Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

[Iamwhomiam]

The latest update on covid deaths in San Francisco took place this evening at 9:38pm edt and indicates 438 deaths in SF so far.

California's number of deaths from covid so far is 54,572. That's more than 10% of all US deaths, which tonight is reported to be 527,643.

WHen I long ago wrote about the failure of masks to prevent spread of disease, It was a trick to garner some opposition. Masks will fail 95% of the time in restraining spittle ejected when coughing or sneezing. Otherwise they are very effective in reducing the spread of viruses.

Could you imagine being prepped for major surgery and telling all there to operate and assist to remove their masks? They'd have a good laugh and then tell the anesthesiologist to take you under, all keeping their masks firmly in place for the duration..

OK, but based on what actual scientific evidence?

Goodness, stickdog, you can't be serious. How do you imagine N95, n 99 or N100 mask ratings are determined? Through testing and reporting the results.

You and BS seem to have avoided researching the subject so far, because the simplest search would have given links to dozens of reports from such studies, some more recent than others: https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... ical+masks

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Oh, we've researched it quite a bit. Demonstrably.

Are masks -- most of the cloth masks/coverings worn every day, by every day people, and the methods/handling employed by users, etc. -- effective in curbing spread?

Not by any margin that would ever, EVER justify mask mandates, NO.

This excludes the DAMAGE caused by masks, which is rarely discussed. Societal, psychological damage. Damage to overall health over the long-term (how it hampers the body's natural immunity response, etc.).

According to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study published Sept. 11, 85% of COVID-19 patients report having worn a mask “always” or “often.” The study also found that “In the 14 days before illness onset, 71% of case-patients and 74% of control-participants reported always using cloth face coverings or other mask types when in public.”

So that sea of masks in Kroger may not prevent the spread of coronavirus after all.

This study only adds to the growing suspicion that science cannot give us a definitive answer as to whether or not mask-wearing prevents the spread of COVID-19, and that mask mandates are in reality a form of political control.

A report from the National Academies of Sciences published April 8 said there is not enough evidence to say by what percentage masks prevent coronavirus.

Public health and disease expert Michael Osterholm “is worried that mask effectiveness is being over-hyped.”

In an article from Jordan Schachtel on the CDC report, he cites a tweet from cognitive scientist Mark Changizi, in which Changizi argues that masks actually have negative side effects. Changizi cites a study from the Technical University of Munich that shows that mask wearing can increase rebreathing of expelled carbon dioxide and significantly increase respiration, respiratory rate, and hyperventilation, while also increasing heart rate and carbon dioxide in the blood.

In other words, masks make it harder to breathe. I’m sure everyone has had the experience of feeling lightheaded after an hour or so of wearing a mask; the science only tells us what we already know. Masks, then, are not harmless whether they work or not. So, no, you shouldn’t wear them just to make other people feel safer.

Other studies show that even where mask mandates have been put in place, cases of the virus have not decreased, but have actually increased. Daily cases in San Diego, Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura counties either continued to increase or spiked after mask mandates were put into place in all four counties. The highest spike for Los Angeles County occurred more than a month after a mask mandate was put in place.

Spreading the mass delusion that masks somehow prevent the spread of COVID-19 only contributes to an environment of fear and isolation. Making someone fearful and isolated does not compute with making them feel safer to me. The tactics of the devil include fear, and the greatest antidote to fear is truth.

The truth is that masks do not only fail to prevent the spread of COVID-19, but also significantly harm human interactions. If I cannot see half of your face, I probably can’t hear you very well or see the emotions on your face. I can’t see you as you, as an entirety of a person.

Peter Hitchens, one of the few patriots left in the United Kingdom, understood the situation rightly when he said, “Face masks turn us into voiceless submissives — and it’s not science forcing us to wear them, it’s politics.”

There is nothing more dismaying than walking into a dining hall that feels like a hospital ward when none of this is necessary. The mainstream culture encourages all of us to avoid conflict and choose “niceness,” or, in the case of the Christian culture here at Hillsdale, some emasculated form of “charity.” When did charity become taking part in a lie?

Back in March, the World Health Organization, the CDC, and the U.S. surgeon general told the public that it should not wear masks, as they do not prevent the spread of coronavirus.

In June, WHO said its position had evolved and encouraged the general public to wear masks in places where proper social distancing could not be maintained. Now, even in October, masks are still the end-all-be-all of coronavirus prevention such that anyone not wearing a mask is seen as either callous or crazy.

...

Emma Cummins is a senior George Washington Fellow studying politics.

http://hillsdalecollegian.com/2020/10/resist-masktopia/

[brainpanhandler]

Now, even in October, masks are still the end-all-be-all of coronavirus prevention such that anyone not wearing a mask is seen as either callous or crazy.

