Just curious, anyone have a plan, or preps for global pandemic?

[Saul]

There's no better way to avoid inflammation than having a good, low calorie diet of fruits and vegetables -- avoiding grains -- and practicing robust daily cardio exercise -- my CRP is almost always < 1mg/L, a sign of extremely low inflammation.

Also, I wouldn't ignore mindfulness and meditation.

You won't find these things in a vitamin pill.

  --  Saul

[Mike41]

15 hours ago, Saul said:

There's no better way to avoid inflammation than having a good, low calorie diet of fruits and vegetables -- avoiding grains -- and practicing robust daily cardio exercise -- my CRP is almost always < 1mg/L, a sign of extremely low inflammation.

Also, I wouldn't ignore mindfulness and meditation.

You won't find these things in a vitamin pill.

  --  Saul

Saul are you still eating fish?

[Ron Put]

On 2/20/2021 at 9:43 PM, Iporuru said:

Ron, if you believe that, you're very naive. The government uses Facebook as a cover story to fool its stupid, uneducated voters that it's acting for their benefit to prevent censorship, but in reality it'll be a blow to domestic free media.

You seem confused and keep conflating the tax and the censorship proposals... The concern here is censorship, so let's stick to that.

The law would provide Polish citizens who have been censored by Facebook with the legal venue to challenge Facebook by appealing to a Polish legal authority, and if Facebook is found censoring content allowed under Polish law, the state can impose significant fines on Facebook. See https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55678502

This has nothing to do with limiting domestic free media, but simply limits the right of social media platforms to arbitrarily remove content that is not deemed to be illegal in Poland. This is a good thing for anyone who supports free discourse.

I am well aware that this law is in the interest of the ruling party, since Facebook's recent purges predominantly remove content Facebook's woke policies consider "hate speech" and may include content that opposes gay rights or abortion, or lockdowns, immigration, and who knows what else. I personally may disagree, at times strongly with some of these views, but private social media platforms clearly play a "public forum" role in the world today, and should not be permitted to censor free speech.

The problem with the emerging UK- and German-led proposals is that they appear to contemplate affirmative duties on social media to limit certain speech, and of course, the devil is in who decides to place such limits on free expression.  Europe, and Continental Europe in particular, has never had an established tradition of free speech protections (perhaps because democratic governance does not have a long tradition on the continent). Free speech is free speech, and until a couple of decades ago the US was rather unique, in an exemplary way, in its Constitutional protections and in prevailing public support for free speech.

 

20 hours ago, Saul said:

There's no better way to avoid inflammation than having a good, low calorie diet of fruits and vegetables -- avoiding grains -- and practicing robust daily cardio exercise -- my CRP is almost always < 1mg/L, a sign of extremely low inflammation.

Saul, I absolutely agree with you, except that vegans need their vitamin B-12 and that some grains (grass seeds) appear to be beneficial overall -- I personally eat milled flax (15-20g), milled chia (15g), and about 15g of steel-cut oats virtually every day. Recently I've also added about 15g of black sorghum bran, as it has a very high ORAC and it adds a really nice color to my mixture. For what it's worth, my hs-CRP is 0.02 mg/L.

I've also started taking 900mg daily of algae DHA and EPA and my blood content of these has shot up dramatically.

On a more topical note, I've had my second shot of the Novavax vaccine. For various reasons, I am certain that I did not have the placebo. While I had no reaction to the first shot, after the second round I developed a low-grade fever and some local swelling, each lasting for about 24 hours.

Edited February 27, 2021 by Ron Put

[Saul]

7 hours ago, Mike41 said:

Saul are you still eating fish?

Yes; a small amount for dinner; sashimi salmon and tuna; except for Saturdays, when wife cooked fish (varying each week) is eaten with lunch (most common fish for Saturdays:  wild pacific halibut, or wild carribean tuna).

