[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 / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: oh wait.png (115 KB, 948x762)
115 KB
115 KB PNG
>medication especially vaccines are perfectly safe if it's rolled out. even if it's less than a year. there is no such thing as unforeseen long term side effects. the only thing that matters is huge sample sizes. there are no time dependencies.
oh wait
>>
>>12941003
Have sex incel. Trust the experts.
>>
File: EjqGzUdX0AAxms9.jpg (86 KB, 972x1200)
86 KB
86 KB JPG
>>12941065
>>
>>12941003
we also don't know the long term effects of covid. the mrna vaccine just makes your cells make the spike protein found in covid so if the vaccines had issues you'd see the same issues if you were infected.

mrna vaccines have been researched since the 80's and the technique used for vaccines today has been around since ~2000. additionally, this isn't the first mrna vaccine that's been made or tested.

remember to put "sage" in all fields before replying to the thread newfrens
>>
>>12941143
>we also don't know the long term effects of covid
We do know a whole lot of them. Unless you argue that a year of suffering isn't long-term.
>mrna vaccines have been researched since the 80's
60's.
>>
>>12941290
>We do know a whole lot of them. Unless you argue that a year of suffering isn't long-term.
op was saying we don't know the long term effects of vaccines. i was saying, going by his definition, we don't know the long term effects of covid either since they've been around for almost the same amount of time
>60's.
could you point me to a link to read more about this? all i can find are sources saying research started in the late 80's
>>
>>12941337
>op was saying we don't know the long term effects of vaccines. i was saying, going by his definition, we don't know the long term effects of covid either since they've been around for almost the same amount of time
you are making the assumption that infection is guaranteed. you do realize you can just bunker up and that will protect you far more than any vaccine.
>>
>>12941143
>>12941290
Up until 2020, these mRNA biotech companies had poor results testing mRNA drugs for cardiovascular, metabolic and renal diseases; selected targets for cancer; and rare diseases like Crigler–Najjar syndrome, with most finding that the side-effects of the mRNA delivery methods were too serious.[24][25] mRNA vaccines for human use have been developed and tested for the diseases rabies, Zika, cytomegalovirus, and influenza, although these mRNA vaccines have not been licensed.[26] Many large pharmaceutical companies abandoned the technology,[24] while some biotechs re-focused on the less profitable area of vaccines, where the doses would be at lower levels and side-effects reduced.[24][27]
>>
>>12941143
>the mrna vaccine just makes your cells make the spike protein found in covid so if the vaccines had issues you'd see the same issues if you were infected.
wrong. the spike on its own has different topologies and is packaged differently. there is a lot of difference between translation, folding and transport.

>mrna vaccines have been researched since the 80's and the technique used for vaccines today has been around since ~2000. additionally, this isn't the first mrna vaccine that's been made or tested.
they have been complete failures till 6 months ago.

>remember to put "sage" in all fields before replying to the thread newfrens
back to tranny discord.
>>
>>12941416
>wrong. the spike on its own has different topologies and is packaged differently. there is a lot of difference between translation, folding and transport.
the final protein is the same though
>>
>>12941462
no it isn't. the full virus has more protein than the spike and it doesn't show the spikes attachment topologies like a free floating spike does.
>>
>>12941143
>we also don't know the long term effects of covid
Can we please, please, please, please stop pretending covid is worth all of this fuss? It's clearly not as bad as we thought. Can we stop treating the virus like it's some kind of world changing thing? Please?
>>
>>12941508
>the full virus has more protein than the spike
no shit
>and it doesn't show the spikes attachment topologies like a free floating spike does
dendritic and helper-b cells don't present the whole virus anyways so it doesn't matter
>>
>>12941515
>It's clearly not as bad as we thought.
Are you so scared of the virus that even after a year of this shitshow you still refuse to educate yourself about it? You're clearly retarded.
>>
>>12941543
>dendritic and helper-b cells don't present the whole virus anyways so it doesn't matter
nonsequitur.
>>
>>12941558
You again? Fuck off
>>
>>12941543
in the extracellular space. intracellular where the spike is formed we don't know the interactions a free floating spike can have. there is no way to simulate every topology inside of target cells and see the binding affinity the exposed spike has.
>>
>>12941003
t. White trash conspiracy theorist
>>
File: 1609958372455.png (1.1 MB, 1024x665)
1.1 MB
1.1 MB PNG
>>12941612
t. smooth brained woketard pozzed tranny
back to discord
>>
>>12941580
No u, shitposter. Go be dumb somewhere else.
>>
>>12941515
Many people are using the virus as an excuse to have a meltdown if you haven't already figured that out.
Trump was like a bad boyfriend to women, they have to dye their hair and go on a health kick to get over him.
But surprise bitch, that new health trend wasn't a replacement for living a healthy lifestyle and now you are bulimic and in rehab.
>>
>>12941065
Didn't the experts say smoking was safe as long as you had an asbestos filter at one time?

