From a German study - will need to translate:
"There is no scientifically sound evidence from the specialist literature cited in the article by the RKI, and neither from the “ current ” studies mentioned there, that masks that are worn by the normal population in public spaces (shops, public transport), regardless of which type The nature of them, whether medical MNS or so-called community MNB, could reduce the transmission of pathogens in respiratory infections, such as influenza or COVID-19 in particular, in order to " sustainably reduce the rate of spread of COVID-19 in the population and reduce the number of new cases to achieve ”, as it says in the RKI article."
"Neither the RKI or the WHO nor the ECDC or CDC presented scientific data for a positive effect of masks in public (in the sense of a reduced "speed of spread of COVID-19 in the population" [ 1 ]) because such data were not available gives [ 1 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9 ]. The update of the Cochrane review also does not support the use of masks in public spaces in any way [ 10 ]. This is confirmed by 2 further reviews of the relevant literature from April 2020 [ 11 ] [ 12]. The same applies to the study from Hong Kong carried out a few years ago [ 5 ]."
https://www.thieme-connect.com/produ...55/a-1174-6591
Results 3,471 to 3,480 of 7628
Thread: Covid-19
-
11-19-2020, 07:53 AM #3471
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 2,169
-
11-19-2020, 08:03 AM #3472
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 2,169
The WHO-commissioned meta-study on the effectiveness of facemasks, published in the medical journal The Lancet in June 2020, has been instrumental in shifting global facemask policies during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, the meta-study, which claimed a risk reduction of 80% with facemasks, is seriously flawed on several levels and should be retracted:
https://swprs.org/who-mask-study-seriously-flawed/
https://reason.com/2020/06/22/promin...-badly-flawed/
-
11-19-2020, 08:08 AM #3473
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Posts
- 15,087
It's really odd how hard you are fighting this mask thing I mean seriously. At the end of the day, who effing cares to what percentage it is effective, even if it is .1%, so what? If you want to be this stubborn about a minor inconvenience, that's your prerogative, but good lord it's just a mask.
-
11-19-2020, 08:22 AM #3474
I wear a mask where required because I am a rule follower by nature. I had to wear a mask at my daughters HS soccer games this year, which were outdoor and we were required to sit 6 feet apart. I think that's absurdly stooopid considering all the data. It's okay have a discussion when there is so much conflicting data out there. And who are you to determine what's a minor inconvenience to anyone? I really wish people would just stop telling others what's a big deal and what's not. Your personal experience and conditioning have nothing to do with your neighbor's.
dayton will lose by 40 and we will loot tonight.
-Pablo
-
11-19-2020, 08:29 AM #3475
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Posts
- 15,087
-
11-19-2020, 09:05 AM #3476
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 2,169
-
11-20-2020, 02:15 PM #3477
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Springboro OH
- Posts
- 1,582
Well look at this. The bullshit I smelled has come out to be bullshit. https://www.wired.com/story/are-covid-patients-gasping-it-isnt-real-as-they-die/
"...treat 'em with respect, or get out of the Gym!"
-
11-20-2020, 02:38 PM #3478
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Posts
- 15,087
really all this proves is that social media sucks. People can say whatever the hell they want in those forums, and if it agrees with their "agenda," they will believe it. I'm normally not into government stepping in to tell us what to do or restrict something, but I would be all for them completely wiping any kind of social media from the map.
-
11-21-2020, 05:55 PM #3479
-
11-22-2020, 09:48 AM #3480
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 2,169
Bookmarks