 

[Dean Pomerleau]

On 2/26/2021 at 8:27 PM, Saul said:

There's no better way to avoid inflammation than ... avoiding grains ...

Saul,

There really is no good evidence that whole grains impact inflammation one way or the other, at least in people without issues with gluten or yeast. This 2020 meta-analysis of randomized control trials [1] found if anything, whole grain consumption led to a modest reduction in markers of inflammation. 

--Dean

---------

[1] Adv Nutr. 2020 Jan 1;11(1):52-65. doi: 10.1093/advances/nmz063.

The Effect of Whole-Grain Intake on Biomarkers of Subclinical Inflammation: A 
Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Rahmani S(1), Sadeghi O(2)(3), Sadeghian M(4), Sadeghi N(4), Larijani B(5), 
Esmaillzadeh A(1)(3)(6).

Findings on the effect of whole-grain consumption on inflammatory biomarkers are 

conflicting. This study aimed to summarize available studies on the effects of 
whole-grain consumption on inflammatory biomarkers in adults. Online databases 
including PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched 
for relevant studies published up to January 2018, using relevant keywords. We 
included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of 
whole-grain foods or diets high in whole-grain foods on markers of inflammation. 
Studies were selected if they had a control diet low in whole grains or diets 
without whole grains, whether calorie restricted or not. We did not include 
studies that examined the effect of individual grain components, including bran 
or germ, or fiber-based diets. Overall, 14 RCTs, with 1238 individuals aged ≥18 
y, were included. Pooling 13 effect sizes from 11 RCTs on serum C-reactive 
protein (CRP) concentrations, we found no significant effect of whole-grain 
consumption on serum CRP concentrations [weighted mean difference (WMD): 
-0.29 mg/L; 95% CI: -1.10, 0.52 mg/L]. However, the beneficial effects of 
whole-grain intake on serum CRP concentrations were observed in studies in 
individuals with elevated serum concentrations of CRP and studies with 
isocaloric diets. Combining 11 effect sizes from 10 RCTs, we found no 
significant effect of whole-grain consumption on serum IL-6 concentrations (WMD: 
-0.08 pg/mL; 95% CI: -0.27, 0.11 pg/mL). Nevertheless, we observed a significant 
effect of whole-grain consumption on serum IL-6 concentrations in studies in 
unhealthy individuals. A nonsignificant effect of whole-grain intake on 
circulating serum TNF-α concentrations was also seen when we summarized effect 
sizes from 7 RCTs (WMD: -0.06 pg/mL; 95% CI: -0.25, 0.14 pg/mL). Such a 
nonsignificant effect was observed for serum concentrations of plasminogen 
activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) (WMD: -3.59; 95% CI: -1.25, 8.44 kU/L). Unlike 
observational studies, we found no significant effect of whole-grain consumption 
on serum concentrations of inflammatory cytokines, including serum 
concentrations of CRP, IL-6, TNF-α, and PAI-1. However, beneficial effects of 
whole grains were found in some subgroups. Given the high between-study 
heterogeneity, deriving firm conclusions is difficult.

Copyright © American Society for Nutrition 2019.

DOI: 10.1093/advances/nmz063
PMCID: PMC7442343
PMID: 31301131 [Indexed for MEDLINE]

[Sibiriak]

 

Study Estimates Two-Thirds of COVID-19 Hospitalizations Due to Four Conditions

 

[corybroo]

The news reports seemed to be focused on three or four variants.  This chart of variant lineages shows there are far more than four.

[Iporuru]

On 2/27/2021 at 9:59 PM, Ron Put said:

You seem confused and keep conflating the tax and the censorship proposals... The concern here is censorship, so let's stick to that.

The law would provide Polish citizens who have been censored by Facebook with the legal venue to challenge Facebook by appealing to a Polish legal authority, and if Facebook is found censoring content allowed under Polish law, the state can impose significant fines on Facebook. See https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55678502

This has nothing to do with limiting domestic free media, but simply limits the right of social media platforms to arbitrarily remove content that is not deemed to be illegal in Poland. This is a good thing for anyone who supports free discourse.
 

