#131
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:20:04 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2021 5:42 PM, Tom Kunich wrote: I have been trying to tell you that Fauci is an incompetent bum that has NO BUSINESS on the public payroll. He NEVER served as ANY sort of medical expert save in the CDC, not from actual practice but from sitting around and reading papers written by others. So much wrongness! https://www.zippia.com/advice/dr-ant...uci-resume-cv/ Frank, you present a resume for Fauci that you are plainly unable to read yourself. Why is that? Fauci served a two year internship which was required for his MD and then went directly to the NIH where he spent his entire life never seeing another patient since. You are so ****ing sick it is unbelieveable. |
Ads |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 7:58:28 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 5:33 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote: jbeattie writes: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote: On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7, wrote: 1979: Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell? A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are the engineers, and the British are the police. In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers. 2029: Doordash are the police Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1 room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were suspended due to covid-28 This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is funny and laughs about this in public! Most of the posters here don't know what science is but since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be missed in the least after they are gone. Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks from Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia". I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a liar. The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the mask religion: https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/ Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data. The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read. Really? Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/ Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it off so I can breathe easier? The Politfact article points out what is generally available on the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is not in itself a scientific journal article. A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits, the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an insignificant way during relatively static activities like attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks. Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing? This is what the CDC says about masks: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html Here, print yourself a poster: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf This study does not say that masks do nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to keep you down -- you and John Galt? As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask wearing. Here, again: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536 For a round up of mask studies, see https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of the pandemic theater. I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research? Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"? When did you stop beating your wife? I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really should have used a parallel sentence structure. It's been said before, but you are a remarkably tedious person. :-) And I ask inconvenient questions! I really am curious how you found such an obscure source of right-leaning opinion. SWPRS doesn't seem like the thing that would turn up in normal searches, unless perhaps one indicated the direction one was already leaning. I don't remember. Frequently I follow links repeatedly, and have found that if I don't mark what I find interesting it is quite hard to find using a search engine later. I really am curious how you categorize swprs as "right wing". There is certainly skepticism about the worldwide covid response, is that all there is to it? I'm not sure that's a specifically right wing position outside the US. I found their website valuable because it's not just unsupported opinion, it has a wealth of links to supporting documents, and some that are not supporting. It is extremely difficult to discover how much each medical facility is being paid to report covid-19 deaths so I simply used the last lowest figure I saw which is $39,000 for cleanup and $11,000 to report the death. |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 4:57:54 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 21.04.2021 um 22:44 schrieb Radey Shouman: Essentially you're telling me that I really should wear a St. Christopher medal, because it's easier on the pocket than a rabbit's foot, less likely to smell bad, and won't offend vegans, while completely begging the question of how either one does any good at all. Funnily enough, this St Christopher's medal (or something else) has all but stalled the flu season world-wide; there is no "flu season" 2020/21 to speak of in Europe or the USA. https://www.today.com/health/flu-season-2020-2021-flu-activity-historic-lows-mask-wearing-t207131 Rolf, this is pure bull****. covid-19 IS influenza. I will show you a chart. On this chart it shows the SARS-Cov-1 pandemic of 2018 |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 4:57:54 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 21.04.2021 um 22:44 schrieb Radey Shouman: Essentially you're telling me that I really should wear a St. Christopher medal, because it's easier on the pocket than a rabbit's foot, less likely to smell bad, and won't offend vegans, while completely begging the question of how either one does any good at all. Funnily enough, this St Christopher's medal (or something else) has all but stalled the flu season world-wide; there is no "flu season" 2020/21 to speak of in Europe or the USA. https://www.today.com/health/flu-season-2020-2021-flu-activity-historic-lows-mask-wearing-t207131 Tom Kunich's profile photo Tom Kunich Rolf, this is pure bull****. covid-19 IS influenza. I will show you a chart.. On this chart it shows the SARS-Cov-1 pandemic of 2018 was classified as a flu pandemic and so is the SARS-Cov-2. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...nchs-data.html |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