Didn't the experts say masks were unsafe?

Didn't the experts say to expect a vaccine at the very soonest to be 3 to 5 years out?

Yall are sending more mixed messages than a drunken prom date ffs.
>>
File: fu01q0mpg2321.png (892 KB, 995x803)
892 KB
892 KB PNG
>>12941065
>>
>>12941716
>Didn't the experts say masks were unsafe?
No.
>Didn't the experts say to expect a vaccine at the very soonest to be 3 to 5 years out?
Irrelevant.
>Yall are sending more mixed messages than a drunken prom date ffs
Of you really think so, what's the common denominator?
>hint: it's (you).
>>
File: Headline Collage.jpg (495 KB, 1600x1309)
495 KB
495 KB JPG
>>12941842
>No.
yes they did. they also said "it was just like the flu bro." actually even less than that.
>>
>>12941842
You actually think this guy went to prom?
Scientists are fucking stupid.
>>
>>12941867
public health "experts" aren't actual scientists. they are just overeducated mouthpieces for big pharma who know the semantics of scientific communication.
>>
>>12941716
>Didn't the experts say smoking was safe as long as you had an asbestos filter at one time?
no, smoking lobbyists and tobacco-funded pseudo-studies said this.
>>
>>12941949
So those conducting those studies were not bought and paid for experts? Good to know they just slapped a lab coat on some high school dropout.

If you faggots can't even own up to your mistakes, for whatever reason the cause of the mistake, you ain't doing anyone any good.

Us plebs rely heavily on you science people, stop abusing the one sided nature of this relationship.
>>
>>12941003
>Known adverse effects of antibiotic use, which is why there's a global campaign to reduce their use and patients on long-term therapy are monitored for gut microbiotic disruption, invalidates all of allopathic medicine
>>
>>12941842
>No.

Ummm, are you really this fucking stupid?

https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-doesnt-regret-advising-against-masks-early-in-pandemic-2020-7
>>
>>12941977
>So those conducting those studies were not bought and paid for experts? Good to know they just slapped a lab coat on some high school dropout.
no, they were scientists who were also pieces of shit
>If you faggots can't even own up to your mistakes, for whatever reason the cause of the mistake, you ain't doing anyone any good.
"science" isn't a monolith. if you only look and listen to corporate-funded studies on their own product than you deserve to be duped. in fairness, they did pay a lot of money to bribe politicians and buy ads so that's excusable. however, one of the most important things is transparency, honesty, and the reproducibility of findings.
listen to actual experts, not ones in the pocket of big-whatever. (they are required to disclose connections and conflicts of interest in the studies). your local university professor has nothing to gain from lying, just shoot them an email and see what they say if you have genuine concerns. they would probably be happy to respond if you're not confrontational about it
>Us plebs rely heavily on you science people, stop abusing the one sided nature of this relationship.
there are always bad people and those willing to sell off their integrity. i'm sorry those people exist anon.
same thing happened as with smoking happened when exxon mobil lied, bought congressmen and ignored their own data dating back to the 70's showing just how big of a disaster climate change would get in 100 years.
>>
>>12942024
they didn't say they were unsafe retard, they said you shouldn't get them. what they should have done is communicate the WHY (which was because of the PPE shortage) so retards such as yourself wouldn't go around being retarded
>>
>>12941639
>hurr durr no argument
I thought so
>>
>>12942044
You are a fucking disingenuous hack, or a child who hasn't learned humility yet. If you want people to protect themselves why are you telling them to wear a mask instead of a respirator? Which is what I was using until more data came out showing how much of a nothing this thing was/is. Lemme guess though, you use a mask diligently that doesn't do a fucking thing for anyone just so you can be virtuous, but are too fucking vain to wear a ridiculous looking respirator that would actually protect you?