For somebody who doesn’t know jack about Poland, they may seem like 2 different issues, but they’re just 2 sides of the same coin – they lead to the same goal.

On the one hand, the ‘Facebook censorship’ talk is a smoke screen. The government doesn’t care about Facebook censorship, and certainly doesn’t support free discourse (LOL), but it’s using the company to as a curve ball to establish “the freedom of speech council” to censor and stifle any unfavourable media. On the other hand, the tax is meant to achieve the same: financially drain independent media and eliminate them or take them over so that nobody criticizes and exposes the government’s dirty politics. So the ultimate purpose of both moves is to curb freedom of speech. Judging by how many people applaud the government for being freedom fighters, the propaganda seems to be working…

[Saul]

On 2/28/2021 at 9:43 AM, Dean Pomerleau said:

Saul,

There really is no good evidence that whole grains impact inflammation one way or the other, at least in people without issues with gluten or yeast. This 2020 meta-analysis of randomized control trials [1] found if anything, whole grain consumption led to a modest reduction in markers of inflammation. 

--Dean

---------

[1] Adv Nutr. 2020 Jan 1;11(1):52-65. doi: 10.1093/advances/nmz063.

The Effect of Whole-Grain Intake on Biomarkers of Subclinical Inflammation: A 
Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Rahmani S(1), Sadeghi O(2)(3), Sadeghian M(4), Sadeghi N(4), Larijani B(5), 
Esmaillzadeh A(1)(3)(6).

Findings on the effect of whole-grain consumption on inflammatory biomarkers are 

conflicting. This study aimed to summarize available studies on the effects of 
whole-grain consumption on inflammatory biomarkers in adults. Online databases 
including PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched 
for relevant studies published up to January 2018, using relevant keywords. We 
included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of 
whole-grain foods or diets high in whole-grain foods on markers of inflammation. 
Studies were selected if they had a control diet low in whole grains or diets 
without whole grains, whether calorie restricted or not. We did not include 
studies that examined the effect of individual grain components, including bran 
or germ, or fiber-based diets. Overall, 14 RCTs, with 1238 individuals aged ≥18 
y, were included. Pooling 13 effect sizes from 11 RCTs on serum C-reactive 
protein (CRP) concentrations, we found no significant effect of whole-grain 
consumption on serum CRP concentrations [weighted mean difference (WMD): 
-0.29 mg/L; 95% CI: -1.10, 0.52 mg/L]. However, the beneficial effects of 
whole-grain intake on serum CRP concentrations were observed in studies in 
individuals with elevated serum concentrations of CRP and studies with 
isocaloric diets. Combining 11 effect sizes from 10 RCTs, we found no 
significant effect of whole-grain consumption on serum IL-6 concentrations (WMD: 
-0.08 pg/mL; 95% CI: -0.27, 0.11 pg/mL). Nevertheless, we observed a significant 
effect of whole-grain consumption on serum IL-6 concentrations in studies in 
unhealthy individuals. A nonsignificant effect of whole-grain intake on 
circulating serum TNF-α concentrations was also seen when we summarized effect 
sizes from 7 RCTs (WMD: -0.06 pg/mL; 95% CI: -0.25, 0.14 pg/mL). Such a 
nonsignificant effect was observed for serum concentrations of plasminogen 
activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) (WMD: -3.59; 95% CI: -1.25, 8.44 kU/L). Unlike 
observational studies, we found no significant effect of whole-grain consumption 
on serum concentrations of inflammatory cytokines, including serum 
concentrations of CRP, IL-6, TNF-α, and PAI-1. However, beneficial effects of 
whole grains were found in some subgroups. Given the high between-study 
heterogeneity, deriving firm conclusions is difficult.

Copyright © American Society for Nutrition 2019.

