[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: covid-1984 masks.png (639 KB, 967x1400)
639 KB
639 KB PNG
does this argument add up, scientifically speaking?
>https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-11-20/face-masks-didnt-stop-coronavirus-spread-in-danish-clinical-trial
>>
If that is the true argument, no. But I'm highly skeptical that this is exactly what they said, since all journalists are low IQ and have no morals, so I don't trust anything form a mounth of those uneducated baboons.
>>
>>12368982
Wear your fucking mask you piece of shit

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
>>
>>12368990
smd
>>
File: disgust.jpg (61 KB, 366x542)
61 KB
61 KB JPG
>>12368996
>I know better than the experts because I read an article I found on google!
>>
>>12368982
Did you even read the article? Seriously, your question is answered in the fucking article. Looks like you only read the first three paragraphs and quit.
>>
>>12368982
south east texas reporting in
people do not give a shit
when i look at the canadian prime minster talking about how people shouldnt hang out with friends or go to birthdays, i feel bad for canadians. he's just dumpstering their economy and causing more mental illness problems
people down here really dont care
people really, really casually wear the mask only in places they absolutely have to, and even then its so relaxed
>>
i have heard an endless supply of preaching about masks
not one single comment, literally not one, anywhere, about strengthening your immune system and preventive measures to stay healthy
>>
File: 1566876870362.png (333 KB, 600x359)
333 KB
333 KB PNG
>>12368998
>I will blindly trust the (((experts))) because I'm a scared sheeple!
>>
>>12368998
sorry but institutions have showed their hand
there's no trust anymore
if i don't immediately know, firsthand based on my own real-world knowledge of studying the topic, how I should act, then I'm just going to go about my own business
You can blame a dysgenic environment of enslavement that doesn't teach us shit but how to be farmed for other peoples objectives

of course "experts" have merit, but the trust is way too low that they can all go in the trash for all i care
>>
>>12369015
>The problem, they said, wasn’t with the masks. The problem was that people didn’t use masks enough.
ok, it continues:
>The study results “should not be used to conclude that a recommendation for everyone to wear masks in the community would not be effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infections,” wrote the team led by researchers from Copenhagen University Hospital.
>A trio of current and former editors of Annals of Internal Medicine, the journal that published the study, went further.
>“Masks likely need to be worn by most if not all people to reduce community infection rates,” they wrote. “The results of this trial should motivate widespread mask wearing to protect our communities and thereby ourselves.”
does this make sense to you?
>>
>>12369035
Yeah, did you read the article where it explained why?
>>
File: a11.gif (199 KB, 600x734)
199 KB
199 KB GIF
>>12369032
>I will only trust experts when they say what I want to hear. I trust anons on 4chan more than doctors
Cool.
>>
>>12368982
Of course it does. It's basically a translated version Pascal's wager. There's literally no downside to wearing a mask except the trivial inconvenience of a piece of cloth over your face. If there's even a chance it helps some degree, you should logically wear one.
>I wear a mask, masks help, I don't get sick/get sick with a lowered probability
>I wear a mask, masks do nothing, I might get sick
>I don't wear a mask, masks help, I might get sick
>I don't wear a mask, masks do nothing, I might get sick
The issue of people not wearing them on principle is purely the American U CANT TELL ME WHAT TO DO LIBTARD MUH FREEDUMBS attitude coming out to play. There's no actual logic behind refusing except that you want to stick it to the people who want you to wear one.
>>
>>12369049
>There's literally no downside to wearing a mask
patently false
>>
>>12369039
no part of the article is able to explain how this study supports mask-wearing
>>
>>12369049
>U CANT TELL ME WHAT TO DO LIBTARD MUH FREEDUMBS
this is your brain on propaganda that leads to erosion of civil liberties
>>
>>12369051
would you like to actually provide some then (which apply to a general case, not just muh asthma) instead of simply saying NUH-UH
>>
>>12369054
>if you don't kill yourself to trigger the libs they're gonna take your Civil Liberties™
this is your brain on republican propaganda
>>
>>12369049
if that's true then why are you seething?
>>
>>12369055
trashes the immune system
face is in a CO2 environment all day. there's a reason athletes sleep in hyperbaric chambers and train at high altitudes
>>
>>12369058
i'm not lib or republican. again, this is your brain on media propaganda
i'm just cognizant of the shit media does to bend perception into getting people into accepting an erosion of their liberties
>>
>>12369064
>trashes the immune system
[citation needed]
>face is in a CO2 environment all day
the fuck does this even mean? The CO2 levels inside a mask are somehow higher than those immediately outside? Masks aren't air-proof.
>there's a reason athletes sleep in hyperbaric chambers and train at high altitudes
Yeah. It's to increase their aerobic capacity for exercise. I don't see how that's relevant to not catching a virus.
>>
>>12369064
Would you wear a mask once the atmosphere inevitably gets filled with noxious smog in the next few decades?
>>
>>12369070
listen man if you're just going to tantrum into spamming why your perspective is the only justifiable one without considering the points i've made, then there's zero point in even entertaining everything you're spouting out ITT
>>
>>12369065
Why don't you go smoke some crack? Media's on a propaganda campaign to tell you crack is bad, everything the media says is automatically a lie, crack must be fine.
>>
>>12369071
won't happen
but no i would probably find an environment where that wasn't happening
>>
>>12369076
>if you're going to disagree with me then there's no point in listening to you
ok
>>
>>12369077
i'm able to see the firsthand effects of what happens when someone smokes crack
i don't have a lab to study covid
if you aren't skeptical of media in 2020 then i think you should just stay back at reddit and do whatever it tells you to
>>
>>12369082
you didn't disagree though
you just threw my comment out the window without addressing it
exposure to the bacteria of others/environment is helpful in boosting the immune system
>>
Pretty much this: >>12368985

If you read the article, the researchers do not say their study provides evidence that wearing masks is effective at stopping the spread of the disease. Clearly it doesn't. On the other hand, it's hard to draw any conclusions at all. Compliance was low, as was the prevalence of COVID at the time.

But scientists don't like saying their study couldn't reach any conclusions, so they wanted to make a statement anyway. The advice is still probably good. The weight of the evidence now does show that wearing masks slows the spread of the virus, though mostly in the other direction. But none of this is evinced by the study they conducted.
>>
>>12369080
And if you couldn't find an environment where it wasn't happening; or it wasn't economically feasible to move to another environment? Would you wear a mask if the outside pollution was dire enough, or would you try to fare without one, no matter the extent?
>>
>>12369088
you keep throwing out these hypotheticals and comparisons that have no relevance to reality, and thinking you can just transfer the rationality over
they're completely contextually different things. this is a really meaningless conversation
>>
>>12369071
i would wear an oxygen mask, not a cloth mask, which would do nothing as either way you’re going to be breathing in the smog
>>
>>12369090
It's purely hypothetical for the sake of hypotheticals. I'm not arguing against your viewpoints, and I don't intend to use your hypotheticals for the sake of debate. I just want to gauge how somebody with your particular viewpoints would respond to these types of questions.
>>
>>12369064
>masks can't stop the virus
>but they can trap CO2
Which is it?
>>
>>12369084
>if you aren't skeptical of media in 2020
"skeptical of media" is a fine position to hold
"the media said it but I don't like it, therefore it's a lie" is retardation
>>
>>12369086
>The weight of the evidence now does show that wearing masks slows the spread of the virus
do you mean the weight of propaganda?
>>
>>12369092
In a post-apocalyptic scenario, without proper access to oxygen equipment. Would you wear a mask to limit your exposure to smog, or do you believe masks would worsen the negative effects that a smog-induced environment would have on you?
>>
>>12369097
this is again really poor logic
first, i never said masks can't stop the virus, that's projection based on a dichotomy script you've internalized
second, it's possible for the mask to not be completely effective at stopping the spread, as well as reducing the oxygen you're intaking

like how are you even comparing CO2, oxygen, and a virus in terms of how they move through fabric
>>
>>12369097
Masks are clearly going to increase the amount of air you rebreathe somewhat. Air travels through them easily, but not as easily as it does when there is no obstruction. I would expect a difference similar to the difference in CO2 concentration between indoor and outdoor environments.

Whether that has any health effects, I'm not sure. But if there is any effect at all, it must be very slight. You can still maintain exactly the same blood CO2 level by just breathing very slightly faster or more deeply.

But for some reason, many people are consistently more worried about small, speculative risks than they are about serious, clearly-understood risks. We know vaccines can have side effects, but they are clearly worthwhile anyway. Masks have more minor side effects (like acne), and while the evidence supporting them is not as strong, the need right now is even greater. But plenty of people ITT still probably worry more about getting killed by an airbag than getting killed because they didn't have one.
>>
>>12369106
>like how are you even comparing CO2, oxygen, and a virus in terms of how they move through fabric
Obviously the gases will travel through the fabric far more readily than the virus particles.
>>
>>12369099
i'm not saying it's a lie
I'm saying I don't know, and I'm not interested in the nanny state experts telling me what's what.
Until our culture decides that it wants to educate people on a broad spectrum of topics, I'm going to go about my business accordingly.
If I don't have firsthand information about bacteria, viruses, interactions with the body, etc. then unfortunately I cannot make an informed decision, and there is far too much intentional misinformation being thrown around for political reasons for me to blindly follow "the experts". Who funds them?

If you want to prevent things like this in the future, personally I would implore you to start envisioning and pushing for a culture that is more about educating the individuals within culture as opposed to farming them for corporate interests.
>>
>>12369110
>We know vaccines can have side effects, but they are clearly worthwhile anyway
This is faulty thinking too
Todays vaccine is not yesterdays vaccine
The guys who wanted to cure polio for the good of mankind are not the same entity as Pfizer
The objectives change
>>
>>12369106
>like how are you even comparing CO2, oxygen, and a virus in terms of how they move through fabric
A single covid particle is hundreds of times larger than a CO2 particle.
If you think a mask is so restrictive it's actually trapping in substantial CO2 particles to turn your inner mask into a "CO2 environment" I don't understand how you could argue it wouldn't do an excellent job blocking comparatively gigantic virus particles.
>>
>>12369122
The mask is reducing the amount of oxygen you're intaking
If you want to argue how much, you can do that
The statement still stands
>>
>>12369115
>personally I would implore you to start envisioning and pushing for a culture that is more about educating the individuals within culture as opposed to farming them for corporate interests.
but you don't want to be educated. There's " far too much intentional misinformation being thrown around for political reasons for me to blindly follow "the experts". "
>>
>>12369033
You are correct, I too believe Russia doesn't exist because I've never been there. I too don't believe in Abraham Lincoln because he died before I was born.

