Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7
Results 181 to 200 of 200

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #181
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    I've grown weary of reading this stuff close enough to determine what should be separated. The distinction, originally, was for content that implied some nefarious intent/conspiracy behind various coronavirus memes, not so much about generally accepted vs "alternative facts" .

    In the case of this thread, please let's stick to the question of masks. It's the generally accepted best policy to wear masks, but for this thread, I welcome alternative points of view/data.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn: View Post
    Originally and not too long ago, Barry created 2 categories/threads: "Coronavirus" for more generally accepted info, and "Corona virus conspiracy theories" or words to that effect. The separation worked well for a while but then the conspiracy theorists began submitting their posts to the Coronavirus thread. For whatever reasons, Barry did not block the flow. ...

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  3. TopTop #182
    M/M's Avatar
    M/M
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    Quote By the way, Dr. Fauci's statements, early in the pandemic, that the general public should not be wearing masks was to preserve the limited supply of masks for the medical personnel that needed them.

    Why do physicians and other support personnel wear them in surgery?
    Why are physicians and other medical personnel wearing masks during the pandemic?
    I went to look at link I provided where Dr. Fauci back in March stated healthy people did not need to wear masks. I was surprised to find it had been scrubbed from 'net. At any rate, in looking at other versions, Fauci clearly stated healthy people didn't need masks. However on questioning from media people he said, 'if people wanted to - he wasn't against it, like you see people in other countries doing... also because not needed by those who are healthy, it is good to save masks for medical personnel.

    I have no issue w/masks in surgery of course or when health care personnel are working w/many who are infected.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Finell: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. Gratitude expressed by:

  5. TopTop #183
    wisewomn's Avatar
    wisewomn
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    It would be helpful if you linked to your sources for Fauci's comments re masks. If they were made early on in the pandemic (last Spring-Summer), then it's likely they are outdated now because we continue to learn more about covid-19 and because the current surge greatly exceeds expectations. It's pretty clear to me that the overriding concern early on was making sure medical personnel, etc. had appropriate masks. There was a shocking shortage of them for a couple of months in the beginning.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by M/M: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  7. TopTop #184
    M/M's Avatar
    M/M
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    We may have heard: 'figures don't lie, but liars can figure'.... some articles for open and curious minds:

    Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science

    Study: Mask Mandates Seen To Make COVID-19 Rates Climb

    Mask Syndrome: How Does COVID-19 Get Into The Brain?

    Many studies looking at this; whereas other studies link masks w/secondary bacterial lung infections.

    Blaylock: Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy




    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Barry: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  8. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  9. TopTop #185
    pamelaL's Avatar
    pamelaL
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    I want a mask with a yellow star on it......
    Quote Posted in reply to the post by M/M: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  10. Gratitude expressed by:

  11. TopTop #186
    Finell's Avatar
    Finell
    Supporting Member

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    Are you alluding to the yellow star that Nazis forced Jews to wear?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by pamelaL: View Post
    I want a mask with a yellow star on it
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  12. Gratitude expressed by:

  13. TopTop #187
    Finell's Avatar
    Finell
    Supporting Member

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    Mara, are you going to reveal your academic degrees and professional experience?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by M/M: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  14. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  15. TopTop #188

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    I just read recently that the same mask or not mask issues were around during the 1918(?) flu pandemic. Interesting. Lilith

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by M/M: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  16. TopTop #189
    Finell's Avatar
    Finell
    Supporting Member

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    We know a lot more now than we did then.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Lilith Rogers: View Post
    the same mask or not mask issues were around during the 1918(?) flu pandemic
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  17. TopTop #190
    Tamilw75
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question



    Yes. My family wears masks to keep well while my spouse awaits a ❤ transplant. We toss used masks, replace filters often as well as washing the cloth ones regularly. No, masks are not causing harm unless they are used improperly and unkept. Just like our minds. At this point in the pandemic, it is what we make of it and if we want it to bring chaos to our lives, then that is an individual decision. At this point I am sick of the idle arguments that basically just tell me that people won't educate themselves enough on a simple matter to care about eachother and help eachother through this. The only conspiracies I see are the ones created in the minds of xy and z. Not that I don't have thoughts of my own, it's just not pertinent to the mask conversion.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  18. TopTop #191
    Finell's Avatar
    Finell
    Supporting Member

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    Bravo! Very well said.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Tamilw75: View Post
    At this point I am sick of the idle arguments that basically just tell me that people won't educate themselves enough on a simple matter to care about each other and help each other through this.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  19. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  20. TopTop #192

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    Oh, thanks for your cogent thoughts about masks and sending love and healing to your spouse. Aloha, Lilith

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Tamilw75: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  21. Gratitude expressed by:

  22. TopTop #193
    Mayacaman's Avatar
    Mayacaman
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question


    two cents @ the end of time...


    My two cents : I have chosen not to post on this thread since its inception. -Not because I do not appreciate the efforts of my old friend Judith Iam, but for the reason that I do not believe the real Question is "To Mask or Not To Mask".

