Trump Rally in Harrisburg

Bare-ya-cuda

Well-Known Member
God you people are dumb

Who was paying them to say covid? and why?

Where do you get these idiotic ideas and why does each one just prove that you have no idea how anything works in the world?

Is it because you =have so little control of your own lives you assume someone must be pulling the strings?

It's always " the overlords". " The elites". "Soros". or some other boogeyman to explain why your lives are so miserable.
IMG_1131.jpeg
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

Face masks made ‘little to no difference’ in preventing spread of COVID: study



Published by Cochrane Library, the review dug into the findings of 78 randomized controlled trials to determine whether “physical interventions” — including face masks and hand-washing — lessened the spread of respiratory viruses.

When comparing the use of medical/surgical masks to wearing no masks, the review found that “wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people).”

Next, the review compared medical/surgical masks to N95 respirators (or P2 respirators, which are used in Europe).

It found that “wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people).”

The 78 studies looked at participants from countries of all income levels.

Data was gathered during the H1N1 flu pandemic in 2009, non-epidemic flu seasons, epidemic flu seasons up to 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic, the study authors wrote.



Unmasking Covid Claims: Scientific Review Challenges Claim that Masks Reduced Covid Transmissions​



A new scientific review raises additional questions over the science behind the mask mandates imposed on the population for years. The new scientific review by 12 researchers from leading universities found little support for the claims that masks reduced Covid exposures. My interest in the story, as usual, focuses on free speech. Numerous experts were suspended or banned for challenging these very claims and the media labeled any such critics as dangerous or fringe figures. Regardless of your ultimate conclusions on the efficacy of masks, there was clearly a scientific basis to challenge the mask policies. Yet, many people were routinely censored on Twitter and other platforms for daring to challenge the official position on masks.

The Centers for Disease and Control Prevention (CDC) initially rejected the use of a mask mandate. However, the issue became a political weapon as politicians and the press claimed that questioning masks was anti-science and even unhinged.
In April 2020, the CDC reversed its position and called for the masking of the entire population, including children as young as 2 years old. The mask mandate and other pandemic measures like the closing of schools are now cited as fueling emotional and developmental problems in children.

The closing of schools and businesses was also challenged by some critics as unnecessary. Many of those critics were also censored. It now appears that they may have been right. Many countries did not close schools and did not experience increases in Covid. However, we are now facing alarming drops in testing scores and alarming rises in medical illness among the young.

Masks became a major social and political dividing line in politics and the media. Maskless people were chased from stores and denounced in Congress. Then-CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said during a Senate hearing that “face masks are the most important powerful health tool we have.”

However, the new publication reaffirms earlier studies and states that “a new scientific review suggests that widespread masking may have done little to nothing to curb the transmission of COVID.” It added that “wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people).”

It also found little evidence of a difference from wearing better masks and that “wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people).”


Again, I expect that these studies will be debated for years. That is a good thing. There are questions raised over the types of studies used and whether randomized studies are sufficient. The point is only that there were countervailing indicators on mask efficacy and a basis to question the mandates. Yet, there was no real debate because of the censorship supported by many Democratic leaders in social media. To question such mandates was declared a public health threat.

The head of the World Health Organization even supported censorship to combat what he called an “infodemic.”

A lawsuit was filed by Missouri and Louisiana and joined by leading experts, including Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya (Stanford University) and Martin Kulldorff (Harvard University).

Bhattacharya previously objected to the suspension of Dr. Clare Craig after she raised concerns about Pfizer trial documents. Those doctors were the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated for a more focused Covid response that targeted the most vulnerable population rather than widespread lockdowns and mandates. Many are now questioning the efficacy and cost of the massive lockdown as well as the real value of masks or the rejection of natural immunities as an alternative to vaccination. Yet, these experts and others were attacked for such views just a year ago. Some found themselves censored on social media for challenging claims of Dr. Fauci and others.




Did Fauci say he ‘made up’ COVID-19 rules on social distancing, masks? Let’s look at the transcript.​




What Fauci said about 6-foot social distancing

Starting on Page 183 of a 246-page transcript of Fauci’s second day of testimony, he said he was not aware of studies that supported the 6-foot social distancing guidelines that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention instituted early in the pandemic.

Committee Staff Director Mitch Benzine asked Fauci whether he recalled when discussions about a 6-foot threshold began.

“You know,” Fauci replied, “I don’t recall. It sort of just appeared. I don’t recall, like, a discussion of whether it should be 5 or 6 or whatever. It was just that 6-foot is — ”

“Did you see any studies that supported 6 feet?” Benzine asked.

“I was not aware of studies that — in fact, that would be a very difficult study to do,” Fauci said.