You're full of shit.
>>
>>12369125
>you don't want to be educated.
Semi true.
I want to learn these things myself. Meaning study the behavior.
Being "told" something isn't education. Repeating mantras in class isn't learning, it's conditioning a script.
Until I'm able to study these things first hand, and at the least, get some laymen understanding of the general arena, then there's no way for me to make an informed decision, and I'm subservient to whoever has been propped up as the authority on the matter.

Society is way too low trust nowadays for this stuff.
>>
>>12369123
Yeah, but so does closing the window or moving uphill. Obviously the amount matters. It's easy to show that people wearing masks have the same SpO2 as people not wearing masks, so there is probably no clinically significant effect. The acne some people get from masks is clinically significant, but it's still not something worth worrying about.
>>
>>12369127
These things are much more simple and verifiable relative to pre-established understandings.
It's not the same thing and its disingenuous to compare it as though it is
>>
>>12369123
>If you want to argue how much, you can do that
I am arguing how much.
Your own opinion is that it turns the interior of the mask into a "CO2 environment", and this is supposed to be a downside of mask-wearing. This would only be a downside if the CO2 being collected was substantial enough to affect respiration, so you believe the mask is catching some amount of CO2/O2 (however much this amount happens to be) which affects respiration.
My question is why you believe a mask so fine it's filtering a substantial amount of molecules nanometers, long made of literally 2/3 atoms, wouldn't be extremely useful at filtering things 300x bigger. This is like getting a marble stuck in a hole and then saying your car could fit through it.
>>
>>12369129
>I want to learn these things myself. Meaning study the behavior.
So what are you doing to learn yourself whether masks work or not?
>>
>>12369129
What types of authorities would you say you find trustable these days?
>>
>>12369131
I notice my breathing takes a hit when I wear it. I wear it as little as humanly possible.
>>
Cloth masks might INCREASE virus risk.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/5/4/e006577.full.pdf

Among healthcare workers
>Constant Cloth mask wearers had the highest infection rates compared to Medical Mask wearers and control (intermittent “normal” use)
>Since the control group had “intermittent” use of cloth masks and medical masks they split the control group up so they could compare like with like.
>Because the control group wore masks frequently they couldn’t determine if the significantly higher infection rates of cloth masks compared to medical was due to the efficacy of medical masks or the detrimental effect of cloth masks.
>Other Randomized Control Studies showed that Medical Masks had NO EFFICACY compared to “convenience selected no-mask group”.
>Therefore the conclusion is probably that Medical Masks have no efficacy and cloth masks are detrimental compared to no-mask.

The only type of mask shown to have efficacy was an N95 Respirator worn continuously.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x
>>
>>12369140
Fuckin heavens
Well, profit motive throws out a lot of them out.
So it's really just people who happen to be presenting information about a topic that they study a lot, and they simply share the behavior of the subject they're studying.


I find it's good to consider what -could- possibly go wrong come the future, and study these things beforehand before they get whacked out.
>>
>>12369146
>Health workers are asking us if they should wear no mask at all if cloth masks are the only option. Our research does not condone health workers working unprotected. We recommend that health workers should not work during the COVID-19 pandemic without respiratory protection as a matter of work health and safety. In addition, if health workers get infected, high rates of staff absenteeism from illness may also affect health system capacity to respond. Some health workers may still choose to work in inadequate PPE. In this case, the physical barrier provided by a cloth mask may afford some protection, but likely much less than a surgical mask or a respirator.
t. the author, in the update history of the paper
>>
>>12368982
Idk about you but I'm forced to weak a mask because I want food and the grocery store won't let me in otherwise.

>>12368998
>>12369049
Show me the test that differentiates Covid-19 from flu

>>12369024
>not one single comment, literally not one, anywhere, about strengthening your immune system and preventive measures to stay healthy
If they wanted you to have a heathy immune system, they wouldn't mandate masks that make it not work proper.

>>12369055
>If I prevent my immune system from adapting to the environment for a long period of time, it will suddenly work proper when I give it a chance.

>>12369070
>[citation needed]
It is the citation. The immune system/immunities themselves and how they function that is. They produce antibodies for germs PREVIOUSLY IN CONTACT WITH. Tell me what mask a virus/bacteria is wearing that's making it not adapt/evolve itself so that we won't get fucked by it when we finally take the mask off?

>Masks aren't air-proof.
They aren't Covid-19 proof either you fucking retard. So tell me why I should wear one? It can't be because it's safer.

>i-its to lower your breaths magnitude and that combined with the 6 foot rule somehow negates weather and the Coriolis effect.
>>
>>12369156
ease up there buddy, remember, we don't talk to you if you tantrum into spamming why your perspective is the only justifiable one
>>
>>12369144
"Takes a hit" in what way? Breathing will take slightly more effort, if that's what you mean. But not enough for you to get significant exercise out of it.

If you find your mask too restrictive, I recommend buying a different one. Surgical masks are often good for people who find cloth masks uncomfortable (and some evidence suggests they are more effective at stopping droplets as well).
>>
Taleb already debunked this crap

https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1329775117518467073
>>
>>12369137
It's really a lot more than 300x, because the mask isn't stopping individual viruses, it's stopping drops.
>>
>>12369155
Well of course they say that but it’s not based on anything. They just don’t want to go against the authoritarian CDC and lose their jobs /funding.
>>
>>12369139
Like I said, point the finger at the environment that does not educate us enough on things that may cause us potential threats.
This is the problem with creating a world where everyone is cattle in singular, specialized roles.

I live in a state where no one really gives a shit
Chances are I've had it and my family too, no ones noticed anything.

What was it, something like only 16,000 people with no co-morbids have died in the US? And the average people who died had 2.6 comorbids?

Why is there no media campaigns about developing your health? lol.
They exist to cause you fear, put you in states of distress, pump your brain with marketing for things that are often bad for you.
Some of the mandates are simply bad for your health.
>>
>>12369146
It's hilarious how you trust some old open-access study unrelated to COVID, even when there is no no-mask control group, but you don't trust any of the new, pre-peer-reviewed studies specifically looking at COVID.
>>
>>12369175
>they're telling the truth when they agree with me
>but when they disagree they're full of shit
that's some grade-A gymnastics

and I'd like to quote to you from the "strengths and limitations" section you forget to highlight
>The control arm was 'standard practice, which comprised mask use in a high proportion of participants. As such (without a no-mask control), the finding of a much higher rate of infection in the cloth mask arm could be interpreted as harm caused by cloth masks, efficacy of medical masks, or most likely a combination of both.
There's no non-mask section in this study. It's "surgical masks, cloth masks, and [do whatever the fuck you want we don't even know what happens here]". This is junk methodology for a control group.
>>
>>12369155
Their RESEARCH though shows that medical masks are ineffective at best, and that continuous cloth mask wearers had higher infection rates compared to intermittent cloth mask wearers, and significantly higher compared to medical mask wearers (which was comparable to no-mask)
>>
>>12369175
So when they say something you agree with, they have to be trusted. When they say something you disagree with, they're just lying to cover their asses.
>>
The same reason is used by islamist. Islam is for world peace. Currently it's not at peace because there are people who aren't muslim. Once we get everyone under islam, there will be world peace.

Therefore Islam is the only true religion, because it works.
>>
>>12369180
This rhetoric is just looping
>I don't trust anyone, I have to learn for myself
>well what are you doing to learn for yourself then?
>Don't look at me, point the finger at the people not educating me
>but they are educating you
>nah I don't listen to people trying to educate me, I only trust things I learn for myself
and we go back to stage 1
>>
>>12369175
>They just don’t want to go against the authoritarian CDC and lose their jobs /funding
This is a really big issue with the science community as a whole, and honestly it's going to start losing steam as a genuine community.
I have a feeling people are going to start expanding upon more..."localized sciences" that they can get their hands on. Things that they can do at home or together as a small group.

If you stand up to stuff like this, you'll get axed and replaced by someone who will color between the lines.
It's just another reason why the authoritative stamp means less and less as days go by.
>>
>>12369156
>Show me the test that differentiates Covid-19 from flu
Antigen and antibody tests. The ones that are actually used. That specifically target antigens that only exist on COVID-19, or antibodies only produced to bind to them. Is this a serious question?

And as far as I can tell, your advice seems to be that people should expose themselves to diseases deliberately because that way they won't get them.

You might want to rethink that approach.
>>
>>12369189
>(which was comparable to no-mask)
Way to announce you didn't even read the thing. There is no no-mask group in the study.
>>
>>12369188
Read more carefully fucking idiot. TELLING people to wear no-mask was deemed unethical. So they referenced another study wear a no-mask control group was created out of “convinience selected no-mask wearers” and they found no difference, compared to medical masks. No efficacy. So with that piece of information they concluded that the harm was probably caused by the cloth arm doing the harm.
>>
>>12369194
>>well what are you doing to learn for yourself then?
I do what I can to educate myself as well as work towards a more developmental environment.
I'm not being "educated" so much as I am being "told"
And education to me is, again, me being able to firsthand witness or test the behavior of the subject under certain conditions.
It's not repeating a script I download from someone else.
>>
>>12369199
I think you’re too enraged / rushed / want to be right in order to take the time to understand everything I posted. You have to read the whole study, and the study they cross-referenced.
>>
>>12369205
>The Taj Mahal doesn't exist unless I visited it myself
>>
>>12369190
No because the first conclusion was based on literature, the second wasn’t based on anything. They just said “uhh.. it might help?? Idk the offical line is that it should help”
>>
>>12369202
OK for like the tenth time, why does this one even older non-randomized study hold more weight in your mind than the multiple recent randomized studies THAT ARE ACTUALLY ON THE DISEASE IN QUESTION?
>>
>>12369053
OP you are so retarded you read the first paragraph of a article and cry about. I honestly can’t imagine being as retarded as you. Even a 60iq retard can read through an article like this and catch the meaning of it.
>>
>>12369223
There were no recent randomized studies done on cloth masks are you retarded?
>>
>>12369218
just a poor comparison
whether it exists or not really doesn't have ramifications on my life
and it's super easy for me to personally see if it does indeed exist
>>
>>12369209
putting aside the
>ur just 2 mad to agree with me
nonsense

>You have to read the whole study
Why do I need to read anything more than the line "without a no-mask control" to know that there is no no-mask control? The study explicitly says there is not a no-mask group.