DOI: 10.1093/advances/nmz063
PMCID: PMC7442343
PMID: 31301131 [Indexed for MEDLINE]

Hi  Dean!

You didn't include my whole quote, thus changing the meaning. My post made two points:

There's no better way to avoid inflammation than having a good, low calorie diet of fruits and vegetables -- avoiding grains -- and practicing robust daily cardio exercise -- my CRP is almost always < 1mg/L, a sign of extremely low inflammation.

 

[Saul]

My negative opinion of whole grains:  Lots of calories, minimal benefit.  Of course better than white  bread (not saying much).

Similar criticism of extra virgin olive oil: Excessive calories for minimal -- and even dubious -- benefit.

  --  Saul

[Ron Put]

On 3/1/2021 at 12:18 AM, Iporuru said:

For somebody who doesn’t know jack about Poland, they may seem like 2 different issues, but they’re just 2 sides of the same coin – they lead to the same goal.

Try to address the argument, instead of guessing what I know. Please explain how exactly does the proposed rule affirmatively impose any form of censorship?

Again, the Polish rule is a legal appeal tool to prevent a social network from removing content. It does not impose obligations to remove content. Thus the rule would limit censorship.

If you, by virtue of residing in Poland, are privy to some information that would indicate how the above rule would expand censorship, then please state it.



 

[Ron Put]

Assessing mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closure effects on the spread of COVID‐19

In summary, we fail to find strong evidence supporting a role for more restrictive NPIs in the control of COVID in early 2020. We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay‐at‐home orders and business closures. The data cannot fully exclude the possibility of some benefits. However, even if they exist, these benefits may not match the numerous harms of these aggressive measures. More targeted public health interventions that more effectively reduce transmissions may be important for future epidemic control without the harms of highly restrictive measures.

[mccoy]

One of the authors of the above article cited by Ron is John Ioannidis, who is undisputable very credible. The conclusions are a quantitative validation of what we could observe after the first rigorous lockdown in Italy last year: draconian measures are not very effective and are not sustainable socially and economically. Whereas less restrictive NPIs may constitute a less unbalanced approach.

[AlPater]

22 hours ago, mccoy said:

John Ioannidis, who is undisputable very credible

Writing for Wired, David H. Freedman said that the Santa Clara study compromised Ioannidis' previously excellent reputation and meant that future generations of scientists may remember him as "the fringe scientist who pumped up a bad study that supported a crazy right-wing conspiracy theory in the middle of a massive health crisis."^[6]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ioannidis#COVID-19}

[mccoy]

Al, I noticed that the common denominator of this SARSCOV2 pandemic is probably that most specialists in the field got pretty wrong at least once. Or more.

[Ron Put]

3 hours ago, AlPater said:

Writing for Wired, David H. Freedman said that the Santa Clara study compromised Ioannidis' previously excellent reputation and meant that future generations of scientists may remember him as "the fringe scientist who pumped up a bad study that supported a crazy right-wing conspiracy theory in the middle of a massive health crisis.

I am puzzled about the relevancy of what some far-left writer, who has been beating the "lockdown" drum and attacking anyone who disagrees with the party line, has to the study posted above, or to Ioannidis's scientific reputation? It's a smear attack and in the vein of the "cancel" attacks which are the reason why there has not been a rational discussion about the most disruptive public policies in the post-WWII period in the West.

It's unbecoming and harmful to open discourse.

 

[mccoy]

15 hours ago, Ron Put said:

It's unbecoming and harmful to open discourse.

I seem to remember one podcast where Ioannidis was asked about these attacks (subsequent to the Santa Clara studies), but cannot remember the answer. What is sure, is that in America the political bias is presently ruling over scientific rigor. And, coming back to the lockdowns, the results have rarely been proportional to the damages inflicted. The first draconian lockdown one year ago in Italy was useful probably to avoid oversaturation of hospitals, but sure did not stop the epidemic and caused really massive economical losses and a significant part of the population falling below the poverty threshold.