After some back and forth, Fauci said the decision was “empiric,” which in medical terms means a determination based on experience rather than a precise understanding of the cause of something.

“I think it would fall under the category of empiric,” Fauci said. “Just an empiric decision that wasn’t based on data or even data that could be accomplished. But I’m thinking hard as I’m talking to you. … I don’t recall, like, a discussion of, ‘Now, it’s going to be’ — it sort of just appeared, that 6 feet is going to be the distance.”


[clip]


“What I meant by no science behind it, is that there wasn’t a controlled trial that said compare 6 foot with 3 feet with 10 feet,” he said.

[clip]

At one point in the hearing, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R.-Ga., held up an enlarged copy of the Daily Mail headline and said, “Mr. Fauci, you also represent the type of science where you confessed that you made up the COVID rules, including 6-feet social distancing and masking of children.”

“I never said I made anything up,” Fauci said.

“You admitted that you made up, that you made it up as you went,” Greene said.

“I didn’t say I made it up,” Fauci said.

“So, are you saying this is fake news, Mr. Fauci?” Greene asked.

“I didn’t say I made anything up,” Fauci said.

“What did you say?” Greene asked.

“I said that it is not based in science and it just appeared,” Fauci said.
 

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member

Face masks made ‘little to no difference’ in preventing spread of COVID: study



Published by Cochrane Library, the review dug into the findings of 78 randomized controlled trials to determine whether “physical interventions” — including face masks and hand-washing — lessened the spread of respiratory viruses.

When comparing the use of medical/surgical masks to wearing no masks, the review found that “wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people).”

Next, the review compared medical/surgical masks to N95 respirators (or P2 respirators, which are used in Europe).

It found that “wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people).”

The 78 studies looked at participants from countries of all income levels.

Data was gathered during the H1N1 flu pandemic in 2009, non-epidemic flu seasons, epidemic flu seasons up to 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic, the study authors wrote.



Unmasking Covid Claims: Scientific Review Challenges Claim that Masks Reduced Covid Transmissions


A new scientific review raises additional questions over the science behind the mask mandates imposed on the population for years. The new scientific review by 12 researchers from leading universities found little support for the claims that masks reduced Covid exposures. My interest in the story, as usual, focuses on free speech. Numerous experts were suspended or banned for challenging these very claims and the media labeled any such critics as dangerous or fringe figures. Regardless of your ultimate conclusions on the efficacy of masks, there was clearly a scientific basis to challenge the mask policies. Yet, many people were routinely censored on Twitter and other platforms for daring to challenge the official position on masks.

The Centers for Disease and Control Prevention (CDC) initially rejected the use of a mask mandate. However, the issue became a political weapon as politicians and the press claimed that questioning masks was anti-science and even unhinged.
In April 2020, the CDC reversed its position and called for the masking of the entire population, including children as young as 2 years old. The mask mandate and other pandemic measures like the closing of schools are now cited as fueling emotional and developmental problems in children.

The closing of schools and businesses was also challenged by some critics as unnecessary. Many of those critics were also censored. It now appears that they may have been right. Many countries did not close schools and did not experience increases in Covid. However, we are now facing alarming drops in testing scores and alarming rises in medical illness among the young.

Masks became a major social and political dividing line in politics and the media. Maskless people were chased from stores and denounced in Congress. Then-CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said during a Senate hearing that “face masks are the most important powerful health tool we have.”

However, the new publication reaffirms earlier studies and states that “a new scientific review suggests that widespread masking may have done little to nothing to curb the transmission of COVID.” It added that “wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people).”

It also found little evidence of a difference from wearing better masks and that “wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people).”


Again, I expect that these studies will be debated for years. That is a good thing. There are questions raised over the types of studies used and whether randomized studies are sufficient. The point is only that there were countervailing indicators on mask efficacy and a basis to question the mandates. Yet, there was no real debate because of the censorship supported by many Democratic leaders in social media. To question such mandates was declared a public health threat.

The head of the World Health Organization even supported censorship to combat what he called an “infodemic.”

A lawsuit was filed by Missouri and Louisiana and joined by leading experts, including Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya (Stanford University) and Martin Kulldorff (Harvard University).

Bhattacharya previously objected to the suspension of Dr. Clare Craig after she raised concerns about Pfizer trial documents. Those doctors were the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated for a more focused Covid response that targeted the most vulnerable population rather than widespread lockdowns and mandates. Many are now questioning the efficacy and cost of the massive lockdown as well as the real value of masks or the rejection of natural immunities as an alternative to vaccination. Yet, these experts and others were attacked for such views just a year ago. Some found themselves censored on social media for challenging claims of Dr. Fauci and others.