I'm really getting tired of this new style of /pol/shitter arguing where they dump a bunch of studies they didn't even skim, post egregious unrelated claims that don't follow at all and often literally contradict the study, and then hide from conversation with
>oh you're trying to talk to me? go read two entire scientific papers first. If you disagree, you must not have read the papers.
>>
>>12368982
I'm so tired of this shit. There's two sides of dumb fuckery to this tho.
First the "masks don't work" crew.
Then there's the more subtle dumb fuckery of a certain preachy pro mask type person.
The first group are just fucking idiots. The second preach science and sciencyness while understanding fuck all about it, like physicists who would go in TV to defend evolution while biologist groaned. These are the people who rant about what the scientists say, and talk about micro particle clouds that hang in the air for hours and share articles claiming that Rona can stay in surfaces for a million hours. I suspect these are probably they same type of people that support extinction rebellion and whine at us, " science says that sea levels will rise 10 meters by 2028 unless we all..."
I work in a virology lab. We wear Howie coats, nitrile gloves, wash hand often and use a fuck ton of hand sanitizer. Also plastic ppe if we are actually opening and working with potentially active Rona sample.
In addition: rapid tests ARE FUCKING A LOAD OF SHIT. Antibody tests are far less sensitive and specific than most seem to think, we should not be doing fucking asymptomatic testing without some serious caveats.
One more thing if you're in the UK: Randox are a fucking meme company. They are basically just shit at what they do, should never receive any public money, should probably be shut down and investigated and I wouldn't trust any diagnostic results from them.
>>
>>12369229
And by the way, it’s always CLOTH MASKS, that these “experts” are wearing. Just moist breeding grounds of bacteria. They don’t stop anything. They JUST make your risk worse.
>>
>>12369198
>Antigen and antibody tests. The ones that are actually used. That specifically target antigens that only exist on COVID-19, or antibodies only produced to bind to them. Is this a serious question?
>The ones that are actually used.
Yeah that one. Can you show me it? Like can I get a citation other that "trust me bro"?

>And as far as I can tell, your advice seems to be that people should expose themselves to diseases deliberately because that way they won't get them.
"Yes". And also:
Six
Fucking
Percent

>You might want to rethink that approach.
>you might want to just completely forget the fact you have an immune system altogether. Treat it like a gallbladder or appendix, get rid of it! Live like bubble boy for the rest of your life it won't be so bad!

>>12369161
>we
>>
>>12369239
Read the fucking study. I clipped PAGE 6 and put it there and highlighted it because I knew a stupid fucking retard like you will tell me the exact retarded argument you’re making. THEY referenced that study to figure out that exact question.
>>
>>12369239
>>
>>12369239
>rapid tests ARE FUCKING A LOAD OF SHIT. Antibody tests are far less sensitive and specific than most seem to think, we should not be doing fucking asymptomatic testing without some serious caveats.
This trashes so much of the nightly media fearporn tally of # of cases
That # of cases is almost entirely what they go off of to shut down countries
>>
>>12369223
There are no RCTs for COVID. The RCTs were for SARS. There are only observational studies for masks vs. COVID.
>>
>>12369241
>Yeah that one. Can you show me it? Like can I get a citation other that "trust me bro"?
Clicked the first link I found: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971220306585.

Literally just google it. There are many studies on this subject.
>>
>>12369241
>"Yes". And also:
>Six
>Fucking
>Percent
wat
>>
>>12369247
Actually, they mostly report on COVID deaths. But I'm sure now you'll tell me those are actually people dying from gunshots and hanglider accidents mislabeled as COVID or some shit.
>>
>>12369156
>If you don't want to get COVID, you should take steps to make sure you get COVID. That way you won't get COVID.
>>
>>12369278
faulty cause of death aside (we know this has happened)
What they don't report is
>What was it, something like only 16,000 people with no co-morbids have died in the US? And the average people who died had 2.6 comorbids?
>>
>>12369243
I know how to science you fucking dickhead. I don't ever just read any study and declare it truth. All the papers are taken in context if previous work on the topic and each fits into a broader view while considering strengths and weaknesses. There are actually very few papers on things like mask use that would give a singular strong argument either way because it's actually a very difficult thing to study, because different researchers might be focusing on different aspects, because there might be different assumptions going in, because it's complex as fuck.
So anyone who waves a single study around and keeps childishly demanding people read it instead of actually engaging in the topic themselves can just be written off as retarded. But then again a small but unfortunately very vocal portion of the pro mask crowd are also retarded.
So my original point was clear, that I'm tired of this stupid fucking debate.
Wear a mask if you can. But don't be a fucking grocery store self appointed mask police Karen either.
This isn't difficult to understand.
Forgot to add in my previous post that we wear masks all times in the lab
>>
>>12369243
This post was meant for:
>>12369237

Also if you carefully read the study it will show that Cloth mask and medical mask wearers were split up in the control group to compare risk more accurately. So the ‘normal use” (aka. Less frequent”) cloth mask wearers had less risk than continuous cloth mask. And then they cross referenced another study and they say if that one is accurate about medical mask having no efficacy compared to no-mask, then the conclusion that cloth mask increased harm might be the correct one.
>>
>>12369278
And no they report on cases and deaths synonymously lol
>>
>>12369291
More than 30% of people already have conditions that would be classified as a co-morbidity if they got COVID. Obviously those ones are overwhelmingly the most likely to die. What would you have expected?

And how do you explain the 300,000 excess deaths since January?
>>
>>12369294
I accidentally you’d the wrong post but what I’m arguing is that the recommendation for Cloth Masks directed towards the general public is based off no science at all and the only science available about it says that it may actually increase risk of infection.
>>
>>12369310
Your "more than 30%" figure is way off if only 16k people have died without comorbids
More like 94% of people have comorbids, with an average of 2.6 comorbids

Again, ZERO conversation about our health, especially none by media.
>>
>>12369237
I’ll put this simpler for you so even a retard can understand. (Although I thought I did that already in the first green text)

Ok ready?

The all the time medical mask wearer had the best out comes, sometimes mask wearers in 2nd (split into two arms cloth and mask) , and all-the-time cloth mask wearers doing the WORST out of all groups. Because there wasn’t a “no-mask at all group” they said. “Hmm... either medical masks work REALLY GOOD, or cloth masks are worse than nothing.” Then they referenced another Randomized Control Study that had medical mask vs. “convenience selected” no-mask. The medical mask showed no efficacy. Therefore the cloth mask is worse than nothing conclusion. Is probably true.

Get it now? apologize.
>>
>>12369247
Number of cases is really a constant measure to look at progress on the response and are not absolute. Do you think public health decision makers sit with a big number drawn on a board? They will be looking at how the numbers track to various pressures in the health care system. So even if total tallies were off one way or another you can still see trends.
Also I live in s country with a first world healthcare system so we're not selling our population ghetto rigged pregnancy tests and calling it a diagnostic. We're doing PCR for everyone who needs a test.
Asymptomatic testing can be very useful but it just should be understood that it is technically a different test with different measures of specificity and sensitivity as well as a different pre diagnostic patient group. It's common to every diagnostic test that exists. It's exactly the same with cancer diagnostics for example. It's the reason why more people die of complications related to unnecessary surgery in the US in relation to similar countries because you guys are fucking just crazy for screening without need. It's a consequence of market ideology applied to medicine. "Here's my money give me a suite of screening tests."
But yes there is a fear news cycle and I see liberal media constantly misrepresent science. It's like the XR people who scream about the seas rising by meters over periods of decades. It's fucking bullshit BUT it doesn't mean that there isn't very good science showing sea level rise that will be catastrophic, or that it's real and worth worrying about.
Y'all just have a really fucked up country.
>>
>>12369296
The split the control group into two groups: those wearing cloth masks, and those wearing medical masks. They excluded the 2 people who didn't wear masks. Then they took those subgroups and added them to the trial groups to increase statistical power. Even then, if you look at their 95% CIs, it's clear the effects are barely significant. They did NOT compare non-mask wearers to anyone else. It even says that. That was the whole reason to bring in the Chinese trials. Specifically, it says,

"Owing to a very high level of mask use in the control arm, we were unable to determine whether the differences between the medical and cloth mask arms were due to a protective effect of medical masks or a detrimental effect of cloth masks."
>>
>>12369228
go ahead and explain how that assertion is proved by a study which failed to prove that that assertion is true
>>
>>12369323
No, 30% of the *general public* has pre-existing conditions that would be considered comorbidities if they got COVID-19. Probably an even larger number of infected people have them, because many pre-existing conditions increase susceptibility to infection. And among infected people, the ones with comorbidities are of course the most likely to die. How is that remotely surprising?

Like, people with chronic bronchitis are obviously more likely to die from COVID-19 than people without it. Why are you acting like this fact is somehow suspicious?

And again, how do you explain the 300,000 excess deaths?
>>
>>12369331
Wow. Wow. You’re still too fucking retarded to understand?

>>12369327
>>
>>12369329
>Do you think public health decision makers sit with a big number drawn on a board?
Media takes these numbers to alter public perception. Publicans willingness to accept these things can determine the outcome of policies, laws, etc.

Would we have had lockdown to the same extent if less people were shocked by the figures?
Would voting in the election be different if numbers weren't so shocking and directly correlated to the president?

It's just real low trust.
The general citizen is little more than a tool for other groups to persuade one way or another.
Now that the internet is open to the world, we have groups from all over the place doing what they can to manipulate the American public toward their vested interests.
>>
>>12369331
They said that in order to explain this result, it has to mean that medical masks have to perform significantly better than no-mask or else it means that cloth mask is causing an adverse effect. Their other studies showed that medical masks are as good as nothing. Only continuous use N95 respirators were shown to have an effect in the other study.
>>
>>12369340
Also there’s the fact that the more frequent cloth mask wearers were worse than the less frequent cloth mask wearers.
>>
>>12369335
Um, retarded how? What did I say that was wrong. Seems like I was repeating what you just said but in a less mocking tone.

The study does not compare people who don't wear masks to people who do. It only compares people who wear cloth masks to people who wear medical masks. The authors doubted that this could be due to medical masks actually reducing the risk of infection, and to support their position, they referenced an earlier study that said medical masks weren't that effective. But having done so, they concluded that the study was not conclusive on that point but that they felt it was unlikely that mask efficacy could explain the results. They felt that, but the results do not show it one way or another. Or as they put it,

"The study design does not allow us to determine whether medical masks had efficacy or whether cloth masks were detrimental to HCWs by causing an increase in infection risk. Either possibility, or a combination of both effects, could explain our results. It is also unknown whether the rates of infection observed in the cloth mask arm are the same or higher than in HCWs who do not wear a mask, as almost all participants in the control arm used a mask."