>>12942034
I should in fact start talking to some local university professors, but you do understand the erosion of trust, especially after the decision to lie to us plebs "for the greater good" of the frontline?
>>
>>12941143
Bump
>>
File: image.jpg (1.94 MB, 4032x3024)
1.94 MB
1.94 MB JPG
>>12942106
>If you want people to protect themselves why are you telling them to wear a mask instead of a respirator?
masks are still somewhat effective at preventing transmission. 15-70% but varies wildly depending on the fit and materials
>Lemme guess though, you use a mask diligently that doesn't do a fucking thing for anyone just so you can be virtuous, but are too fucking vain to wear a ridiculous looking respirator that would actually protect you?
no, I wear an n95 with the valve taped up on the inside

if everyone did there wouldn't be enough n95s for healthcare workers however.

what should've happened is the govt. should've imported massive quantities of KN95 masks once they realized it was a respiratory virus since they're cheap and effective enough. the government didn't seem very interested in actually helping stop the spread however.
>>
>>12942106
>you do understand the erosion of trust, especially after the decision to lie to us plebs "for the greater good" of the frontline?
yes, there needs to be more accountability for the corporations behind this. usually the scientists themselves are discredited or disbarred. the corporations get a slap on the wrist at the most for lying out of their teeth and putting lives at danger.
>>
>>12942114
That's all you have to contribute? This isn't a high volume board. Posts stick around.
>>
>>12942137
Thank you for understanding. Hope you have influence in your field and use it.
>>
>>12942131
>masks are still somewhat effective at preventing transmission
Not really
>>
>>12942106
>If you want people to protect themselves why are you telling them to wear a mask instead of a respirator?
Well they are saying to wear a mask with a filter (like a surgical mask) underneath a cloth mask that's fitted, which will seal the filter. It turns it into a pseudo-respirator.

>but are too fucking vain to wear a ridiculous looking respirator that would actually protect you?
Many respirators look a lot cooler than surgical masks, imo.
>>
>>12942197
>Well they are saying to wear a mask with a filter (like a surgical mask) underneath a cloth mask that's fitted, which will seal the filter. It turns it into a pseudo-respirator.

Why not just use a fucking respirator instead of some retarded niggerrigged bullshit. Listen take your hermaphrodite mask, step into a gas chamber and really see how good it works at protecting you.
>>
>>12941864
>yes they did
Post source.

>>12942024
Doesn't say they are unsafe. Try again.
>>
>>12942075
My argument was laid out in the earlier post. Learn to read. You're dumb as fuck. And scared.
>>
>>12942106
>until more data came out showing how much of a nothing this thing was/is.
Post data.
>mask diligently that doesn't do a fucking thing for anyone
Post source.

>>12942158
Yes, they are.
.
>>
>>12942373
Are you suggesting a surgical mask provides protection to ones self?

Also considering each state had extremely different mask mandates and had similar infection rates is the source. A state that went full commie didn't do any better than one which was wide open. Donno what else would prove to you that surgical masks dont do shit.
>>
>>12942481
The only state that went full commie, the DPRK, avoided infection even entering their country you dumb liberal.

A mask has to provide some measure of personal protection, it can be low, but it is a physical thing blocking some of the surfaces you can get infected through.
Just because masks are more effective at keeping you from infecting others doesn't mean you discount the absolute material reality.

The majority of people who get infected do so from their household. Shutting down large gatherings is probably the single most effective thing at reducing wide scale transmission because this is far more likely to happen, even with masks, if people are lingering in the same space together over time.
Briefly passing someone in your 50% capacity supermarket is fairly safe, even if you had no mask.
But the mask helps some and there is literally zero reason not to wear one, so even if they provided an overall 5% reduction in transmission in real world situations you are going to wear the fucking mask.
>>
>>12942348
>And scared
I actually laughed
>>
>>12942231
>Why not just use a fucking respirator instead of some retarded niggerrigged bullshit.
Probably because there's not 7+ billion respirators available.
>>
>>12942514
>But the mask helps some and there is literally zero reason not to wear one, so even if they provided an overall 5% reduction in transmission in real world situations you are going to wear the fucking mask.
No
>>
>>12941065
>Trust the experts.
Experts are just people. People with qualifications, yes, but people. People with agendas, people susceptible to social pressure or bribery or other forms of influence.

Trusting experts is fine, but don't trust blindly or without skepticism.
>>
>>12942106
>If you want people to protect themselves why are you telling them to wear a mask instead of a respirator?
Literally this, people melt down in public if you aren't wearing a piece of cloth over your mouth while they take no action whatsoever to actually protect themselves.
>>
>>12942936
So why cant you get one retard? Your telling me there isn't one with 30 miles of you?
>>
>>12942481
>Are you suggesting a surgical mask provides protection to ones self?
No, stop attacking strawman. They do though, to a certain extent.