I also remember that when the English government noticed that the faster spreading of SARSCOV2 was caused by a new variant, thousands of truck drivers were blocked at the border. Now the English variant is circulating anywhere in Europe, the blockage resulting in an unnoticeable effect.

 

[Iporuru]

On 3/3/2021 at 11:11 PM, Ron Put said:

Again, the Polish rule is a legal appeal tool to prevent a social network from removing content.....

If you are privy to some information that would indicate how the above rule would expand censorship, then please state it.

You have clung to this strange idea that the Polish government is some kind of a freedom champion targeting Facebook with anti-censorship law. Do you think political gangsters can be freedom fighters simply because they officially declare that?

For the umpteenth time, the assumption of the proposed legislature is prevention of censorship (you’re right here), but the devil is in the details – actual regulations will allow “the freedom of speech council” to punish any media criticizing the government – I’ve repeatedly pointed this out and, strangely, you don’t seem to grasp that. The discussion started with Gordo quoting Poland as an example of a country fighting for free speech, which I opposed by explaining the real motives behind the proposed laws and also quoting the planned new tax on media (Facebook among others). In the last few posts I’ve been trying to hone you in on this hypocrisy, but you dodge my explanations and keep repeating the same thing. Of course you’re free to believe what you want, but at this stage I’m done with this pointless, off-topic discussion.

[Ron Put]

On 3/6/2021 at 5:04 AM, Iporuru said:

You have clung to this strange idea that the Polish government is some kind of a freedom champion

Huh? No, I don't, and you keep missing the point, but whatever...

On another note, Mullen Baker actually makes some very good points here:
 

 

[corybroo]

Claims that meritied debunking.    Politifact 15 wackiest covid-19 claims

[Saul]

5 hours ago, corybroo said:

Claims that meritied debunking.    Politifact 15 wackiest covid-19 claims

😀

My favorite false claim:

Doctors and nurses who administer the coronavirus vaccine can be "tried as war criminals."

  --  Saul

 

[Ron Put]

7 hours ago, corybroo said:

Claims that meritied debunking.    Politifact 15 wackiest covid-19 claims

One has to wonder, what is the information value of articles like this, other than making dim people feel superior to what are supposedly even dimmer people, and affirming political propaganda? I can point out why Politifact was created and how it's funded, but let's not open a can of worms and instead just look at the "article" at hand.

Among the alien abduction-equivalent examples of supposed abject stupidity, there is the "clever" insertion of two genuinely debatable presumptions, and I'll humor this inflammatory nonsense by addressing them, since I have some of the data handy:

1. CT-PCR tests: Many, including Michael Levine from Stanford, have pointed out that the until recently commonly used 40-cycle thresholds to determine "deaths from Covid-19" are problematic, and that if similar methods were used to determine deaths from the flu, the numbers would likely be significantly higher (if I recall correctly, Levine said "similar"). One should note that both President Biden and Dr. Fauci are on the record as suggesting that the high cycle thresholds used are inappropriate, yet no other state than Florida, to my knowledge, has required that Ct numbers are included with PCR test results, and that's only a relatively recent development. The recent and unfortunately timed WHO guidance to "use manufacturer guidelines" is likely to drive down the number of positives and "Covid deaths" and that will surely be used for political purposes, too. Just to provide a reference, the WHO has traditionally suggested a Ct of between 28 and 30, way below the Ct 40 used until Inauguration Day. WHO, like all other medical organizations I am aware of have also traditionally recommended that such tests should be performed only when the patient's condition and symptoms warrant CT-PCR confirmation in order to determine treatment:

"A useful assessment is the sensitivity of the test in patients with a rRT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) below a specific value (e.g. 28 or 30), because the virus is expected to be abundant in respiratory samples when the test is in this range, and test sensitivity correspondingly high (exceeding 90% in some published and unpublished studies) (4,11). It is important to note, however, that Ct values at a given input concentration of target RNA vary between rRTPCR assays and are not strictly quantitative."
 