Even when they discuss cloth mask use in Africa, they don't recommend that they stop wearing masks. They recommend that they do more research, and most importantly, get more PPE. And now during the pandemic, the authors have come back again and explained that their paper does not say that people shouldn't wear a mask.
>>
>>12369313
Hey anon. You see this is the problem. Like I said it's actually a very complex thing to study so it needs to be taken in broad context. Most studies are measuring some kind of surrogate. So can I produce a single paper that declares "masks work mother fucker"? No because it's a difficult question to answer and science doesn't work like that. The best advice comes from people with experience and knowledge drawing on that to give their thoughts.
It's just such a frustrating argument to hear over and over.
Masks work to a degree. They are not infallible but they have a benefit. Tho that benefit is hard to measure directly but there is so much we take as fact that is hard to measure directly.
People with experience in infection control wear and believe in masks. We know that clinicians wear masks for a reason. They are accepted as useful in other scenarios. There's a fair amount of logic and common sense to draw on.
But it's complicated and I'd actually really like to discuss this and get somewhere but I worry that we could literally fill books trying to write about this stuff. There's so many basic fundamental concepts of science we all would need to go over and establish first that unless we can find some common solid set of facts from which to have a debate, it would very quickly become exhausting
>>
>>12369340
The lead authors' previous paper on N95 masks is not the same one as the Chinese trials included for reference. In any case, this is just not how studies are performed. There is no way to know if the conditions in the hospitals in China in the earlier RCTs were the same as the ones in Vietnam in this one. Because the sample size for each cluster is small, the implied efficacy has huge error bars, and so do the ones in the other trials. And the main outcomes were not even the same.
>>
>>12369339
This is not a bad point to be fair. But there's something I would add.
We are living in the benefits of the measures that were taken. Does that make sense? Regardless of figures in the media, political wrangling etc at some point the virus would have caught up with and surpassed hospital capacity.
I work in a hospital viro lab and the thing that worries me is not directly the death totals, the case numbers or whatever else. The frightening thing is looking at the available beds and figures in capacity.
Forget everything else from now on and look at that data instead.
This is how actual medical professionals are thinking about this.
Do we have more people than we have nurses to care for them, is there going to be days when there are decision who get to use the life saving equipment. Are there 4 patients in crisis but only 2 doctors with the training to deal with that crisis? Is there a patient who urgently needs triaged and potentially could infect a vulnerable ward but the lab capacity on urgent tests has been reached?
I'm sorry but the truth in front of my eyes is quite clear when I go to work every day
>>
>>12368982
[eqn]\frac{\sqrt{C_{min}}}{\pi}[/eqn]
>>
keep your mask on around me or pay a fine.The state is allowed to use violence precisely because of sociopathic animals like you
>>
>>12369347
> To assist in interpreting the data, we compared rates of infection in the medical mask arm with rates observed in medical mask arms from two previous RCTs,8 9 in which no efficacy of medical masks could be demonstrated when compared with control or N95 respirators, recognising that sea- sonal and geographic variation in virus activity affects the rates of exposure (and hence rates of infection out- comes) among HCWs. This analysis was possible because the trial designs were similar and the same outcomes were measured in all three trials. The analysis was carried out to determine if the observed results were explained by a detrimental effect of cloth masks or a protective effect of medical masks.

Further, we found no significant difference in rates of virus isolation in medical mask users between the three trials, suggesting that the results of this study could be interpreted as partly being explained by a detrimental effect of cloth masks. This is further supported by the fact that the rate of virus isolation in the no-mask control group in the first Chinese RCT was 3.1%, which was not significantly different to the rates of virus isolation in the medical mask arms in any of the three trials including this one.
>>
File: Kris Kuksi.jpg (315 KB, 1400x2000)
315 KB
315 KB JPG
>>12369044
When anons on 4chan telling you NOT to chop your balls off and mutilate your dick into a smelly hole lookalike because it all might/Will have horrible results in the long game. But "expert doctors" Do as well as entire WHO machina?
YES, trust 4chan anons! 100%
>>
>>12369378
So there were THREE trials actually that suggest that medical masks have no efficacy in reducing virus rates compared to no-mask, actually. I downplayed it. And then this study proves that all the time cloth mask was worse than sometimes cloth mask, which was worse than all the time medical mask, which was shown to be the same as no-mask in 3 other studies.

And this is all we have to go on with Randomized Control Studies and cloth masks. They’re worse than medical masks, which are the same as nothing at protecting from viruses.
>>
>>12369355
> The best advice comes from people with experience and knowledge drawing on that to give their thoughts.

The conclusion that cloth masks may have a detrimental effect can be quoted straight from the paper since they had 3 other trials that were designed similarly that showed medical masks had no efficacy.

>>12369378
>suggesting that the results of this study could be interpreted as partly being explained by a detrimental effect of cloth masks.

>explained by a detrimental effect of cloth masks.

>detrimental effect of cloth masks.

Furthermore, do you really believe cloth masks help? Use your own brain for a second. Or do you think it’s more likely that the only type of mask that HAS shown efficacy at reducing virus risk“N95 PPE respirators” are in extremely short supply and they just pushed this mandate out with no evidence backing it what-so-ever and they’re just sticking to it because it would be disastrous pr if it turns out their mandate for cloth-masks are actually have been making the virus situation worse.
>>
>>12369127
Lincoln maybe didn't, maybe they renamed some guy after thermodynamic war in 1883 or something
But you can easily verify Russia existence (although in the end, of course, you can yourself deny existence of Russia as a country/governement like with Kosovo, Crimea, Israel, Alaska etc)

Again >>12369402 disprove that, you can't.
>>
>>12369446
Who even is this "they"? Trump controls the executive, and he's certainly not all about masks.
>>
>>12369461
CDC, WHO, Fauci... Biden... Trudeau... all the governers to name a few... entities...
>>
>>12369471
Oh, you're one of . . . those people. You probably shouldn't post on 4chan. The lizard people will backtrace you.
>>
>>12369494
You asked who recommends masks and I named a few? What are you talking about?
>>
>>12369494
You sound paranoid anon. You should take some meds.
>>
>>12368982
>does this argument add up, scientifically speaking?
Yes. Science in 2020 is what a journalist defines it as. What some phd faggot does is irrelevant, it's not like the labels would know how to properly inform the public anyway
>>
>>12369503
Your theory is that the CDC, WHO, Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden, Justin Truedeau, *every* state governor, and other nameless "entities" are conspiring to cover up the fact that masks don't work, and somehow are able to overpower Trump in this respect. You literally said that.

>They just pushed this mandate out with no evidence backing it what-so-ever and they’re just sticking to it because it would be disastrous pr if it turns out their mandate for cloth-masks are actually have been making the virus situation worse.
>>
>>12369567
Institutions have motive to maintain public trust, js
And right now, times are turbulent in terms of institutional trust

Whether or not what thus poster claimed is true, if it was, that's likely the course of action they would take.
>>
>>12369567
an alternative suggestion: they all defer to the same Ministry Of Truth, and are institutionally incapable of questioning it
>>
>>12369584
OK, so it isn't lizard people, it's Big Brother. Politicians and scientists are not allowed to speak their mind because he's always watching. Gotcha.
>>
>>12369597
Who funds them
>>
>>12369567
>They pushed the mandate
Fact.
>With no evidence
Fact. Where’s the Randomized Control Trials showing cloth masks or masks other than N95 are effective at preventing the virus?

The first google search of “randomized control trial cloth masks” is the study I referenced, and it suggests that wearing a cloth mask all the time is worse than wearing a cloth mask sometimes, and significantly worse than a medical mask, which was proven in 3 other trials to have the equivalent risk as not wearing one.
>>
>>12369599
the thing that falls apart in this theory is the totally unfounded and asinine assumption required to support it. that assumption being that there is some sort of global entity that has the reach to influence every world government to react in the same way. some people call it the world bankers, others the jews, others the illuminati, IMF, etc.

this fucking insanity coupled with the whole "great reset" meme is ridiculous

if you ask yourself: whats more likely, a global pandemic actually existing, or this all being a fabrication by the puppet masters towards some amorphous goal, and your answer is the latter, then youre a fucking dipshit
>>
>>12369584
You don't need centralized control to make people believe in stupid ideas. Do you think there's the King of Flat Earthers somewhere that sends his royal decree on what is flat earth canon to all his loyal followers once a month?

Academia is filled with examples of authority figures and an educated majority having false or outright harmful ideas while ridiculing the opposition. Bloodletting for treating disease. Not seeing the point in washing hands between amputating a festering wound and delivering children. The cause of infectious disease. Stomach ulcers being caused by bacteria.
It's a never ending story of some established faggot in a suit and tie with a fancy title saying "No, the established majority theory is the truth, listen to me I'm the authority" and his sycophants agreeing with him, until irrefutable evidence have accumlated, the authority retires or dies, and they are ridiculed and scorned for causing deaths due their suddenly backwards belief structure, only then does it change, but the path there is years or decades of uphill battle.
bUt ThIS tImE It'S dIfFeReNt! It'S 2020 aNd IfL!
>>
>>12369634
>a global pandemic actually existing, or this all being a fabrication by the puppet masters towards some amorphous goal
Both
Don't be so naive
This has been going on for at minimum hundreds if years.
>>
>>12369597
All that is, is a huge straw man attempt to derail the conversation from the fact that you got proved wrong:

>>12369419
>>12369446

The AUTHOR’S OF THE STUDY said the 3 other trials (with similar designs) showed the same result of medical masks having no efficacy, and cloth masks having worse outcomes than medical masks (again which was proven 3 times as having no efficacy against viruses) meaning cloth masks are probably detrimental.
>>
>>12369667
>the fact that you got proved wrong
On what? The lizard people? That was a joke, bro.
>>
>>12369673
>On what?
The masks
>That was a joke, bro.
Just like the efficiency of masks. Bro.
>>
So if I'm getting you, the politicians know that cloth masks are ineffective but won't do anything because it would look bad.

Don't you think one of them would just promote N95s and surgical masks instead of cloth masks? That is what you want, right?
>>
>>12369673
You’re not even coherent any more. Now you’re beyond retarded. You’re just petulantly sputtering.
>>
>>12369676
You "proved" that masks don't work? WTF are you talking about?
>>
>>12369683
Yeah. HURR DURR The masks don’t work according to randomized control studies. That’s what the whole conversation was about until you started bring up lizard people.
>>
>>12369677
Politicians know absolutely nothing, they would fail to solve pic related if it was against their party line. How dense are you really?