>Donno what else would prove to you that surgical masks dont do shit.
A rigorous study, mask mandates mean jackshit. As if mutts would wear them correctly or care about them.
I don't really need sources, I just know you never looked, because we've known full well for a long time that they are an important part in a general pandemic response. Because they do work.
>>
>>12941003
>>medication especially vaccines are perfectly safe
>there is no such thing as unforeseen long term side effects
Who are you quoting?
>>
>>12941143
>been researched since the 80's but JUST HAPPENS to be ready for this extremely unusual pandemic?
This doesn't raise ANY red flags for you anon? None at all?
>>
>>12943720
>JUST HAPPENS to be ready for this extremely unusual pandemic?
1. It's not unusual, we just fucked up the response (and China tried to bury the fact it exists).
2. They were ready a few years before. We already performed large tests in humans with at least two mRNA vaccines, the results of which were published 2017.
>>
>>12941864
literally a bunch of shit tier conservative local news stations

using stupid buzzword headlines

during january 2020, when no one fucking knew what was going on.

Get this fucking tripe out of here.
>>
>>12941003
>control groups are no longer science: EVERYONE MUST GET JABBED!!!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dT5kEe0bARk
>>
>>12943958
>>control groups are no longer science: EVERYONE MUST GET JABBED!!!
Whom are you quoting?
>>
Why are westerners so dumb that they can't produce a classical vaccine?
>>
>>12941065
>Trust the experts.
I trust the experts who know who are the experts to trust, fuck off
>>
>>12944067
Why are you too dumb to understand that a classical vaccines takes much longer to be developed and is much less effective?
>>
>>12944183
>much longer to be developed
Not in China it seems.

>is much less effective
100% prevents severe cases and death.
>>
>>12942131
Mask isn't for you dumby. An infected person with a mask has a far less chance of spreading the virus. The mask isn't to stop you getting it, it's to stop you spreading it.
>>
>>12944221
>100% prevents severe cases and death.
Like all the other ones. Apart Form that, it's not that good:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinovac_Biotech
>>
>>12943592
>Because they do work.

What data source are you drawing from?
>>
>>12941003
antibiotics fuck up a whole host of shit in the human body and have been avoided from long term usage for decades
>>
File: 1551081331469.png (24 KB, 543x443)
24 KB
24 KB PNG
>>12943940
>ABC, NPC, Wapo, Daily Beast, Wired, CNN, Time
>conservative
>>
>>12944236
Why not wear something that would prevent you from getting it dipshit?
>>
>>12943940
Fucking wow, you just don't want to accept that the medical community fucking lied its ass off "for the greater good". Your opinion on anything isn't worth shit if you cannot re-adjust your view after being proven wrong.
>>
>>12944749
Ten seconds of using Google brings up plenty. What have you tried?
>>
>>12944749
He said he "doesn't need a source", he obviously has none.
>>
>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.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/m20-6817
>>
>>12945542
Learn to read. That's wrong. I said I don't need a source _from him_.
>>
>>12945557
That's about masks protecting the wearer, not others FROM the wearer.
>>
>>12943322
Kek. I've been wearing a respirator from the beginning. My point is that it's not a viable option for everyone. If everyone decided to wear a respirator, they'd disappear from the shelves (and online markets) within days.
>>
>>12945852
And the market would adjust like it has forever.
>>
>>12945815
You are really fucking stupid, we are talking about protecting yourself, your fag mask wont do shit. If you are so worried about protecting yourself you would buy something that actually does the job, not virtue signal how fucking compassionate you are charlatan..
>>
>>12945852
Oh because everyone cannot get one, it means we all just have to play along and suffer? Yea its fucking heartless, but you are also being retarded. If you are worried about your health do the proper actions, if you just act without actual cause you are part of the problem. Cloth masks don't do shit, and if you can just for once lose an argument in your life you would admit that to be the truth as well. So fucking what if not everyone gets one, at least a portion of the population would actually be protected, instead of being lulled into believing they are protected.