" writes:
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:44:48 PM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote: The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news. Are you saying the current government health mandates are unreasonable? Limiting attendance, closing some activities, limiting travel, and others. Yes. Arbitrarily denying people the right to work or operate their businesses, closing schools, subjecting populations to the equivalent of house arrest (not in the US as far as I know, but you can now be arrested in Ontario for being on the street without sufficient reason). https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugee...ation-faq.html What vaccines are required for U.S. immigration? At this time,* vaccines for these diseases are currently required for U.S. immigration: Mumps Measles Rubella Polio Tetanus and diphtheria Pertussis Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib) Hepatitis A Hepatitis B Rotavirus Meningococcal disease Varicella Pneumococcal disease Seasonal influenza So is it OK to require the danged furners to get vaccinated to get into the land of milk and honey? But its unreasonable to require those already here? Above is a federal law. Probably been on the books for decades and decades. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-man...aws/index.html State Vaccination Requirements State laws establish vaccination requirements for school children. These laws often apply not only to children attending public schools but also to those attending private schools and day care facilities. States may also require immunization of healthcare workers and of patients/residents of healthcare facilities. So it is OK for most, all the states, to make school children and healthcare workers get vaccinated but current health rules are unreasonable? Maybe I am just not following you too well. We currently have federal and state health laws for diseases and many other things. And have had these for decades and decades. And we have state laws regulating population, attendance. Such as certain buildings cannot safely accommodate too many people. And vehicles like buses cannot carry too many people. But you are saying all these laws are illegal and the population should rise up and overthrow the oppressors? We have never had a law that required vaccination for anyone just because of US residence. We have never had the current sort of opaque, unaccountable administrative rulemaking over, for example, how many people you can have in your own house for dinner. Are you really saying that covid regulations are not a major increment in government power? Mr. Beattie will perhaps take the time to explain to us hoi polloi why it's all legal, but it certainly has not been customary up to very recently. I am in favor of regulations with a clearly articulated rational basis, and transparent rules that limit their scope of application. When the call was "14 days to flatten the curve", I was in favor, it made sense to me. But after 14 days, and 14 days, and another 14 days, we have a pandemic raj that makes rules about every aspect of everyday life without public oversight, and without feeling the need to explain their actions. California, for example, has repeatedly denied FOIA requests for the data that underlie their pandemic regulations. Michigan and Oregon are attempting to make mask mandates permanent. When I look at the actual curves for hospital admissions, deaths, or covid cases I just don't see where, for example, the legal restrictions made in South Dakota cause their curves to bend in way that that those of North Dakota didn't -- there just isn't much evidence that legal restrictions have done any good, and it should be obvious that they have had heavy costs, not just in money but also in lives. I believe that voluntary behavior changes have made a significant difference in the pandemic progress. These are done in self interest, they need not be mandated with criminal penalties. Those that are unlikely to voluntarily change their behavior due to risk are also unlikely to change their behavior due to regulation. Many of our fine leaders are among this group. |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
Frank Krygowski writes:
[ ... ] The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news. Not all decisions were good, but many were. Much can be explained by the fact that this virus was completely unknown. Measures and recommendations changed as more was learned. But assuming you're smarter than Tom ("There have been only 4000 deaths"), care to tell us what you would have done at what point in time, had you been in charge? I don't assume that I am smarter than Tom, although we certainly do not agree on many points. And I think I bored the group with a response to a similar question not long ago -- I can't be arsed to try to find it. So, who was "in charge"? Anthony Fauci? Donald Trump? Angela Merkel? Jacinda Ardern? Everyone, even those of us who are merely expected to bow to that hat on a stick, has a role to play. Since your question is so vague, I'll interpret it as "What would you have done had you, unaccountably, found yourself philosopher king of America?" Free hospital care (as in, pay nothing) for anyone with Covid from a care home, until clearly not contagious. Subsidised hospital care (as in, pay an affordable and predictable amount) for all Covid sufferers, to keep them out of the general population. Additional charges will apply if you check out early AMA. Needless to say, actually doing this with the pharmaco-medical vampire squid that we have created would require several years worth of GDP, but perhaps not less than the cost of the upcoming