It seems that you share the constructed reality(fictional) that occupies the head of most politicians and newspeople. Until you get out of that mindset you're an NPC-level object not a human being.
>>
>>12369698
I’m almost convinced I’m talking to GPT-3.
>>
>>12369692
>Whole conversation
Different person
>>
>>12369699
Actually GPT-3 would be more intelligent than this according to some demos I’ve seen.
>>
>>12369699
>I'm stupid enough to not be able to tell a human from an IFL hyped meme chatbot.
Thanks for confirming you're an NPC construct(single-digit IQ)
>>
>>12369708
You would obviously think so as GPT-3 is more intelligent than you are.
>>
>>12369707
Isn't this whole board just one person samefagging?
>>
>>12369716
It’s like 2 or 3 people at a time and then GPT - 3 autocompletes conversations to sound like people it’s seeing which makes things confusing.
>>
>>12369721
I just see you trying to deflect from the fact that masks don't work by bringing up different topics.
>>
>>12369731
That wasn't me, that was GPT-4, the next iteration of me.
>>
File: GPT-4 profile photo.jpg (41 KB, 500x500)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
>>12369739
>>
File: 20201030_232628.png (124 KB, 422x480)
124 KB
124 KB PNG
>wear the mask! Here are some meta-analyses and if you dont a pathetic face nappy in public because of them then are just brainwashed by right wing propaganda, LISTEN TO MUH SCIENTISTS (but only the ones who agree with me)
>>
File: 1604974483884.png (371 KB, 596x432)
371 KB
371 KB PNG
>>12369156
>It is the citation. The immune system/immunities themselves and how they function that is.
>>
>>12369402
bump
>>
>>12369024
Masks are a preventative measure to stay healthy.
You can't strengthen your immune system. There's no such thing. Such statements betray a lack of knowledge of immunology. But I wouldn't reasonably expect the general population to understand the immune system to be fair. It's actually quite complex.
It's not an issue of strength and weaknesses but an issue of specificity, appropriate activation and resolution of the response.
>>
>>12369908
You're a criminal and you'll get what you deserve
>>
File: TIMESAND___Beep.jpg (30 KB, 425x239)
30 KB
30 KB JPG
>>12369837
>>
>>12369058
>It's just two weeks
Meanwhile eight months later...
>>
File: gokek gets kicked.jpg (757 KB, 1276x720)
757 KB
757 KB JPG
Alright mask sheep, let me end this debate.
The TSA was meant to be temporarily for terrorist attacks, yet it is still used to violate Americans.
So tell me, why would the mask shilling be any different, especially if it's got the phrase "new normal" associated with it?
>>
>>12369184
Old studies are unlikely to have bias towards an idea, like when gays were revealed to be completely disgusting in studies from the 1990's, yet today, (((peer reviewed studies))) claim they aren't while said degeneracy can literally be seen if you look at raw footage from a gay congregation like a pride parade.
Buffoons like you literally worship kosher pseudoscience like a religion.
>>
>>12370043
3/10
>>
>>12369619
If you go to the other anti mask shill thread you will see papers showing exactly what you ask, that disposable masks are as effective as N95. It's just that the dumb fuck in that thread doesn't understand the paper and thinks it says the opposite.
>>
>>12370071
> that disposable masks are as effective as N95

I guarantee you there are 0 studies that say that. Because that is simply untrue. Link it. I think I saw the study that you think says that but it doesn’t. But I want to make sure though. Link it.
>>
>>12370132

>>12369964
It's a limited analysis with only 6 clinical studies included. But yes the paper does actually suggest that.
I personally would not give too much weight to this and there's various complicating factors to consider. My point is that this other anon thinks this paper is irrefutable, while actually misunderstanding the papers actual findings.

Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” CMAJ Mar 2016 https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567

“We identified six clinical studies … . In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism
>>
File: 1515004554925.jpg (60 KB, 500x500)
60 KB
60 KB JPG
>>12369451
Hahaha, cute. When you're losing an argument you people always fall back on 'you will never be a woman'. You just fall back on identity politics because it's all the right has to unify it. Pathetic and sad.

Here's an anime reaction image. It's the best I'm willing to do.
>>
>>12370132
Also you searched a single specific phrase? You have no idea how the practice of science functions, for example how to properly perform a literature search.

You're arguing with me about what scientists say while I am actually a scientist, have carried out research on pulmonary inflammation, and am currently working in virology.

Also you completely fail to understand that not all of everything ever has been clearly investigated in simple clear cut scientific studies. It's actually quite a complex thing to study mask efficacy with plenty of caveats and complicating factors. It's actually not always possible to cite very specifically, broadly accepted theoretical concepts that form fundamental basics of a whole field or sub speciality.
The citation is rows of books in a university library.
You're basically saying unless I can teach you all of the theory of infection prevention and control by using a single easy to understand paper with copypasta of 4 lines from the abstract, then it's not true.
You're not...
A genius
>>
>>12370189
>I'm a SCIENTIST
>that's why I rely on a shitty meta analysis to defend face nappies
No mate you're just a boring cunt, simple as
>>
>>12370252
>If I use a stupid enough word, people might mistake my petulance for self-respect.
>>
>>12370252
Can you fucking read? The point made is that any paper should be taken on it's own merits in the context of the broader evidence.

It's a limited analysis with only 6 clinical studies included. But yes the paper does actually suggest that.
Let me repeat:
"It's a limited analysis with only 6 clinical studies included. But yes the paper does actually suggest that.
I personally would not give too much weight to this and there's various complicating factors to consider. My point is that this other anon thinks this paper is irrefutable, while actually misunderstanding the papers actual findings."

You are trying to hold up individual papers as irrefutable evidence without taking stock of the broader understanding, research and context.
You and this other anon in the other thread need to talk to each other. I wasn't holding this paper up as evidence of masks working I was showing how you anti mask retards don't have the ability to understand research you think you do.
Don't tell me the paper is garbage, go tell your fellow idiot anti mask anon that it's garbage, as he seems to think this paper proves masks don't work.
You're literally struggling to keep up with the debate. Your stupidity is exhausting.
>>
>>12370252
In other words, you have retreated from the debate into insults because you feel defeated.
>>
>>12369049
>There's literally no downside to wearing a mask except the trivial inconvenience

Trivial to you doesn't mean trivial to everyone.
>>
>>12369282
>look mom! I figured out how a vaccine works!

>>12369837
It is. It's memory of how to be able to deal with the toxins of the world.
>>
>>12369102
If by propaganda you mean multiple scientific studies that all came to the same conclusion independently of each other, then yes
>>
>>12369032
Hi (((/pol/)))!
>>
>>12368985
Scientists are journalists with a PhD.
>>
>>12369402
true
>>
>>12369402
I dunno about that. Doctors in the UK are literally fighting a court case as they (the doctors/clinicians) want to severely limit access to physical interventions for children and young people who present to the NHS with issue around them being trans.
So fuck up
>>
>>12369018
Wow so rebellious anon. Have fun burying your grandparents homie.
>>
>>12369166
Covid is not just droplet spread. It's airborne. Cloth masks offer only a small reduction in risk.
>>
>>12368982
Thanks for posting a link, anon. Anyway, here's the actual results: https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

>A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.

They did find a reduction, though it was a small trial, and human behavior can affect results. Regardless, it's important to note that the people wearing masks would have been among the few masks wearers in the country. This was a trial purely about preventing infection in mask wearers, but we should all know at this point that masks are also to prevent an infected person from spreading the virus. Presumably the results would be more significant if you were able to compare results between mostly masked populations compared to unmasked populations.
>>
>>12368982
>Masks don't work.
Masks absolutely work and it's the stubborn stupidity of the anti-mask crowd that got us to our current sorry state
>>
>>12370163
thank you for admitting you are wrong, now here's your (you)
>>
>>12371139
There's also this

>Based on the lowest adherence reported in the mask group during follow-up, 46% of participants wore the mask as recommended, 47% predominantly as recommended, and 7% not as recommended.

So it was really a trial of intermittent mask use. The 7% were eliminated from the mask group, but I don't see anything about whether those who adhered fared better than those who were less compliant.
>>
>>12368982
Masks are a waste of time. Being afraid of covid is waste of time
>>
>>12370842
yes, Some doctors have to prove that thee shall no harm is really what it should be about
>>
>>12371127
It's not airborne. I literally handle hundreds of covid samples every day. We all wear masks and gloves in the lab and no one has been infected. If it was air borne we'd be all infected by now. Infections would be noticed by the IPC team and the ppe requirements and safety protocols would be raised.
So yeah masks work.
Saying that we have a specific protocol for putting on and off our masks. Always after first using hand sanitizer.
If there is an over confidence in masks or they are used alone as a single method of prevention then there is a potential increased risk through bringing the hands to the face
>>
>>12371404
I'm an MD and I approve of this post
>>
>>12371477
It's airborne. You're just lucky so far. Our teams have N95, gloves, glasses and staff screenings when anyone shows symptoms and we had 9 infections tied to same shift despite this.
>>
>>12370906
>homie
>believing this shit
dumb faggot zoomer detected
>>
>>12370842
And why should they have to treat trans people (read: mentally ill people who are accepted as normal, but "with an organic spiritual problem" by the larger populace). Trans people should be treated, socially, as any other group in society that is mentally ill. For some reason they are given unique medical attention. Fuck any and all support for transsexualism. Transsexuals need to be dashed upon the rocks. Both in and outside of Minecraft.
>>
>>12371477
A real mask is a lot different than a bit of cotton, which is what most people use. Also samples aren't likely to be throwing off a whole ton of viral particles anyway unless you're warming them up and flicking them around.
>>
>>12371540
Soooo it's not airborne then?
It requires droplets to be flicked around in order to spread?
>>
>>12371527
Well they definitely shouldn't be giving puberty blockers to children.
>>
>>12371487
Can you provide a citation to prove this?
>>
>>12370906
I made no comment about myself
I made an observation of my environment

But to retort; enjoy your media conditioning. Your identity is primarily designed by people who send out narratives on the internet, and they have a ton of data on how you will react to XYZ
>>
File: soyyyyy.gif (62 KB, 570x537)
62 KB
62 KB GIF
>WEAR THE FUCKING MASK WEAR THE FUCKING MASK
>>
>>12370539
i mean... not exactly.

a vaccine is a seriously weakened form of the virus. The virus will literally kill you. In most cases. That's why you get so many shots young. Some viruses you can survive on your own. Leaving you like this:

https://images.everydayhealth.com/images/infectious-diseases/smallpox-super-722x406.jpg
>>
>>12369129
you are literally retarded. you can live hundred lifetimes, you won't have the time and brain capacity to learn all there is...
>>
>>12372087
>you are literally retarded. you can live hundred lifetimes, you won't have the time and brain capacity to learn all there is...
Can't live em all
But I can gain enough knowledge to get a sense of when things are bullshit. Same goes for a more educated population.