Did Fauci say he ‘made up’ COVID-19 rules on social distancing, masks? Let’s look at the transcript.​




What Fauci said about 6-foot social distancing

Starting on Page 183 of a 246-page transcript of Fauci’s second day of testimony, he said he was not aware of studies that supported the 6-foot social distancing guidelines that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention instituted early in the pandemic.

Committee Staff Director Mitch Benzine asked Fauci whether he recalled when discussions about a 6-foot threshold began.

“You know,” Fauci replied, “I don’t recall. It sort of just appeared. I don’t recall, like, a discussion of whether it should be 5 or 6 or whatever. It was just that 6-foot is — ”

“Did you see any studies that supported 6 feet?” Benzine asked.

“I was not aware of studies that — in fact, that would be a very difficult study to do,” Fauci said.

After some back and forth, Fauci said the decision was “empiric,” which in medical terms means a determination based on experience rather than a precise understanding of the cause of something.

“I think it would fall under the category of empiric,” Fauci said. “Just an empiric decision that wasn’t based on data or even data that could be accomplished. But I’m thinking hard as I’m talking to you. … I don’t recall, like, a discussion of, ‘Now, it’s going to be’ — it sort of just appeared, that 6 feet is going to be the distance.”


[clip]


“What I meant by no science behind it, is that there wasn’t a controlled trial that said compare 6 foot with 3 feet with 10 feet,” he said.

[clip]

At one point in the hearing, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R.-Ga., held up an enlarged copy of the Daily Mail headline and said, “Mr. Fauci, you also represent the type of science where you confessed that you made up the COVID rules, including 6-feet social distancing and masking of children.”

“I never said I made anything up,” Fauci said.

“You admitted that you made up, that you made it up as you went,” Greene said.

“I didn’t say I made it up,” Fauci said.

“So, are you saying this is fake news, Mr. Fauci?” Greene asked.

“I didn’t say I made anything up,” Fauci said.

“What did you say?” Greene asked.

“I said that it is not based in science and it just appeared,” Fauci said.
I hope you realize that Tard won’t read any of that, and will just continue to blather on, relentlessly.
 

TPD

the poor dad
The talk of face diapers reminds me of the Trump rally I went to in Sept 2020 - the peak of scaredness for a lot of people. Very few attendees were wearing masks, but we couldn’t call it a rally back then - they were banned. It was a peaceful protest that my friend and I attended with 15,000 of our closest MAGA friends. And guess what - neither of us got sick and died from the rona that day!
 

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
The talk of face diapers reminds me of the Trump rally I went to in Sept 2020 - the peak of scaredness for a lot of people. Very few attendees were wearing masks, but we couldn’t call it a rally back then - they were banned. It was a peaceful protest that my friend and I attended with 15,000 of our closest MAGA friends. And guess what - neither of us got sick and died from the rona that day!
Nobody that was in good health died from that cold.
 

Kinnakeet

Well-Known Member
So what if it was less than 1 percent? That's not really a winning argument from the party of every life is precious and abortion is murder.

1.1 Million people died of a preventable disease.

Because you couldn't be bothered to wear an effective mask and your ornage god told you it would disappear like magic and to try injecting bleach.
My lord you are stupid
 

Kinnakeet

Well-Known Member
Transmission was preventable with effective masking and social distancing which you idiots refused to do..

And yes many people died of covid.

Some people had co-morbidities but not all.

Its been four years you've had plenty of time to educate yourself about this stuff yet you remain completely ignorant.
So you went to a restaurant wearing a mask and took it off when you sat down to eat thats awesome.
Where did the rona go back to wuhan i
It was all FAKE
 

Chopticon64

Well-Known Member
Those pre-existing conditions get you every time.

Perhaps if his sugar and blood pressure had been better he’d still be here.
42% of Americans are Obese

18% are eldelry

Since few obese folks make it to old age we can estimate that at least 50% of Americans suffer from one or two of those ailments, so right off half the population aren’t in good health. This isn’t counting the other preexisting conditions that can lead to death from COVID, these deaths you just waved away.

We have an obesity crisis in America and everyone is ignoring it.
 

Chopticon64

Well-Known Member
we have an obesity problem because we can’t call people fat anymore or fat shame them!
We started saying retard again, call the fatsos fat!

You hear any more from Lizzo? That post pandemic insanity haze is clearing….finally
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Transmission was preventable with effective masking and social distancing which you idiots refused to do..
Its been four years you've had plenty of time to educate yourself about this stuff yet you remain completely ignorant.

and in 4 yrs the LIES of the CDC, WHO, Dr Fauchi have all been exposed ..... Masks DO NOT Work, Masks NEVER Worked and YOU cannot prove otherwise

Standing in a restaurant a mask is required, sitting at a table eating magically you are covid avoidant
 
Top