheit-II. Half wore surgical masks and half did not. Then the team tested respiratory droplets, the air they exhaled, and took throat and nose swabs looking for viruses. The results, again, were striking. The masks stopped droplets containing influenza virus, but not aerosol particles. They did little to stop either in people infected with a rhinovirus—a cause of the common cold. But when it came to seasonal coronaviruses (not SARS-CoV-2), the masks stopped both sizes of particles. “We detected coronavirus in respiratory droplets and aerosols in 3 of 10 (30%) and 4 of 10 (40%) of the samples collected without face masks, respectively, but did not detect any virus in respiratory droplets or aerosols collected from participants wearing face masks,” the researchers wrote.
The effects of masking are clearly not easy to discern. I haven't found what I consider solid proof either way, but until I do, I'll defer to the people paid to look into this--while keeping in mind the Incompetence Factor.

Thanks for the links, I've more to check out,

Karl
Post Reply