Our singular direction careers hinder this understanding and make us horribly dependent.
This sort of specialization would be fine in a highly connective, high trust society, but we are far from either of those things.
That's why it's renaissance season.

Or you can just blindly trust the narratives of others during extremely manipulative and propagandized times lol. Suit yourself man, I'm just expressing my take.
>>
>>12372070
Your point about vaccines is correct, but why did you paste the URL of a jpg into your post?
>>
>>12369156
The whole point of masks is to reduce the risk of catching the virus. You say masks reduce your exposure to the virus. So it seems like you agree that they work.

But you don't want them to work. You want everyone to get the disease! Because you have some bizarre misunderstanding of public policy. In your perfect world, everyone gets COVID, because that will "strengthen their immune systems" or some shit. Right? I literally can't think of any other way to interpret your post.
>>
File: read a book.jpg (54 KB, 566x480)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>12368982
>Masks don't work
That's not what it says though

>Masks don't protect you from non-mask wearers
This is what it says
>>
>>12372506
Why don't you wear two masks then? One for you and one for the other person?
>>
>>12372596
I would love to have the power to wear masks on other people's faces.
>>
>>12369402
So, wait. Your argument is

Because some doctors commit gender reassignment surgery all doctors are wrong about diseases? That's your argument? Are you okay?
>>
>>12372633
No, his argument is AUGH BLAH EWW DOCTORS BAD GROSS STUPID PENIS VAGINA AAAAH!
>>
File: 2gsffo.jpg (43 KB, 785x720)
43 KB
43 KB JPG
>>12368982
Masks only work if you're wearing the one's approved in that leaked Wuhan/Hong Kong University paper where they wrote 100+ pages on what protective measures work against covid19

The paper and bullshit cloth masks we all wear do absolutely nothing at all, they are merely what is known as security theatre, like when you click 'lock my online wallet' and this elaborate animation appears to seem to lock your wallet but in reality it does absolutely nothing, just APPEARS to do something.
>>
>>12372902
>lock my online wallet
Never heard of this. Normally you can lock an account or a credit card, and then the account or card is unusable until it is unlocked. So for instance if you lose your card or your card details are stolen, you can protect yourself that way. Definitely not theater.
>>
File: 1581662926938.jpg (99 KB, 1000x660)
99 KB
99 KB JPG
>>12368982
>>12368985
>>12368990

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=uEo3rnU12jw
>>
>>12372914
I generalized (mathematical term, this is sci) to the most obvious mental illustration of some crony online wallet like moneybookers or whatever shitcoin website but if you want an even more pleb illustration imagine a Virus scanning program, it has all these flashy animations for 'NOW MONITORING.. SYSTEM SECURE' type advertising. It's pure theatre.
..and so is wearing a cloth/paper mask against a likely chinese engineered coronavirus.
>>
(((Kaplan)))
>>
>>12372933
Except antivirus programs do actually scan your computer for viruses. So it's not just theater. They also may have "flashy visuals" (though in my experience, not so much), but so what? Your examples suck. If you want actual security theater, look at the way they tighten airport security after an attack. The next attack isn't any more likely than it was before, and if the best way to secure the airports was to tighten it, they would have tightened it all the time. That is pure theater. An antivirus is not.

And neither are masks. The whole point of security theater is to make people more comfortable. Masks make them less comfortable and have been a massive headaches for the governors mandating them. They mandate them because they believe it improves safety, not because they think it somehow makes them look good.
>>
>>12369228
retard thats the unproven hypothesis HYPOTHESIS
>>
>>12372920
This guy is smoking something and you are too if you believe he's correct.
>there is nothing we can do to contain covid
Than explain why efforts to contain covid have worked in other countries like Korea and Japan. The US has 5% of the world population of Covid-19 and 25% of it's covid-19 deaths. Meanwhile Taiwan has had a total of 605 patients since the outbreak began.

This guy is not wrong, this guy is OBVIOUSLY wrong and you stupidly believed him.
>>
File: 1605391156462.png (267 KB, 558x949)
267 KB
267 KB PNG
>wear a mask, it's literally just a trivial inconvenience for protecting vulnerable people! what are you afraid of?
>when do we stop wearing them? B-....oh, errrr th-...errrr I'll get back to you
>>
>>12373154
>vaccines are a myth
>>
File: masks.png (911 KB, 999x1912)
911 KB
911 KB PNG
>>12372596
it's like a condom, anon
you have to put the protection near the source to stop the spray
>>
>>12373172
Aye now it will be
>get the fucking vaccine, it doesn't take any effort to literally save lives you selfish FUCK
>just because covid is defeated doesn't mean it isn't basic human DECENCY to wear a mask for other viruses that may affect vulnerable people
>>
>>12371827
That's not what airborne means. Airborne means it remains viable suspended in the air for a long period of time without needing to be contained within a droplet. The original source is usually an aerosol. Non-airborne respiratory viruses simply don't remain viable long enough after becoming dessicated to worry about it.
Droplet or aerosol spread means your cloth mask might stop 20-30% of the viral particles on each pass from an infected person to you (if everyone wears one), which is okay enough to actually slow transmission and reduce the severity of infections. The heavy droplets also fall to the ground quickly and a room is safe to enter just 10 or so minutes after someone with an infection has left.
Airborne means your cloth mask is almost ineffective. Someone who is infected and is wearing a cloth mask is still casting off shitloads of particles from their breath moistened, large surface area infection assister. Your cloth mask still stops 20-30% of droplets, but does literally nothing to stop the free floating viral particles. A room remains dangerous hours after an infected person has left it. Spaces with a lot of traffic will see a build up of viral particles over time until they're being emitted by humans and destroyed by the environment at the same rate.
A properly fitted N95 will stop both droplets and free viral particles, and is what you should use if you value your own safety.
>>
File: EdDjoNgWoAMLrGh[1].png (338 KB, 2192x1068)
338 KB
338 KB PNG
>there's no second wave
>we're rounding a corner
>covid is overblown
>covid is a hoax
>nothing can be done to stop it
>covid deaths are almost nothing
>doctors fake covid deaths for money
>covid will go away on november 4th
>covid will go away on january 20th
>>
>>12373302
I guess we'll see. But by the time that happens, you will have forgotten about this anyway and moved on to "coronavirus was a myth; viruses don't just go away."
>>
Reminder that in lieu of a surgical mask, citizens can also wear bandannas, a tied tshirt over their face, welding masks, novelty masks, or the crook of your sleeve. It's not about stopping the spread, it's about complying, now cover your face because we said so.
>>
>>12373172
You will always need a mask because I'm not getting a shot lol.
Havn't had one in decades not changing that now. Imagine getting shit injected in you every year, I bet you fags get sick more than once every five years don't you? Weak.
>>
>>12373493
>Imagine getting shit injected in you every year
I inject insulin five times a day. If I don't, I get violently ill, fall into a coma, and die.
>>
>>12368998
I always have a laugh when morons like you don't even attempt to make an argument and just expect others to bow down to some authority figure. Why? Because yes.
>>
File: 361.jpg (32 KB, 600x688)
32 KB
32 KB JPG
>>12368990
>Wear your fucking mask you piece of shit
>>
>>12368982
Imagine being almost a year into this shitshow and still not understanding that masks aren't supposed to protect the wearer, but actually others FROM you.

/sci/ - brainlet central
>>
>>12373192
If it were like a condom, then a woman in your analogy would get pregnant despite wearing two layers of female condoms and the man ejaculating six or more feet away from her. Any documented cases of this happening? Civil War bullet?
No one has ever given a good answer to the two mask question. Heck, by the logic of "masks don't protect you, they protect others from you", all you need to do is wear one mask backwards. Inverse square law means you wearing one backwards mask would be far more effective than one forward facing mask would be on the other person.
>>
>>12373338
10 PRINT "Just two weeks!:
20 PRINT "Just two more weeks!"
30 GOTO 20
>>
>>12373704
Imagine being expected to be responsible for other people's health

Fuck off
>>
>>12368982
you lost. trump is gone. go back to /pol/ and cry there fags
>>
>>12368982
i don't see a contradiction. if there is no compliance then the obvious conclusion is people need to wear masks to increase it.
>>
>>12369018
thats why you have so many deaths and your hospitals and morgues are full. nothing to brag about. inb4 fake news. don't listen to trump and read proper media (CNN, NYT, WashPost).
>>
>>12373826
>responsible for other people's health
Yes, that's exactly what democracy and society is about. Maybe you need to leave to China?
>>
>>12369156
you're just too retarded
masks stop spit particles, not air you fucking idiot. how would you breath otherwise.
>>
>>12368998
The “experts” said that rioting was perfectly ok, even if it led to covid being spread. They even called them ‘heroes’ ffs.
>>
>>12369058
>muh Republicans
I guess Republicans all moved to Germany then.
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/11/18/936184870/berlin-police-disperse-anti-lockdown-protesters-with-water-cannons
>>
>>12373864
>M-MIGA trump lost, so p-p-please go back to pol...
Too bad, little bitch. We are here to stay. This is not your safespace.
>>
>>12373990
There are no democracies in the west, retard. Ancient Greece is long gone.
>>
>>12373594
I hope a nignog steals it from you then.
>>
>>12371509
A majority of white zoomers voted for Trump. The only reason zoomers went for Biden by 25 points is because half of zoomers are shitskins.
>>
>>12373990
>hur dur yew should leeve China
>btw the government should be able to tell you where to go and what to wear
You are a certified spastic mong
>>
>>12374567
Except that's not what I said at all, you absolute retard. Seethe harder for me.