>inb4 muh equality or whatever dipshit rational you come up with for not telling people cloth masks are worthless
>>
>>12946863
>we are talking
>we
You quote nobody. The info you posted is irrelevant.
>You are really fucking stupid
Seems like it's you who's "really fucking stupid", when you can't even grasp simple thought continuation.
>your fag mask wont do shit
So contrary to what you claim here, I was right in my assumptions about you.
>If you are so worried about protecting yourself
What makes you think so?
>not virtue signal how fucking compassionate you are charlatan
Where did I do that?
>>
>>12941003
I just can't trust the medical field anymore. Ever since I was given a combination of antibiotics and accutane for acne when I was a teenager that gave me lifelong crohn's disease, which nobody knows the cause of or how to cure. Now I live my life in misery waiting for it to continue getting worse and most likely dying before 50. Modern medicine does more harm than it does good and I fully expect to have some debilitating lifelong side effect from the vaccine after they force me to take it, but I just don't care anymore. Life can't get any worse as it is.
>>
>>12947169
Have you thought about gut biome transplants? If it was really caused by the antibiotics, it might help.
>after they force me to take it,
Nobody is forcing you.
>>
>>12946930
>Oh because everyone cannot get one, it means we all just have to play along and suffer?
Are you genuinely this stupid? I just said that I have been wearing a respirator since the beginning, so how in the hell did you come to this conclusion? You asked me why everyone isn't using a respirator, and my response was because there's not enough respirators for everyone. The fact that M3 masks were completely blocked off from public purchase, and are only now available if you're willing to pay exorbitant prices, should tell you that supplies aren't meeting demand. You can go out and buy some shitty Chinese K95's that fail to meet the claimed standard 90% of the time, but at that point you'll get better protection from a decent surgical mask plus a well-fitted cloth mask.
>>
>>12947169
>antibiotics + accutane manifesting Crohn's.

I'm really sorry Anon, you got dealt a raw deal. I see that you're using passive language -- "I was given" -- which suggests you weren't a participant in your own medical treatment, nor were you informed correctly on the risks. I on the other hand to had fight for years for the right to accutane, causing me untold amounts of mental disruption... if only we were allowed to take control of our medical destinies.

Anyway, that's a fascinating story and I'd like to hear more about it. Why did they prescribe antibiotics AND accutane, adding a real mean kick to an already powerful punch? I wasn't aware that was established practice at all. What do you think did it? I've heard that Crohn's has a strong genetic component. Was it just waiting to be kicked off & activated? Any more of a story tell about yourself?
>>
>>12947279
I've tried all kind of probiotics and diets, including the paleo diet, but nothing has ever helped and it's only gotten progressively worse over time. It's probably not even the antibiotics. There's a known link between accutane and crohn's disease that's apparently "very rare" and yet here I am. The medical industry always hides and downplays the risks of everything and inflates the benefits, just so they can sell more unnecessary drugs and make more money.

And yeah I will be forced to get it through peer pressure. My parents are obsessed with covid to the point of paranoia so they'll probably never speak to me again if I refuse to get the vaccine.
>>
>>12947315
My parents were the ones who made me take it, and since I was still a minor I didn't really have any say in the matter. And I didn't take them at the same time, but was taking antibiotics first before switching to accutane. It's pretty much 100% guaranteed that either one of those things caused it because there's nobody in my entire extended family that has anything like crohn's disease.
>>
>>12947279
my dads a high school teacher, he was forced to take it and would’ve lost his job had he refused. basically forced by the government to put an experimental substance in his body
>>
>>12947337
>experimental
Cool antivax meme word
>>
>>12947320
>>12947335
Well, you are right to be sceptical of modern medical practice.

Where's that often-cited statistic about 50% of current-day surgical operations being unnecessary? The appalling numbers of anti-depressants prescribed while social decay rots people's spirits, people clearly in need of nothing less than an urgent lifestyle change? Antibiotics prescribed for flu, that kind of thing?

For some people (like myself) the level of acne is unbearable, we come through a course of isotretinoin relatively unscathed, and can't imagine living life without it. But I took this medicine well aware of the risks, and after a long fight to get it. I've heard of other doctors giving it out like candy... Essentially, I'm glad to have had it, but believe (somewhat like yourself) that your treatments should be chosen sparingly -- if you're gonna try to change your life by undergoing a dangerous treatment, you damn well better be sure the problem is the one above all others that you really want to fix. And of course, we need to stop doing the things that are making so many people sick in the first place -- acne itself seems to be a disease of modernity, though nobody can quite piece apart just what's causing it.

Vaccine freedom, yeah, what happened to herd immunity? If 20 people are at work, is one guy not taking it such a risk?
>>
>>12947320
>>12947335
>>12947392
>Isotretinoin's exact mechanism of action is unknown, but several studies have shown that isotretinoin induces apoptosis (programmatic cell death) in various cells in the body. Cell death may be instigated in the meibomian glands,[30][57] hypothalamic cells,[58] hippocampus cells[59][60] and—important for treatment of acne—in sebaceous gland cells.