covid relief pork barrel act. This could be hard on the medical staff, in terms of burnout and in terms of infection, so expedited licensing for any doctors or nurses from Kazakhstan, or Zimbabwe, or wherever, that have found themselves working in quickie marts or driving ubers. Serious research into early covid treatment with already approved drugs. There seems to be a variety of approaches around the world, some of which may well be working. I have no idea if hydroxychloroquine, or ivermectin, or any other particular drug is the key, but I'll bet there is one and it's clear that the vampire squid has no interest in anything not patentable. No school closings or remote school, at least for those 14 and under. Early retirement with reduced pensions for any teachers that don't want to work. Repeal of laws prohibiting the wearing of masks in public places (there were quite a few). Let individuals decide if they want to wear a mask. Restrictions on public gatherings and other activities that have a clearly articulated rational basis, transparent limits on the scope and term of application, and consider the human costs involved. Outlaw any digital pandemic simulation that can't be done using pencil and paper, without notes. |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 8:21:49 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
" writes: On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:44:48 PM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote: The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news. Are you saying the current government health mandates are unreasonable? Limiting attendance, closing some activities, limiting travel, and others. Yes. Arbitrarily denying people the right to work or operate their businesses, closing schools, subjecting populations to the equivalent of house arrest (not in the US as far as I know, but you can now be arrested in Ontario for being on the street without sufficient reason). https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugee...ation-faq.html What vaccines are required for U.S. immigration? At this time,* vaccines for these diseases are currently required for U..S. immigration: Mumps Measles Rubella Polio Tetanus and diphtheria Pertussis Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib) Hepatitis A Hepatitis B Rotavirus Meningococcal disease Varicella Pneumococcal disease Seasonal influenza So is it OK to require the danged furners to get vaccinated to get into the land of milk and honey? But its unreasonable to require those already here? Above is a federal law. Probably been on the books for decades and decades. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-man...aws/index.html State Vaccination Requirements State laws establish vaccination requirements for school children. These laws often apply not only to children attending public schools but also to those attending private schools and day care facilities. States may also require immunization of healthcare workers and of patients/residents of healthcare facilities. So it is OK for most, all the states, to make school children and healthcare workers get vaccinated but current health rules are unreasonable? Maybe I am just not following you too well. We currently have federal and state health laws for diseases and many other things. And have had these for decades and decades. And we have state laws regulating population, attendance. Such as certain buildings cannot safely accommodate too many people. And vehicles like buses cannot carry too many people. But you are saying all these laws are illegal and the population should rise up and overthrow the oppressors? We have never had a law that required vaccination for anyone just because of US residence. We have never had the current sort of opaque, unaccountable administrative rulemaking over, for example, how many people you can have in your own house for dinner. Are you really saying that covid regulations are not a major increment in government power? Mr. Beattie will perhaps take the time to explain to us hoi polloi why it's all legal, but it certainly has not been customary up to very recently. I am in favor of regulations with a clearly articulated rational basis, and transparent rules that limit their scope of application. When the call was "14 days to flatten the curve", I was in favor, it made sense to me. But after 14 days, and 14 days, and another 14 days, we have a pandemic raj that makes rules about every aspect of everyday life without public oversight, and without feeling the need to explain their actions. California, for example, has repeatedly denied FOIA requests for the data that underlie their pandemic regulations. Michigan and Oregon are attempting to make mask mandates permanent. When I look at the actual curves for hospital admissions, deaths, or covid cases I just don't see where, for example, the legal restrictions made in South Dakota cause their curves to bend in way that that those of North Dakota didn't -- there just isn't much evidence that legal restrictions have done any good, and it should be obvious that they have had heavy costs, not just in money but also in lives. I believe that voluntary behavior changes have made a significant difference in the pandemic progress. These are done in self interest, they need not be mandated with criminal penalties. Those that are unlikely to voluntarily change their behavior due to risk are also unlikely to change their behavior due to regulation. Many of our fine leaders are among this group. Unfortunately Jay is doing nothing more than trying to make excuses for a government that is NOT being run by a President but by an invisible oligarchy. Biden is nothing more than a figurehead of these people who believe that they can escape punishment by remaining invisible. I have shown everyone that 1. Covid-19 is nothing more than another influenza and nothing more. 2. None of the numbers make he slightest sense. If an additional 538,000 people fell victim to covid-19 that would be an additional 20% of deaths above the normal yearly death rate and that would stand out like a sore thumb. But none of this has been