>>12374474
Okay, well they call themselves democracies.
>>
>>12374567
>everybody has a responsibility for their peers
>that's exactly the same as an authoritarian government
This is why the US will never be a first world country.
>>
>>12373878
it's not bragging, it's an observation
people don't care
if you get covid and you don't have comorbids, you have a 0.13% chance of death
Meaning if you're your average healthy person, that's your chance of death

How come no ones talking about health during all of this lol
>>
>>12373878
>don't listen to trump and read proper media (CNN, NYT, WashPost).
also all of these are bullshit

also I saw NYT publish and article for young people that encouraged them to cut ties with their family members if they would not actively support or give money to BLM
Any news agency that encourages you to cut ties with your family if they don't actively support social issues is really selfish and manipulative. Par for the course from new agencies.
>>
>>12374780
This is the real reason why mandates are a waste of time. People are not afraid; one cannot force them to be afraid. Compliance with mask mandates and lockdowns will not reach targets. Police sent to enforce them will likely be ineffective. This doesn't even get into the debatable effectiveness of masks as per studies posted ITT.
>>
>>12374852
>People are not afraid; one cannot force them to be afraid.
I mean, they can and they have
It's just that the truth came to life on the impact it would have on the individual and it's really not that big of a deal for most

For others, they're just not going to let it override their only chance at life, so..

Public perception, the ability to enforce, and the willingness to be enforced is all that matters.
Most people nowadays are too existential and lifestyle driven to take it all that serious unless it was proven to be truly deadly.

this is getting a bit out there, but I find people that come from a eurocentric background and the established religious conditioning tend to be more susceptible to fear and shame than other cultures who haven't had as much background conditioning under the same ideas.
>>
>>12374780
>people don't care
>a small minority of Americans are cluelsss assholes, but they;re enough topsread the disease to the extent that about 2000 Americans die a day.
>such people are a greater threat to America than any foreign power in our history.
FTFY
>>
File: soyyyyyyyyyyyy.jpg (346 KB, 1077x1278)
346 KB
346 KB JPG
>>Wear your fucking mask you piece of shit
>>
>>12374885
>>a small minority of Americans are cluelsss assholes
It's not a minority. There's a lot of people, all types of backgrounds too.

I personally find your blind allegiance to whatever the next media cycle is to be more of a threat to America, if we're talking about America as an identity.

I'll side with people whom don't compromise their entire lives and entire economies over a 99.87% survival rate in healthy individuals assuming they've already contracted.

If you're unhealthy, you should probably tend to that or avoid the general population until there's a vaccine you're willing to take.
>>
>>12374908
Also I'm big on exposure therapy across the board, being it an emotional, social, or physical thing.
Avoidance is resoundingly dysgenic

I hope you enjoy your compromised immune system and chronic stress as a result of following media, though.
>>
>>12374908
>I personally find your blind allegiance to whatever the next media cycle is to be more of a threat to America, if we're talking about America as an identity.
I don't even have cable or dish.
Nice strawman though.
Do you lie awake at night making up imaginary adversaries?
Meanwhile, you're hand-waving away 10-12 thousand American deaths a week.
You're a monster.
>>
>>12371527
you've provided no basis for your arguments other than opinions. perhaps you need to seek some form of mental health care to fix that yourself.
>unique medical attention
by that logic, anyone who's given prescribed drugs is given unique medical attention.
>offering violence as a solution to mental illness, ironically or not
you're the one with the illness
>>
File: excess memetalities.png (27 KB, 1360x475)
27 KB
27 KB PNG
>>12374928
You're handwaving away the 50-60k deaths from other causes and focus only on the covid meme deaths, demanding we rebuild society to a joyless authoritarian greyscale leper colony focused on preventing that little bump in mortality.
You're the monster.
>>
>>12374928
>I don't even have cable or dish.
lmao what year is it
scripts get pumped out through all the main media sites and people repeat them like programming mantras

I don't think people who blindly follow media are... my "adversaries"? I'm not fighting them, but they've been pavlov trained to attack anyone who doesn't accept the script, such as you're casually doing here.
It's just more fear and shame projection. Like I said, I find eurocentric people and people who come from a lineage that followed the bible, or had backgrounds that lived under monolithic rulers, who used fear and shame, these people are particularly sensitive to being conditioned under feeling "bad" as a motivator.

I don't respond to neither fear nor shame. The things you say are what motivate you, but projecting them onto me do nothing.

My personal cost-analysis is that it wasn't worth all the chronic stress, economy destruction, small business destruction, huge increases in income in the hands of bezos and the wealthy, the resulting aggression of hay-fever, and all the media manipulation that conditions how we are supposed to look at other groups without actually interacting with them.

I also think the techniques pushed do a lot of damage to the overall health of people, such as compromising optimal oxygen intake, as well as doing damage to the immune system.
We don't get stronger by avoidance.

You can project all your internalizations onto me all you want, but they do nothing. That's how you've organized reality and that's fine, but that's a you thing.
A balance has to be assessed, and the expectations, especially for a full year with no genuine end in sight, is not worth what was asked.

At some point you're going to let it go as well.
>>
>>12374928
Also it's just so easy to do this
What do you have to say about people who are homeless, have lost their businesses, have gone bankrupt, or commit suicide as a result of pushing these mandates?
You're okay with that? They're worth less to you?

It's all just conditioning man, and I'm pretty well convinced you're from reddit, so you're largely going to have the reddit script.
Go out and experience your own life lol
>>
>>12370906
I agree, no one should have to bury a grandparent.
>>
>>12374852
>People are not afraid
Why do people have to be afraid to adhere to a very simple suggestion that stops/slows the spread of this shitty disease?
I'm not afraid at all and I'm consistently wearing masks because I want this shitshow to end.
>>
>>12369049
you clearly have no idea what is actually going on
>>
>>12374701
>Okay, well they call themselves democracies.
So does North Korea.
>>
>>12374904
Ok, despite all our differences in this thread, I hope we can at least all agree that the redditor in this image is a colossal fucking faggot that should be sterilized.
>>
>>12375029
Certainly not the person you replied to.
>>
>>12370727
Please, please be joking. The two are nothing alike, except they both come across as retards when talking about politics.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdnny7MQUO5PEgs615XRHjmO80UVOOQ7ikduphoh_r80Cgjgw/viewform
>>
We had to wear a mask here in Melbourne for months but as of today we no longer have to because we haven’t had a case in almost three weeks after our case numbers observably dropped after mask wearing was mandatory.
Pretty weird
>>
>>12371527
>>12374930
I’ve literally seen this EXACT SAME conversation before. Do you just go around 4chan talking to yourself?
>>
>>12375186
Nice. In the USA, I finished one quarantine after an exposure at work, and immediately had to go back into quarantine after another exposure at work.
>>
>>12375186
>sparsely populated island in the middle of bumfuck nowhere has fewer cases than densely packed megalopolises like Europe and America with lots of travel
Whoa, that’s incredible.
>>
>>12375185
no its true. they both get paid to spew establishment bullshit. politicians don't fund the scientists that dont. and journalists dont get paid if they say things that the corporations who buy ads on their networks dont like.
>>
>>12375186
California has had mask mandates and curfews for a long ass time, yet the cases are still high. Have you ever considered that population density might be the number one factor in the spreading of a contact disease?
>>
>>12375208
You are right that scientists often have their own agendas, but unlike journalists they have actually give us useful shit, like refrigerators.
>>
>>12375185
That open letter fuckin infuriated me when I first heard about it. So much hypocrisy.
>>
>>12375195
I don't blame you. sometimes I feel like I'm in a time loop. doesn't help when the population of /sci/ (or rather, the 4 channels) use the same images in circulation. first time I've posted anything about this though.
>>
>>12369049
>It's basically a translated version Pascal's wager.
So you're a Christian because of Pascal's wager, fag?
>>
>>12375215
No because if population density matters then we can't blame everything on rural rednecks.
>>
I'll never fucking understand how a public health issue turned into a political issue
>>
>>12374474
>Representative democracy is a myth
>>
>>12374908
Don't use the word "whom" until you learn what it means.
>>
>>12374949
>compromising optimal oxygen intake
No matter how many times we prove this wrong, it will continue to be repeated. I dare you to provide a source showing wearing a mask reduces your SpO2.

>damage to the immune system
Again, your argument that "getting COVID is a good thing because it boosts your immune system" is unbelievably asinine, and I can't understand how it could be convincing to anyone. Getting COVID is emphatically not a good thing, since it may kill you and others around you. That is not worth whatever trivial "boost" you think it will give you.
>>
>>12375215
The population density of major cities in Australia is higher than it is in California. The population density of the whole country is low only because virtually everyone lives in the big cities. How does that slow the spread?
>>
File: truth.png (111 KB, 770x462)
111 KB
111 KB PNG
Educate yourselves, fucking retards.
>>
>>12375835
You don't understand how something that gives authoritarians the perfect excuse to fulfill their fantasies would become political?
>>
>>12375926
When people link Infowars, I'm never sure if they're trolling or not. BTW, that article is just a 404 now.
>>
Didn't this study show a 15%-20% drop in infection rate in the mask wearing group?

IN anycase, masks aren't about protecting yourself, but about protecting others. No study has been done on this yet.
>>
>>12375911
>"getting COVID is a good thing because it boosts your immune system" is unbelievably asinine
I didn't say that
Personally I don't care about getting it
But distancing, disinfectant, masks, staying indoors, chronic stress etc. is all bad news for the immune system.

youre going to have to get punctured with vaccines your whole life and avoid most the world if you dont just train your DNA to handle it.
>>
>>12375997
That advice would make sense at almost any time that there isn't a pandemic affecting tens of millions of people. If you get exposed to any virus at all right now, it is likely to be SARS-CoV-2. So de facto, that is what you are saying. We should all just accept that we will get the virus and may die, because those of us who don't die will be "stronger."
>>
>>12369146
A sony digital paper Chad annotated this.
>>
>>12369184
You can extrapolate from past studies, smoothbrain.
>>
File: eca.jpg (51 KB, 708x800)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
>>12369375
>keep your mask on around me or pay a fine.The state is allowed to use violence precisely because of sociopathic animals like you
>>
>>12371316
Not a single reusable cloth mask in that image. Cloth masks don't work.
>>
>>12373704
Why should I care about other people? It benefits me if more people die. That means more jobs and more capital.
>>
>>12376055
Apart from how asinine that question is (lol I'm so rational, being a selfish asshole is da way), the premise is entirely wrong. When people die, some jobs will open up, and some businesses will close down destroying jobs. There will be less total capital, because there will be fewer people to produce it. And the more slowly we recover, the more slowly we reopen. People like you are the reason we had to go into another lockdown in the first place. Are you loving this lockdown? Has it given you more jobs and capital?