Just realizing I was not as well-educated on the matter as I thought I had been. Fuck me, what a terrifying drug. I really got off lightly.
>>
>>12941065
Name 4 experts in the field you trust
>>
>>12947320
>accutane
Imagine being so retarded to take literal chemotherapy drugs to treat acne and then cry when you get fucked up
>>
>>12942044
fauci said on video that they cause pneumonia, this was awhile ago though but it's still relevant to the context here
>>
>>12942131
>masks are still somewhat effective at preventing transmission
source? bonus points if pre-politicized, i.e the results weren't lobbied for. all the sources prior to covid pointed to surgical masks being laughably ineffective at preventing spread.
>>
>>12943592
>A rigorous study
you have in front of you all the data you need to view the most widespread study, the actual occurrence of this virus, and you can compare across all different demographics. there have been more controlled and scaled down studies done recently, but last I checked they're inconclusive, and if the evidence is inconclusive it's ridiculous to force this on a population
>>
>>12945557
>95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.
what's a CI? confidence interval? how is that relevant here? how do you interpret the (-46, 23) range of infection impact here? at any rate, the results were statistically insignificant thus randomness has more to say here than anything (thus mask shouldn't be required)
>>
>>12948140
>fauci said on video that they cause pneumonia
I don't believe that.
>>
>>12948184
you're right i think it was actually that guy criticizing fauci in that other thread, he claimed that happened

>>12941244
>>
>>12948151
> if the evidence is inconclusive
It isn't. We KNOW masks are a vital part of a pandemic response. Do you really think Asians would run around with masks all the freaking time if they were useless?
>>
>>12947424
I took that shit. Am I going to have a nasty surprise in the future?
>>
File: 1405014639349.jpg (28 KB, 500x353)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>12948844
Do you really think drones would be wearing masks all the time if they were useless?

Masks do jack shit. The most significant benefit of them is getting people not to touch their filthy mouths all the time and spit when they talk. It does next to nothing at filtering out viruses which are on average 50 time smaller than the individual hole in the filters on masks.

It's a programming tool to give the illusion of safety and to control retards and their behaviour. And this isn't a fucking bad thing either. The annoying part are the people who jump to protect their inflated ego because they must believe masks work or otherwise they are wrong, and their whole lack of a moral structure falls apart due to them only mimicking their character based on authority figures.
>>
>>12949385
>Masks do jack shit.
Wrong.
>It does next to nothing at filtering out viruses which are on average 50 time smaller than the individual hole in the filters on masks.
1. Viruses don't fly.
2. Droplets smaller than the holes are mostly bound by van der Waals force.
3. It transforms laminar flow of your breath into turbulent flow, reducing the spread.
4. It's only a part of a pandemic response concept and works much better together with other measures, like physical distancing.
>It's a programming tool to give the illusion of safety
Translation: I did not inform myself and know nothing, so it must be a conspiracy if others do.
>>
>>12949588
Can someone post the numerous people in the cold or vaping through masks?

Just because I think masks dont do anything real doesn't mean I'm a conspiracy theorist you fucking mindless dickwad. The virus is real, and I support the wearing of masks and advocate for medical progress towards overcoming it.
You fucking mindless troglodyte.
>>
>>12950127
>Can someone post the numerous people in the cold or vaping through masks?
That perfectly show how masks reduce the spread of the vapor. Good idea.
>doesn't mean I'm a conspiracy theorist you fucking mindless dickwad.
Oh rly? See
>>12949385
>It's a programming tool to give the illusion of safety and to control retards and their behaviour.
Sounds like you are, you "mindless dickwad".
>>
>>12941065
You will never be a woman.
>>
>>12949385
>It does next to nothing at filtering out viruses which are on average 50 time smaller than the individual hole in the filters on masks.
I can't believe it's been over a year and people still get hung up on this, especially with the amount of studies available showing surgical masks, but especially respirators, can filter particles as small as the virus to a very high degree.
>>
>>12952067
There are also studies indicating masks are ineffective
>>
>>12947516
Stupid NEONAZI WHITE NATIONALIST POLTARD. Unlike you, I am an SJW and a genius, and I fucking love science, so I actually have a pretty good general understanding of all areas of science. Stupid, fucking schizophrenic, incel neonazis, listen here are 4 experts I trust:
Bill Nye
Dr Oz
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Dr Fauci
>>
File: masks.png (209 KB, 604x665)
209 KB
209 KB PNG
>>12942044
>they didn't say they were unsafe retard, they said you shouldn't get them

What you're saying is objectively false. They were literally telling people not to get masks because they were ineffective. Pic related is one example, but I can provide you literally dozens of other sources if you'd like.