happening. Money has been flowing out of the US treasury to medical facilities or has it? While most assuredly medical facilities have falsified causes of death to get on the payroll by using PCR as a diagnosis tool would allow them to legally say that they had covid-19 deaths, we could not possibly have a 20% increase in deaths without families all over the US talking about it and they aren't. What we have is people saying things like "I got covid and it was terrible". i am not seeing people speaking of all of their relatives dying from covid instead of pneumonia. Because the lockdown had EXACTLY the opposite effect of what was expected - people began taking much better care of themselves very soon after the media purposely tried to scare them into doing all the wrong things, the numbers of deaths this year a FAR below normal. Pneumonia is down 30% older people are much healthier. Democrats and the Lame Stream Media are in deep **** since no one believes a word they say now. The important thing is to discover who is running this government since Biden can't even control his bed wetting. These people are guilty of Grand Treason and should be held fully accountable. |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On 4/22/2021 9:41 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:20:04 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 4/21/2021 5:42 PM, Tom Kunich wrote: I have been trying to tell you that Fauci is an incompetent bum that has NO BUSINESS on the public payroll. He NEVER served as ANY sort of medical expert save in the CDC, not from actual practice but from sitting around and reading papers written by others. So much wrongness! https://www.zippia.com/advice/dr-ant...uci-resume-cv/ Frank, you present a resume for Fauci that you are plainly unable to read yourself. Why is that? Fauci served a two year internship which was required for his MD and then went directly to the NIH where he spent his entire life never seeing another patient since. You are so ****ing sick it is unbelieveable. People with memory longer than gnats know the ******* well from previous adventures: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=gallo+fauc...IH&t=h_&ia=web -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On 4/21/2021 10:58 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 5:33 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote: jbeattie writes: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote: On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7, wrote: 1979: Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell? A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are the engineers, and the British are the police. In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers. 2029: Doordash are the police Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1 room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were suspended due to covid-28 This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is funny and laughs about this in public! Most of the posters here don't know what science is but since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be missed in the least after they are gone. Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks from Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia". I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a liar. The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the mask religion: https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/ Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data. The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read. Really? Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/ Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it off so I can breathe easier? The Politfact article points out what is generally available on the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is not in itself a scientific journal article. A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits, the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an insignificant way during relatively static activities like attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks. Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing? This is what the CDC says about masks: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html Here, print yourself a poster: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf This study does not say that masks do nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to keep you down -- you and John Galt? As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask wearing. Here, again: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536 For a round up of mask studies, see https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of the pandemic theater. I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research? Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"? When did you stop beating your wife? I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really should have used a parallel sentence structure. It's been said before, but you are a remarkably tedious person. :-) And I ask inconvenient questions! I really am curious how you found such an obscure source of right-leaning opinion. SWPRS doesn't seem like the thing that would turn up in normal searches, unless perhaps one indicated the direction one was already leaning. I don't remember. Frequently I follow links repeatedly, and have found that if I don't mark what I find interesting it is quite hard to find using a search engine later. I really am curious how you categorize swprs as "right wing". There is certainly skepticism about the worldwide covid response, is that all there is to it? I'm not sure that's a specifically right wing position outside the US. I'm aware of some skepticism about some aspects of the COVID response, for example Dutch punks protesting their right to party after curfew. And obviously different countries had different policies - like Sweden and Britain trying for herd immunity instead of shutdowns. That indicates disagreements. (And we've now seen how some of those alternate policies have worked out.) I don't know the politics of the Dutch punks. But I know that among my acquaintances in real life and online, skepticism about COVID in general and about mitigation measures such as distancing, masks and vaccines correlate strongly with right-leaning politics. I'd say the split can now be characterized as the great bulk of knowledgeable scientists and medicos on one side, and right wingers on the other. So when a fairly anonymous agency puts up a long article promoting skepticism of COVID measures, it's likely right wing. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Heaven and Hell