Get the fuck out of here.
>>
>>12376073
Economically and historically false. The black death lead to the renaissance. The people most likely to die are not working people or business owners but old people.

Go back the fuck to reddit.
>>
>>12376055
lmao you overbased edgy cunt. Leave society then. Well see how long you'll make it.

>>12376131
>muh death
What makes it so difficult for you to follow a simple argument? Why do you bring up death when it wasn't about deaths?
>>
File: WwqvMdTF.jpg (42 KB, 766x500)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
>>
>>12376154
ESL moron detected. The Black death refers to the bubonic plague that swept europe.
>>
>>12376008
if you want to create a dysgenic bloodline that's your business, i suppose
>>
>>12376008
Did you know some people are immune to HIV because their ancestors went through the black plague?
>>
>>12376131
The black death didn't lead to the Renaissance. But even if it did, the Renaissance was an artistic, religious, philosophical, and scientific movement. It didn't improve the lives of shitheads like you for centuries. There weren't jobs to open up in that way; capitalism hadn't been invented yet. It was just an unmitigated catastrophe. So now your "selfish" motive has turned into some weird altruism of "let's sacrifice millions of people today so that hundreds of years from now, people will think differently." That's even more stupid than what I thought your argument was.
>>
>>12376170
Even the eugenicists didn't recommend deliberately killing weak people (who in this case are mostly old people, who have no bearing on the gene pool anyway). This is literally the worst argument of all so far this thread. I have a hard time even you believe it.

I mean for that matter, why don't we just shoot all disabled people, all stupid people, and first and foremost, all dickheads like you? That would prevent a "dysgenic bloodline," right?
>>
>>12376172
Wow, and a mere 100 million people had to die so that centuries later, ten percent of people didn't have to take medicine for a virus that isn't even deadly anymore.

Totally worth it.
>>
>>12376195
>Even the eugenicists didn't recommend deliberately killing weak people
I didn't make the claim to deliberately kill people.

I'm of the mind that if you have social anxiety, you go out and be social.

The "gene pool" is linked to/has connection to more than just having children.

Shooting disabled people is not developmental.
You're disingenuously twisting what I'm saying, and applying grotesque shock to coerce towards your position.
>>
>>12376196
You're being way too literal about my point.
It shows that exposure leads to stronger and more resilient development.
>>
>>12376214
>Shooting disabled people is not developmental.
But letting old people die IS developmental? You literally said that we don't want a "dysgenic bloodline." What the hell can that even mean except that you don't want the wrong people to breed? And in the context of this virus, how else can I interpret it instead of, "it is better that people die from this virus so they can't have kids"? What else is "dysgenic" supposed to mean?
>>
>>12376217
What led to the development of resistance was the selective pressure caused by bubonic plague. In other words, because some populations were living with the plague for generations, so many people who were not immune died, that the rare immunity eventually dominated those populations. There is no other way for natural selection to happen except by some environmental factor causing a lot of death over a long period of time.
>>
>>12376222
>You literally said that we don't want a "dysgenic bloodline." What the hell can that even mean except that you don't want the wrong people to breed?
It means you want people and their bodies to have to face challenges one means to grow and develop.
Dysgenic is avoiding everything, be this social, emotional, laborious, physical, etc.

As I said, DNA is linked to more than just having kids. DNA is always developing, and that development is shared.
>>
>>12376224
The black plague is an extreme example. That's not what we're dealing with here.
But again, it still shows that having to face these things is good for development.
In order to have a broader experience with reality, DNA needs continual exposure to new challenges to create the resilience necessary to advance itself.

You're completely free to engage in weakening your helix and everything resultant from doing so.
I'm quite certain I must have had it by now, and I haven't noticed anything.
Sure, I'm "lucky", but perhaps my position on the matter stems from a biological understanding that my lineage also engaged within.

If you want to wait for the vaccine and the likely innumerable resultant ones afterwards, that's your prerogative.
>>
>>12376227
>Dysgenic is avoiding everything, be this social, emotional, laborious, physical, etc.
Well, no it isn't. Dysgenics means "bad genes." It is the opposite of eugenics. Guess you learned something today.

>DNA is always developing, and that development is shared.
No, Lamarck. DNA is determined at conception. It does not change over your life, except sometimes for random mutations in the germ line.
>>
>>12376232
>weakening your helix
It is abundantly clear that you slept through biology class.
>>
>>12376235
>Well, no it isn't. Dysgenics means "bad genes."
Generally as a result of poor development.
Aside from "poor mutations", which even eugenics cant ever eradicate.

DNA changes wtf haha
>>
>>12376167
How does that relate to anything I said? You literally have zero reading comprehension.
>>
>>12376236
lmao what?
you do damage to your dna throughout your life
dude you have no fucking idea what you're talking about
>>
>>12376243
Virtually all of an offspring's DNA come from the DNA of the parents. Virtually all of your cells have exactly the same DNA (except red blood cells, which have no nuclei).

On average, the human mutation rate is about 10^-8 per bp per generation. That means only 10 base pairs per *billion* change each generation. And to be clear, these are random point mutations; there is no mechanism for the body to choose good mutations over bad ones. The selection process happens at the intergenerational level, where fitter genomes tend to get passed on more.

Seriously, where are you getting these ideas that our genes as kids are different from our genes as adults? That contradicts the whole idea of genes and is flatly wrong. Where would we even acquire these other alleles from? The air?
>>
>>12376243
>you do damage to your dna throughout your life
Disease is one of the main causes of DNA damage, you dipshit.
>>
>>12372633
no, it is
>Because some doctors commit gender reassignment surgery some doctors are wrong about diseases and "science" isn't bulletproof especially astroturfed one by entities that are INTERESTED in rapid depopulation
>>
>>12373053
>Than explain why efforts to contain covid have worked in other countries like Korea and Japan. The US has 5% of the world population of Covid-19 and 25% of it's covid-19 deaths. Meanwhile Taiwan has had a total of 605 patients since the outbreak began.
>This guy is not wrong, this guy is OBVIOUSLY wrong and you stupidly believed him.

Because
1)all that info is nothing but lies perpetuated by CCP shareholding majority of news outlets
2)Americans are weaker than gooks in terms of getting through those deseases
3)most of deaths listed as COVID are from other things, but listed as such because of politics and investments carving
>>
It's always the same story.

>Predictable disaster strikes
>People don't believe natural disasters are real
>Therefore it must have been done on purpose
>Therefore people saying it was natural must be lying
>But everyone is saying it was natural
>Therefore everyone must be lying
>Therefore it's a giant conspiracy

Nothing is ever, ever just an accident, coincidence, or natural event. It is ALWAYS caused by some nefarious scheme.


TL;DR: Shit doesn't happen.
>>
>>12376585
except covid isn't natural

nice try schlomo
>>
>>12376687
Of course not. Nothing is natural. Everything is a conspiracy.
>>
>>12376585
I generally agree with you, but the geometrical proximity to the lab that performed gain-of-function experiments like creating coronaviruses that bind to human cells is really something here. Plus there are four confirmed cases where viruses escaped the Beijing lab due to malpractice.
>>
>>12376731
The lab was placed in that location precisely because bats that carried coronaviruses lived nearby, and the most dangerous coronaviruses have come from animals. Again, it was predictable. So predictable that they predicted it and put a lab there. The interactions people have with bats in the area vastly outnumber the interactions they have with staff from that lab.
>>
>>12376743
I know and agree with everything, Anon. I know about bat-woman. Gates warned us of exactly this 6 years ago after the Ebola disaster.
It's just that this time some coincidences are really weird and I can kinda understand where at least some of the conspiracies are coming from.
>>
>>12368985
This.

>>12368982
It doesn't take a fucking genius to figure it out does it? Why is the spread worst in all the rural areas with ridiculously low population density? Because all the fucking retards live there, and they don't wear masks. Now tell me again, when are the masks at their most effective? When worn by carriers. Now put the two together.

Of COURSE the masks won't fucking be enough, if the ones spreading the fucking disease refuse to wear them. That half the population of the US is this goddamn stupid is just beyond unbelievable. This epitomizes the problem with democracy and why the west as a whole is so fucked against Russian / Chinese / Indian authoritarian governments. I'm really having a hard time imagining which is worse: To have your life be decided by a smart, evil authoritarian regime. Or to have it decided by a completely retarded, moronic majority. Chaos vs. willful evil, these seem to be the choices here.

We're fucked either way.
>>
>>12377024
>>12368982
There have been studies according to which around 80%+ of the spread of the disease is done by a less than 20% minority of the people. Superspreaders. These people, who refuse to wear those masks, are the same who also don't care about social distancing, who don't take any precautions whatsoever, and who willingly expose themselves to as much potential contact with the disease as they possibly can. It's fair to say that these people are responsible for the entire pandemic. The minority, in this case, is capable of doing *far* more damage than the majority can fix.

This is literally like being on a row boat, while 4 of the 5 people are doing their best to both row forward and to bail the water out, while the fifth is hacking the boat to pieces and screaming "what you're doing ain't working" to the other 4.
>>
>>12377038
How do you know superspreaders refuse to wear masks? Sounds like you took two groups and merged them together for your own ideological purposes. Almost every superspreader story involves some urbanite going to a party, refusing to social distance.
>>12377024
It's the cities you moron. It incubated and reproduced in the crowded cities. When those people wanted to flee the consequences of their actions, the spread out into the rural areas and people like you said "Hey look, it's the rural rubes that are the problem" and conveniently cut off all data analysis from months ago when cities were allowing the disease to reproduce like wildfire. All because you and you urban filth cannot stand to social distance and your filthy pet minorities don't understand how to wash their hands. Instead you cherrypick data to try to make it look like rural people who social distance and understand proper hygiene are at fault because they don't have religious faith in your magical talisman masks.
We should have locked down the cities and shot anyone who left them. The virus would be done by now and most of the useless urban population dead. The world would have been a better place because of it. But no, instead we have urbanites rubbing up against each other all day, screaming at the top of their lungs with a mask in their hands and claiming this foolish behavior reduced the spread of the virus. Then you guys flee to the countryside, bringing your filthy habits with you while trying to make everyone wear your spit soaked tissue masks to cover up for you being the primary infection vectors.
>>
>>12377472
>When those people wanted to flee the consequences of their actions, the spread out into the rural areas
bro what are you on?
>>
>>12377483
Probably the real estate booms in places like Utah, Florida, and Arizona
>>
>>12377608
They must have been planning this out in advance, seeing as those started well before 2020.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.