You are either intentionally misrepresenting facts because you are an establishment bootlicker, in which case you are a LIAR, or you are genuinely talking out of your ass and don't know what you're talking about, in which case, you're a MISINFORMED ASSHOLE.

source: https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/03/facemasks-coronavirus-says-cdc-who/

Also, I actually study mathematical biology and population dynamics as an applied mathematics grad student. Almost everyone in my field was raising alarms back in January 2020, and probably every major university was already actively researching COVID by the end of January, and politicians and journalists were well informed, but they CHOSE not to address the issue in order to avoid hysteria and panic. In fact, iIRC there was even evidence of insider trading going on, because politicians and elites knew that it was going to become a pandemic and they were trying to downplay the issue. And I'm sure if me and my uni were aware in early January, the military and the Chinese government probably knew in December or even November. It's already been confirmed that it was circulating, undetected, in early fall 2019.
>>
>>12952183
>There are also studies indicating masks are ineffective
Surgical masks aren't going to be very effective against aerosols if they're not well fitted, and they're generally not, but it's not because they're an ineffective filter. Respirators have pores much larger than the virus, yet they're known to be an effective protective measure.
>>
>>12952293
>It's already been confirmed that it was circulating, undetected, in early fall 2019.
There's plenty of anecdotal evidence that this is the case. Pretty sure it happened to me too. Got the flu vaccine around the same time, was completely bedridden for two weeks and felt like shit for months afterward.

And you're wondering why people still say it's not much worse than the flu?
>>
>>12952293
>It's already been confirmed that it was circulating, undetected, in early fall 2019.
Source?
>>
>>12941591
>simulate
I'm no expert or anything, but I wonder: can't you record a bunch of modified cells to see what could happen? like literally have some cultures (or a piece of flesh taken from someone or whatever) under microscopes and record them for some days or weeks?
>>
>>12941716
>Didn't the experts say masks were unsafe?
>>12952293
>They were literally telling people not to get masks because they were ineffective.
If you're the same anon for both these posts, then you're changing your story. Calling something ineffective is not the same thing as calling something unsafe. The other anon was arguing against the claim that masks were called "unsafe," and you just switched the wording to "ineffective" and then have the nerve to call them a liar.
>>
>>12952183
And they're all concerning the wearer.
>>
>>12941003
have you ever read the "side effects" section of any description of the pills you have ever taken? everything, EVERY FUCKING THING you eat or inject can be bad for you in some way or another.
>>
>>12952293
FOR THE WEARER

>>12953049
https://newseu.cgtn.com/news/2020-11-17/COVID-19-was-spreading-in-Italy-by-September-2019-study-indicates-VuSqUttP8s/index.html
>>
>>12953072
No they are not, sorry
>>
>>12953087
Post 'em.
>>
>>12953086
>https://newseu.cgtn.com/news/2020-11-17/COVID-19-was-spreading-in-Italy-by-September-2019-study-indicates-VuSqUttP8s/index.html
I remember reading this, but it's never been corroborated as far as I'm aware, and antibody tests are known to have a lot of false positives. I do think it probably was around at that point because it was also discovered in waste water in December, but the 10% claim seems ridiculous. 10% is higher than the infection rate in Italy during their surge in March of 2020, and the death rate was extraordinary at that time.
>>
>>12952293
>pic
that's not what they said. did you even read the article you just linked? they said they did not RECOMMEND wearing masks. why? for two reasons:
- there was NO EVIDENCE that they would help, and
- people were buying them like crazy, and that meant stocks were disappearing fast.
"there is no evidence" does NOT mean that masks won't protect people, it ONLY means that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE. no evidence means "we don't have information, we can't say anything with confidence, we need data.
of course some retarded journalist will translate that for retards for clickbait, and retards will spread fake news,just liek you are doing right now,

>Also, I actually study mathematical biology and population dynamics as an applied mathematics grad student
that's funny, you work with logic but you are not able to distinguish between "no evidence" and proof that something does not work.
>>
>>12953090
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm?s_cid=mm7010e3_w