2. Masks: No, they don't really buck the laws of physics since last summer, they just became another political tool and a war marking identifying if one is with the "good, smart people who are backed by "the scientists"," or with those "who want grandma dead."

Forget the fact that all medical groups have claimed for years that there is no evidence that masks reduce transmission by or exposure of otherwise healthy, asymptomatic people, outdoors, but it seemed accepted that exercising while wearing a mask had certain less than desirable effects, as one would expect. Just two such examples published shortly before the Left and its mob bullied a number of medical groups to reverse their recommendations:

“Exercise with facemask; Are we handling a devil's sword?” – A physiological hypothesis
"Exercising with facemasks may reduce available Oxygen and increase air trapping preventing substantial carbon dioxide exchange. The hypercapnic hypoxia may potentially increase acidic environment, cardiac overload, anaerobic metabolism and renal overload, which may substantially aggravate the underlying pathology of established chronic diseases. Further contrary to the earlier thought, no evidence exists to claim the facemasks during exercise offer additional protection from the droplet transfer of the virus. Hence, we recommend social distancing is better than facemasks during exercise and optimal utilization rather than exploitation of facemasks during exercise."

Wearing Face Mask Could Make Exercise Dangerous
“A mask makes it harder to inhale the quantity of air needed to perform at the highest levels,” Lindsay Bottoms, of University of Hertfordshire, said in an article posted on the Conversation. “We know that wearing a surgical mask can increase the resistance to airflow. Exercise invariably leads to faster and harder breaths, so wearing a mask during exercise places a further strain on airflow.”

One is, of course, free to disagree with such studies, theories, or recommendations, and free to wear a mask on the trail or alone in the car, if they chose so. 

But that's the nature of science and before draconian public measures are imposed indefinitely restricting basic freedoms, we need a real debate. Not the Left's fearmongering, censorship, and political purges and punishment of the "unpure."

[Mike41]

18 hours ago, Ron Put said:

One has to wonder, what is the information value of articles like this, other than making dim people feel superior to what are supposedly even dimmer people, and affirming political propaganda? I can point out why Politifact was created and how it's funded, but let's not open a can of worms and instead just look at the "article" at hand.

Among the alien abduction-equivalent examples of supposed abject stupidity, there is the "clever" insertion of two genuinely debatable presumptions, and I'll humor this inflammatory nonsense by addressing them, since I have some of the data handy:

1. CT-PCR tests: Many, including Michael Levine from Stanford, have pointed out that the until recently commonly used 40-cycle thresholds to determine "deaths from Covid-19" are problematic, and that if similar methods were used to determine deaths from the flu, the numbers would likely be significantly higher (if I recall correctly, Levine said "similar"). One should note that both President Biden and Dr. Fauci are on the record as suggesting that the high cycle thresholds used are inappropriate, yet no other state than Florida, to my knowledge, has required that Ct numbers are included with PCR test results, and that's only a relatively recent development. The recent and unfortunately timed WHO guidance to "use manufacturer guidelines" is likely to drive down the number of positives and "Covid deaths" and that will surely be used for political purposes, too. Just to provide a reference, the WHO has traditionally suggested a Ct of between 28 and 30, way below the Ct 40 used until Inauguration Day. WHO, like all other medical organizations I am aware of have also traditionally recommended that such tests should be performed only when the patient's condition and symptoms warrant CT-PCR confirmation in order to determine treatment:

"A useful assessment is the sensitivity of the test in patients with a rRT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) below a specific value (e.g. 28 or 30), because the virus is expected to be abundant in respiratory samples when the test is in this range, and test sensitivity correspondingly high (exceeding 90% in some published and unpublished studies) (4,11). It is important to note, however, that Ct values at a given input concentration of target RNA vary between rRTPCR assays and are not strictly quantitative."
 