Yah. Strange how they are though. And violent and stupid.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Another lazy, inept strawman comment. Unfortunate.

Carry on, footsoldiers.

[stickdog99]

The latest update on covid deaths in San Francisco took place this evening at 9:38pm edt and indicates 438 deaths in SF so far.

California's number of deaths from covid so far is 54,572. That's more than 10% of all US deaths, which tonight is reported to be 527,643.

WHen I long ago wrote about the failure of masks to prevent spread of disease, It was a trick to garner some opposition. Masks will fail 95% of the time in restraining spittle ejected when coughing or sneezing. Otherwise they are very effective in reducing the spread of viruses.

Could you imagine being prepped for major surgery and telling all there to operate and assist to remove their masks? They'd have a good laugh and then tell the anesthesiologist to take you under, all keeping their masks firmly in place for the duration..

OK, but based on what actual scientific evidence?

Goodness, stickdog, you can't be serious. How do you imagine N95, n 99 or N100 mask ratings are determined? Through testing and reporting the results.

You and BS seem to have avoided researching the subject so far, because the simplest search would have given links to dozens of reports from such studies, some more recent than others: https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... ical+masks

Obviously, you haven't looked at the science because I thought the exact same thing until I looked at the science. There is no scientific evidence that suggests that mask wearing alone significantly limits the spread of any respiratory disease, and a lot of scientific evidence that suggests that it does not;

And there are many downsides to mask wearing beyond the obvious symbolic ones.

Are you sure nobody is harmed by mask wearing?

All I am asking for is actual scientific evidence (rather than religiously unquestionable "fact check" establishment propaganda) that actually demonstrates that the benefits of masks definitely outweigh their risks and costs. Why is this controversial?

Did you know that masks harbor dangerous bacteria and fungus? Did you know that plastic masks give off dangerous fumes known to cause lung cancer? Did you know that masks measurably restrict our intake of oxygen and that this restricted oxygen intake is bad for our health? Did you know that 1.5 billion masks landed into our oceans just last year? Did you know that Fauci, the WHO, and the CDC were just last year telling us that masks do not stop the spread of COVID or influenza? Did you know that there have been no randomized control trials in the history of the world that demonstrate that masks do anything measurable to stop the spread of respiratory diseases in any statistically significant manner?

All I am asking people to do is to stop assuming that doing whatever they tell you to do is definitely helping and to instead consider all of the available scientific evidence.

Is it too much to ask for clear scientific evidence of the benefits of masks, which masks, outdoor masks, outdoor distancing, lockdowns, what kind of lockdowns, experimental vaccines, which experimental vaccines, air filters, which air filters, nutritional supplements, which nutritional supplements more than a year after this pandemic began?

Is it OK to point out that all of the above are still (and in many cases mysteriously) lacking more than a year since this began?

Why do both MAGA and Blue MAGA camps alike pretend that these are closed questions when they are anything but closed questions from a scientific perspective? Of course, I agree 100% that vulnerable people need to be supported by their government rather than hung out to dry. However, blanket statements such as "you can't be serious" are not science.

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/do ... .pub5/full

What are the results of the review?

Medical or surgical masks

Seven studies took place in the community, and two studies in healthcare workers. Compared with wearing no mask, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu‐like illness (9 studies; 3507 people); and probably makes no difference in how many people have flu confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 3005 people). Unwanted effects were rarely reported, but included discomfort.

N95/P2 respirators

Four studies were in healthcare workers, and one small study was in the community. Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu‐like illness (5 studies; 8407 people) or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people). Unwanted effects were not well reported; discomfort was mentioned.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 121724.htm

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-re ... a-pandemic

https://update.lib.berkeley.edu/2020/05 ... rventions/

Mask skepticism was officially sanctioned by the Surgeon General of the US Navy in a 1919 report:

“No evidence was presented which would justify compelling persons at large to wear masks during an epidemic. The mask is designed only to afford protection against a direct spray from the mouth of the carrier of pathogenic microorganisms … Masks of improper design, made of wide-mesh gauze, which rest against the mouth and nose, become wet with saliva, soiled with the fingers, and are changed infrequently, may lead to infection rather than prevent it, especially when worn by persons who have not even a rudimentary knowledge of the modes of transmission of the causative agents of communicable diseases.”

“Epidemiological and Statistical Data, US Navy, 1918,” Reprinted from the Annual Report of the Surgeon General, US Navy, (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1919) 434.

Although the Surgeon General of the US Navy acknowledged that wearing masks by hospital staff was good practice, “the morbidity rate, nevertheless, was very high among those attending the sick,” and may only have prevented infection from a direct, close hit from a cough or sneeze of a patient. The protocols followed in the contagious annex of the US Naval Hospital in Annapolis, MD, were sufficient to prevent cross-contamination of “cerebro-spinal fever” (aka meningitis), diphtheria, measles, mumps, scarlet fever, and German measles. Not so with influenza. In fact, the infection rate of staff was as high in the high-protocol wards as in the improvised hospitals. In one improvised hospital at the Navy Training Station in Great Lakes, IL., the infection rate was higher among those corpsmen and volunteers who wore masks than those who did not!