It's pointless
>>
>>12953211
>CDC recommends a combination of evidence-based strategies to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1). Because the virus is transmitted predominantly by inhaling respiratory droplets from infected persons, universal mask use can help reduce transmission (1).
What's your fucking point?
>It's pointless
Ah yes. Indeed. You know you got nothing.
>>
>>12953119
They tested old samples from pneumonia patients, not the general population. 10% of those samples were tested positive, not the general population.
I also wonder why this wasn't discussed any further. Because it would shine a bad light on the "it came from Wuhan" narrative? I mean, it makes a lot of sense to have come from there, but this story seems like it may be used as a counterargument.
>>
>>12953264
>They tested old samples from pneumonia patients
Were they pneumonia patients? The article said they were lung cancer screening participants, whatever that entails. Another study is mentioned too, but no details about the participants. It would make sense to have a higher rate of positives for pneumonia patients, but the article made it sound like they were dealing with asymptomatic people.
>>
>>12953281
Oops, I remembered that incorrectly. You're right, it was a lung cancer screening. I wasn't aware that they were asymptomatic and thought something with their lungs must've been wrong to partake in the screening.
In any way, I'd argue that even with the restricted accuracy of antibody tests the 10% mean that at least some of those people had actual antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Whatever that means.
>>
>>12953319
>at least some of those people had actual antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.
It wouldn't surprise me, and if not by September, then by December when it was found in waste water. Regardless, I agree that it's odd the story gained little traction. I searched for it, and there were a lot of articles about it over a period of a few days, but after that it was just dropped. I would have expected other scientists requesting to test the samples, or more studies looking at other blood samples from the end of 2019.
>>
>>12953353
Found this one for November and France as well:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654DASH020-00716-2
They mention the Italy study. The tests were performed using ELISA, not PCR. But I don't know how ELISA works.
Here's an article summarizing a few studies, one of which says it circulated in the USA as early as October 2019, but apparently it also circulated that early in Wuhan.
>>
>>12953374
>Here's an article summarizing a few studies
Forgot the link: https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-circulated-europe-china-before-wuhan-outbreak-2020-12
>>
>>12953254
The actual number they showed were pretty weak, like a 2% difference between requiring masks and not. There was also dump of studies some other anon did that I was too lazy to search for in the archive. The biggest thing I found was a staggering number of hastily modeling studies and impromptu reviews pushed out in the middle third of 2020, not a single one of which seemed to challenge its starting hypothesis, nor seriously address how conditions could deviate in the real world from a laboratory or hospital. In light of the lack of correlation between stringency of mandates and actual number in US states and European countries, I am pushed towards the conclusion much of the science backing up masks is junk. Furthermore, I am led to believe purponents of mask usage are largely deaf to its real world limitations and potential drawbacks.
>>
>>12953385
I.e., you got nothing but gut feeling. K.
>>
>>12953399
What were the numbers in the source I gave?
>>
My state's doing vaccinations by tiers. I'm in the lowest tier which includes homeless people.

Should I lie and say I'm something more important (they dont check anything AFAIK) just in case they plan on culling everyone in that tier?
>>
>>12941404
Sauce please?
>>
>>12953431
What you provided wasn't a source. There are no numbers in there in relation to what you claimed.
Unless you're both confusing percentages and percentage points and mask efficiency vs impact of mask mandates.
But look, they even have a neat image explaining it for you.
>>
>>12941404
I'm the second Anon you quoted. How does this relate at all to what I said?
>>
>>12953584
>Mask mandates were associated with a 0.5 percentage point decrease (p = 0.02) in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.1, 1.5, 1.7, and 1.8 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all)
A fucking 1.8% change. The mandates are dumb. Forcing people to wear masks does little, not that it fucking matters anyway
>>
>>12953605
>not knowing the difference between relative percentage and raw percentage points
Damn.
>>
>>12953605
You are completely illiterate lmao.
Exactly like I predicted.
>percentage POINTS
>of GROWTH RATES
Nowhere in there does it say
>masks are ineffective
on the contrary, it says they're very effective.
>>
>>12953615
Fuck you it's midnight
>>
>>12953645
You posted that site two hours ago. Don't act like you're not retarded. You have zero sources to back up your claims and instead parrot covidiot talking points without understanding them, let alone checking them.
>>
>>12953658
Masks are stupid; covid isn't worth wasting any more time on
>>
>>12953689
Proving me right once more. K.
>You have zero sources to back up your claims and instead parrot covidiot talking points without understanding them, let alone checking them.
/sci/ isn't for you. Go back to >>>/pol/.



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.