    In my opinion, the Real Question - which was a vital issue at the very beginning of the Coronavirus Controversy back in March and April of 2020 - still remains "Was SARS-CoV-2 Cooked up in a BSL-4 Lab - Or Not?"

    I for one believe that it was, and that it was a product of a collaboration between the Feds @ Fort Detrick, MD, Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina, and Dr. Peter mengele Daszak working in tandem with "some of the best scientists in the world" at the BSL-4 Lab in Wuhan, China. In short, the creation of Covid-19 was a genuine International team effort.

    This was essentially the position that Dr. Judy Mikovitz took in the documentary, "PLANDEMIC". But of course, some will insist, she has already been "debunked" by the so-called "fact-checkers". -Along with Dr. Luc Montagnier -and- Dr. Joseph Mercola -and- Professor Francis Boyle -and- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. -and- Dr. Stella Emmanuel, & many, many Others...

    Question:

    "Why is it that Everyone who came up with information -or a thesis- that ran counter to the narrative being promoted by the mainstream media from the beginning of this pandemic
    in the year 2020, was "debunked" and discredited ?"

    -For, it may be said -without controversy- that the Mainstream Media & the Medical-Industrial Complex have worked overtime at damage control & "debunking" dissenters ever since the Coronavirus Controversy began.

    The Answer to that Question lies in the nature of "Who owns the Main Stream Media ?" =AND= the fact {not a "conspiracy theory"} that the Pharmaceutical-Industrial Complex & the Mainstream Media have interlocking Boards of Directors. -All of Whom just happen to be members of the Bilderberg Group.




    Think** About **It...

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  23. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  24. TopTop #194
    pamelaL's Avatar
    pamelaL
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    I get it - because I have been watching the profiteers take over my precious choice of a career since the Regan administration and even before. New practitioners, generally healthy people too, do not know anything different than a profiteering system, one that has, in my opinion, become self-serving and monstrous - not that they don't do excellent things for us as well, mind you; but not with infectious disease nor especially chronic disease which has exponentially increased under the decades of Fauci. Not understanding the science is a part of the big problem, not critically thinking is a bigger part, and censorship the biggest. People who praise science do not seem to even read our own governments studies plus think critically about masks vs no masks - for instance - this study below - just read the conclusion on the first page - I don't know why malaria drugs work so well in treatments of covid, but this explains the zithromax part - then again, in some parts of the world plain ol' cholecolciferol is used to treat covid - but there I go digressing again! Dang I'm gonna miss Wacco - the one uncensored site I know - or, sorta uncensored (wink wink)

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...KPSUMWEKfE4W1Q


    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  25. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  26. TopTop #195
    Jude Iam's Avatar
    Jude Iam
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    yeah, you darling med nerd, where are we gonna share this stuff, like from your link below(!) THANKS.
    uhhh, did fauci just forget bout this...?
    Predominant Role of Bacterial Pneumonia as a Cause of Death in Pandemic Influenza: Implications for Pandemic Influenza Preparedness
    David M. Morens, Jeffery K. Taubenberger, and Anthony S. Fauci


    Conclusions

    The majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria. Less substantial data from the subsequent 1957 and 1968 pandemics are consistent with these findings. If severe pandemic influenza is largely a problem of viral-bacterial copathogenesis, pandemic planning needs to go beyond addressing the viral cause alone (e.g., influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs). Prevention, diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment of secondary bacterial pneumonia, as well as stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines, should also be high priorities for pandemic planning.

    and gotta love their quote:

    “If grippe condemns, the secondary infections execute” [1, p. 448].
    ——Louis Cruveilhier, 1919

    coincidentally, just got this, not yet watched, good to have professional colleagues input on his background though -
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=de...ature=youtu.be

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by pamelaL: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  27. Gratitude expressed by:

  28. TopTop #196
    pamelaL's Avatar
    pamelaL
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    I think most people quit reading this stuff a while ago, have made up their minds and so that old saying of Moshe's applies: "The sure effect of belief and certainty is to stop thinking." I'm wasting my time posting anything here anymore I think.....

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Jude Iam: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  29. TopTop #197
    pamelaL's Avatar
    pamelaL
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    I won't take the time to reply to all your points, but whether or not the virus was ... what I could call "altered," my short answer is, I think it was. I think this because within the first two weeks of research and stay at home orders (at which time I was going to work as usual and otherwise immersed in research) I got to see the slide progressions from our source inside Wuhan that showed the splice of 12 peptides into a regular corona virus in the same sequencing location the materialistic scientists are always experimenting with, only it was a different peptide than had ever been used before. The group went on to theorize about the probable outcomes, and speculate. Mind you, this is on a professional forum of international Integrative practitioners, scientists, virologists and epidemiologists. The two speculations I remember the most were "they evolved this virus 800 years into the future" and the other was "eh - it's a hybrid; what does a hybrid seed do when set into the wild? It mutates quite rapidly, if not immediately back to it's original form." oh, and one other comment was "it's a corona virus, our bodies know this virus; every flu, 1/3 of all the colds we have had and so on." Now, as far as nefarious intentions etc. - It does not interest me to speculate. I want to trust in the innocence, curiosity, and well, stupidity of the human condition, but I do think the profiteers took advantage of this situation to fear-monger and manipulate us towards a technocracy, and I have a jaded eye to our main stream media because it is owned by very few profiteers who may even sit on each others boards.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  30. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  31. TopTop #198
    Mayacaman's Avatar
    Mayacaman
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by pamelaL: View Post
    Pamela, You say,