...

If we invested more in public health research, primary health care, and public health education, we could improve even more the quality and quantity of these layered non-pharmaceutical interventions, which worked together in 1918-19 and which are working now. We can do better with building our communication and trust so that all of these measures can work together. But for them to work together, we have to work together.

If you want more studies, I have a scores of them that I can show you. And IMHO, it is pretty telling that none of studies done before the CDC and Fauci made their public about-face concerning mask wearing last March suggest that mask wearing alone is statistically significantly effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases.

[stickdog99]

Now, even in October, masks are still the end-all-be-all of coronavirus prevention such that anyone not wearing a mask is seen as either callous or crazy.

Yah. Strange how they are though. And violent and stupid.

Hmmm. What do you call people who wear masks religiously everywhere they go for over a full year just because constantly lying authorities told them to (after just telling them that this would not help)? What do you call people who won't even consider the scientific evidence about the effectiveness and costs and risks vs. supposed benefits of mask wearing when this evidence is presented to them because they already "know" that anyone who uses scientific evidence to question the orthodoxy of the COVID-faithful is by definition a selfish, violent, fascist brute?

[dada]

People wear masks religiously their whole life. That's today's society, in fact. A collection of masks.

Constantly lying authorities - parents, peers, teachers, etc - tell them to, after telling them not to. They're all hypocrites, wrapped up in their own double binds.

Despite all common sense evidence that shows mask wearing doesn't make people any happier, costs a ton to keep up with the joneses, and the ever present risk of the mask becoming stuck, forever, people still decide that the advertised benefits of wealth that mask wearing promises are worth it.

The fakes and phonies will not hear any questioning of the orthodoxy of society, anyone who does earns every negative label under the sun, and then some. And they deserve it.

[stickdog99]

People wear masks religiously their whole life. That's today's society, in fact. A collection of masks.

Constantly lying authorities - parents, peers, teachers, etc - tell them to, after telling them not to. They're all hypocrites, wrapped up in their own double binds.

Despite all common sense evidence that shows mask wearing doesn't make people any happier, costs a ton to keep up with the joneses, and the ever present risk of the mask becoming stuck, forever, people still decide that the advertised benefits of wealth that mask wearing promises are worth it.

The fakes and phonies will not hear any questioning of the orthodoxy of society, anyone who does earns every negative label under the sun, and then some. And they deserve it.

Can't argue with that. We are all socialization's bitches. Yet we all also realize to one degree or another that everything we have ever been told is a lie.

I would just like some of my friends and fellow citizens to awaken to the possibility that these general truths could also apply to their inviolable Catechism of COVID-19.

[stickdog99]

Here are the age demographics of the 440 people who have died while also testing positive for COVID-19 in San Francisco since the pandemic started:

20-24: 2 deaths
30-39: 4 deaths
40-49: 11 deaths
50-59: 26 deaths
60-69: 56 deaths
70-79: 72 deaths
80+: 269 deaths

Assuming very conservatively that all of these individuals died at the midpoint of these age ranges and the average age of death for those over 80 was 85 results in a COVID-19 average age of mortality of 77.3. I would bet $1,000 that the actual rather than estimated ages of death would increase this estimate by several years, just considering that older people within any range tend to die more than younger people.

The typical age of mortality of a San Francisco male is 78.8 years.

So again, I see no evidence that the average age of mortality in San Francisco has changed one whit due to COVID-19-related illness. However, over 700 San Francisco residents died of drug overdoses in 2020, and 61 more just in January 2021. This is up from the previous all-time highs of 134 in 2018 and 290 in 2019. And last year, there was a 66% increase in suicidal teens visiting San Francisco emergency rooms. So my guess is that the age of mortality has declined significantly due to COVID-19 hysteria.

And we are now down to 44 total patients in the entire SF hospital system tested positive for COVID-19, accounting for less than 4% of the number of people who are currently hospitalized in San Francisco.

Yet schools and places of worship still remain shuttered with no projected date of reopening and countless small businesses remain devastated by lockdown restrictions while 98% of San Francisco's "good liberals" continue to religiously squeeze toxic chemicals on their hands while hiding in their homes (if they are lucky enough to have them), shuddering in fear behind their masks, and castigating the fascist red states that have so recklessly dared to lift martial law.

And all the while there has never been a shred of proof provided that masks or handwashing or even social distancing actually have had any measurable effect on anything. The case and death curves have simply had their peaks and valleys with no regard whatsoever for the near-universal implementation (or non-implementation) of all of these practices.