On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 9:05:11 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2021 10:58 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 5:33 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote: jbeattie writes: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote: On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7, wrote: 1979: Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell? A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are the engineers, and the British are the police. In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers. 2029: Doordash are the police Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1 room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were suspended due to covid-28 This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is funny and laughs about this in public! Most of the posters here don't know what science is but since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be missed in the least after they are gone. Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks from Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia".. I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a liar. The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the mask religion: https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/ Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data. The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read. Really? Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/ Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it off so I can breathe easier? The Politfact article points out what is generally available on the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is not in itself a scientific journal article. A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits, the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an insignificant way during relatively static activities like attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks. Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing? This is what the CDC says about masks: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html Here, print yourself a poster: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf This study does not say that masks do nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to keep you down -- you and John Galt? As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask wearing. Here, again: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536 For a round up of mask studies, see https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of the pandemic theater. I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research? Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"? When did you stop beating your wife? I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really should have used a parallel sentence structure. It's been said before, but you are a remarkably tedious person. :-) And I ask inconvenient questions! I really am curious how you found such an obscure source of right-leaning opinion. SWPRS doesn't seem like the thing that would turn up in normal searches, unless perhaps one indicated the direction one was already leaning. I don't remember. Frequently I follow links repeatedly, and have found that if I don't mark what I find interesting it is quite hard to find using a search engine later. I really am curious how you categorize swprs as "right wing". There is certainly skepticism about the worldwide covid response, is that all there is to it? I'm not sure that's a specifically right wing position outside the US. I'm aware of some skepticism about some aspects of the COVID response, for example Dutch punks protesting their right to party after curfew. And obviously different countries had different policies - like Sweden and Britain trying for herd immunity instead of shutdowns. That indicates disagreements. (And we've now seen how some of those alternate policies have worked out.) I don't know the politics of the Dutch punks. But I know that among my acquaintances in real life and online, skepticism about COVID in general and about mitigation measures such as distancing, masks and vaccines correlate strongly with right-leaning politics. I'd say the split can now be characterized as the great bulk of knowledgeable scientists and medicos on one side, and right wingers on the other. So when a fairly anonymous agency puts up a long article promoting skepticism of COVID measures, it's likely right wing. Frank, why are you, like Jay, talking about things you don't understand? ALL of the US states that did not lock down had EXACTLY the same infection rates and supposed death rates and those who did. Sweden attempted to keep it out of nursing homes and had the same non-success as every other country but their rates of infection matched everywhere else. You haven't the slightest understanding of disease and methods of spreading but want to pretend you do. Why is that? Because like Climate Change you read about it in Popular Mechanics? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Do dead cyclists go to Heaven or Hell? | Mike Jacoubowsky | UK | 47 | January 12th 08 10:52 PM |
Do dead cyclists go to Heaven or Hell? | Jens Müller[_2_] | UK | 0 | January 2nd 08 10:11 AM |
Do dead cyclists go to Heaven or Hell? | Jim F | UK | 2 | December 31st 07 04:59 AM |
Do dead cyclists go to Heaven or Hell? | Bill Z. | UK | 0 | December 31st 07 04:55 AM |
From Hell to Heaven. part 2. Heaven on two wheels | David Martin | UK | 0 | March 14th 05 09:23 PM |