2. Masks: No, they don't really buck the laws of physics since last summer, they just became another political tool and a war marking identifying if one is with the "good, smart people who are backed by "the scientists"," or with those "who want grandma dead."

Forget the fact that all medical groups have claimed for years that there is no evidence that masks reduce transmission by or exposure of otherwise healthy, asymptomatic people, outdoors, but it seemed accepted that exercising while wearing a mask had certain less than desirable effects, as one would expect. Just two such examples published shortly before the Left and its mob bullied a number of medical groups to reverse their recommendations:

“Exercise with facemask; Are we handling a devil's sword?” – A physiological hypothesis
"Exercising with facemasks may reduce available Oxygen and increase air trapping preventing substantial carbon dioxide exchange. The hypercapnic hypoxia may potentially increase acidic environment, cardiac overload, anaerobic metabolism and renal overload, which may substantially aggravate the underlying pathology of established chronic diseases. Further contrary to the earlier thought, no evidence exists to claim the facemasks during exercise offer additional protection from the droplet transfer of the virus. Hence, we recommend social distancing is better than facemasks during exercise and optimal utilization rather than exploitation of facemasks during exercise."

Wearing Face Mask Could Make Exercise Dangerous
“A mask makes it harder to inhale the quantity of air needed to perform at the highest levels,” Lindsay Bottoms, of University of Hertfordshire, said in an article posted on the Conversation. “We know that wearing a surgical mask can increase the resistance to airflow. Exercise invariably leads to faster and harder breaths, so wearing a mask during exercise places a further strain on airflow.”

One is, of course, free to disagree with such studies, theories, or recommendations, and free to wear a mask on the trail or alone in the car, if they chose so. 

But that's the nature of science and before draconian public measures are imposed indefinitely restricting basic freedoms, we need a real debate. Not the Left's fearmongering, censorship, and political purges and punishment of the "unpure."

Hmmm....I’ve been thinking about this and I do wonder how masks could supposedly be so effective considering how much they leak. I have several brands that are noish approved and they leak the trough the nose. This is very common. These approved n95 and a powecom k95 have the flexible metal nose strips and they still leak. Consider what the average person is wearing AND it does seem like a big JOKE and is it any wonder the epidemic goes on despite massive mask wearing.

https://theconversation.com/is-your-mask-effective-against-covid-19-three-questions-you-should-ask-yourself-153839

 

 

 

[Todd Allen]

52 minutes ago, Mike41 said:

Hmmm....I’ve been thinking about this and I do wonder how masks could supposedly be so effective considering how much they leak.

Here's a recent attempt to answer the question of mask effectiveness at the CDC:

Association of State-Issued Mask Mandates and Allowing On-Premises Restaurant Dining with County-Level COVID-19 Case and Death Growth Rates — United States, March 1–December 31, 2020

Quote

Discussion

Mask mandates were associated with statistically significant decreases in county-level daily COVID-19 case and death growth rates within 20 days of implementation. Allowing on-premises restaurant dining was associated with increases in county-level case and death growth rates within 41–80 days after reopening. State mask mandates and prohibiting on-premises dining at restaurants help limit potential exposure to SARS-CoV-2, reducing community transmission of COVID-19.

And looking at the tables and figures one finds...

 

Looks to me like the benefits of mask mandates have been modest and it is still fair to question if there is a net benefit after costs are taken into consideration.

Edited March 18, 2021 by Todd Allen

[AlPater]

None so blind as those who ...

One expects more from this crowd.

 

Effectiveness of Mask Wearing to Control Community Spread of SARS-CoV-2.
Brooks JT, Butler JC.
JAMA. 2021 Mar 9;325(10):998-999. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.1505.
PMID: 33566056 No abstract available.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536?utm_source=silverchair&utm_campaign=jama_network&utm_content=covid_weekly_highlights&utm_medium=email

Edited March 19, 2021 by AlPater