Will our nightmare of mass hysterical fear ever end? What data will it take for you personally to ever again consider hugging a stranger while exposing your (gasp!) naked face? Will the unproven protection of your experimental Pfizer or Moderna vaccine ever replace the unproven protection and religious righteousness of your infinitely pious devotion to your mask, hand washing, and social distancing rituals?

[Belligerent Savant]

.

The case and deaths curves have simply had their peaks and valleys with no regard whatsoever for the near-universal implementation of all of these practices.

This single fact alone is enough to collapse the entire [hysterical] argument FOR lockdowns/mask mandates.

[dada]

You guys keep saying it's hysterical, but I'm not really seeing what's so funny about it.

[JackRiddler]

Now, even in October, masks are still the end-all-be-all of coronavirus prevention such that anyone not wearing a mask is seen as either callous or crazy.

Yah. Strange how they are though. And violent and stupid.

Hmmm. What do you call people who wear masks religiously everywhere they go for over a full year just because constantly lying authorities told them to (after just telling them that this would not help)? What do you call people who won't even consider the scientific evidence about the effectiveness and costs and risks vs. supposed benefits of mask wearing when this evidence is presented to them because they already "know" that anyone who uses scientific evidence to question the orthodoxy of the COVID-faithful is by definition a selfish, violent, fascist brute?

Uh... constructs? Since not all of these types/categories (there are at least three implicit or explicit in the passage) overlap fully or even in majority? To be truthful, I want to find a way to get a majority on board, not to solidify it in the opposite direction. Does that make me soft on technofascism?

[I feel like this has been Groundhog Day since 9/11]

.

[dada]

"We are all socialization's bitches."

Only when we wear puppy masks.

It just doesn't resonate with me. My relationship with society is friendly, not a dominant/submissive affair. Everything I'd been told was a lie, and that's okay. I've told some real whoppers to myself over the years, too.

As society is a collection of masks, socialization is allowing society to mediate direct experience of the world, through the mask. When we say "social media," we're talking about the latest trend in digital socialization. But social media has been around like, forever. Gossip, trivia, fandom. Promotional campaigns, mask-recognition enterprises. Society mediates direct experience. If it's the only connection one has to the world, I can see why it becomes this godlike thing for people. Making them so depressed, so angry.

[stickdog99]

"We are all socialization's bitches."

Only when we wear puppy masks.

It just doesn't resonate with me. My relationship with society is friendly, not a dominant/submissive affair. Everything I'd been told was a lie, and that's okay. I've told some real whoppers to myself over the years, too.

As society is a collection of masks, socialization is allowing society to mediate direct experience of the world, through the mask. When we say "social media," we're talking about the latest trend in digital socialization. But social media has been around like, forever. Gossip, trivia, fandom. Promotional campaigns, mask-recognition enterprises. Society mediates direct experience. If it's the only connection one has to the world, I can see why it becomes this godlike thing for people. Making them so depressed, so angry.

or so puzzled.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

"social media" may well have existed prior to the Internet, but the social media of the internet, the internet itself, and cable news, have all acted as unprecedented force multipliers, amplifiers of hysteria, conditioning tactics, propaganda, fear. What would have happened in 2020 if we had the media technology of, say, 1982? It would have likely amounted to, at best, a higher than average flu season.


https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ruary_2021

Review of scientific reports of harms caused by face
masks, up to February 2021

Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

Researcher, Ontario Civil Liberties Association (ocla.ca)
Member scientist, PANDA (pandata.org)
[ See section about the author’s expertise, at the end ]

The article is organized into the following sections:
- Summary
- Introduction: Government’s onus to evaluate safety
- Context: Risk-benefit-harm analysis
- Healthcare workers (HCWs)
- Physiological impacts of face masks in healthy adults
- Psychological harm in the general population
- Infants and school children
- Microbial pathogen infections from masks
- Endnotes / References

Summary

It is a testimony to the power of propaganda, institutional capture, and the desire to
socially conform that masking of the general population has successfully been imposed
during the COVID-19 era. The harms from this imposition are palpable, and potentially
long-term and gargantuan, not the least of which is the psychological training of the
public to comply with an absurd measure that has direct personal negative impact. I
review the mounting evidence of the obvious: Universal masking harms people and
society, without any detectable benefit.

Introduction: Government’s onus to evaluate safety

Following the precautionary principle, government has the onus to demonstrate
absence of significant anticipated harm, prior to imposing a measure, especially with a
personal medical measure applied to the general healthy population.

The precautionary principle was not followed for masks in the COVID-19 pandemic.
The general masking implementations in Canadian provinces were even more
aggressive than the qualified recommendations of the WHO [1].

This reckless government overreach has not been missed in recent scientific
commentary. A few examples are as follows.

See link for the rest.