    " ...I want to trust in the innocence, curiosity, and well, stupidity of the human condition, but I do think the profiteers took advantage of this situation to fear-monger and manipulate us towards a technocracy, and I have a jaded eye to our main stream media because it is owned by very few profiteers who may even sit on each others boards...."

    However, consider these facts: The World Economic Forum bunch of Globalists / Plutocrats had already created a website that was over two hundred {200} layers deep and unveiled it just over a year ago, on January 15, 2020, in time for their annual get-together in Davos, Switzerland,
    before most of the rest of us had even heard of Covid-19. To create such an elaborate website doesn't just happen overnight. And the thought and planning that went into that particular website (See Link, Below) has been in the pipeline for decades. Decades.

    Once Again, I would advise everyone in this forum to examine the recorded videos of the "Event 201" Symposium that took place in New York City in late 2019. Watch the talking head in the Naval Intelligence uniform specifically deal with the issue of how to deal with alternative medical 'cures' and 'disinformation'. Those are the rules of Media Censorship in what I have termed the "Event 201 Playbook". See this clip - starting @ 48:00.




    Behold, ^ the Mother Lode ^ of Covidity


    SARS-CoV-2 is a "designer" virus; one that arrived complete
    with a website of its own that is two hundred (yes, 200) layers deep.
    - A virus with a mission - a “
    Crown Virus" that arrived on the World scene
    in order to hasten "Global Governance."

    Study Up:

    World Economic Forum: Strategic Intelligence Covid-19:

    https://www.weforum.org/platforms/covid-action-platform

    Before you click on the link ^above^ -Just a little explanation :

    New World Order Explained ~ Covid Action Plan ~ Fema Whistleblower


    Study up. This is what the Billionaires has been planning for us field-negroes...


    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  32. Gratitude expressed by:

  33. TopTop #199
    geomancer's Avatar
    geomancer
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question

    Population level study in The Lancet shows that mask wearing reduces the spread of the corona virus.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30293-4/fulltext

    Mask-wearing and control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the USA: a cross-sectional study

    Although evidence suggests that masks help to curb the spread of the disease, there is little empirical research at the population level

    378,207 individuals responded to the survey between June 3 and July 27, 2020,

    We found that communities with high reported mask-wearing and physical distancing had the highest predicted probability of transmission control.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  34. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  35. TopTop #200
    Mayacaman's Avatar
    Mayacaman
     

    Re: To Mask or Not To Mask, that is the question


    The Fog of COVID War — Locking Down the Healthy


    Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
    January 27, 2021

    Story at-a-glance


    • You’re living in a fog of war right now — a fog of COVID war — according to Jeffrey Tucker, editorial director of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER)
    • This description is typically reserved for the disorientation, chaos and confusion of battle but now applies disturbingly well to the fog surrounding COVID-19 disease mitigation
    • It’s often unclear who is making decisions related to COVID-19 health policy, and why, and the rationale behind such decisions is elusive or entirely absent
    • One example is the timeline from January 2020, when mask use was discouraged for the general public, to December 2020, when masks have become mandatory in many areas
    • Science suggests asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 is rare, and masks are ineffective at stopping transmission, but healthy people continue to be locked down and told to wear masks

    The “fog of war” is a term used to describe the uncertainty, chaos and confusion that can occur during battle. What you thought was true entering into the battle may be turned upside down, clouding your judgment as you try to make decisions in a sort of suspended reality.

    You’re living in a fog of war right now — a fog of COVID war — according to Jeffrey Tucker, editorial director of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER): “It is often unclear who is making decisions and why, and what the relationships are between the strategies and the goals. Even the rationale can become elusive as frustration and disorientation displace clarity and rationality.”1

    This description is typically reserved for the disorientation of battle but now applies disturbingly well to the fog surrounding COVID-19 disease mitigation. If you’d like a concrete example, watch the video timeline above, which takes you from January 2020, when mask use was discouraged, to December 2020, when masks have become mandatory in many areas.2

    March: Face Masks Cannot Protect Against the New Coronavirus

    In February 2020, Christine Francis, a consultant for infection prevention and control at the World Health Organization headquarters, was featured in a video, holding up a disposable face mask. She said, “Medical masks like this one cannot protect against the new coronavirus when used alone … WHO only recommends the use of masks in specific cases.”3

    Those specific cases include if you have a cough, fever or difficulty breathing. In other words, if you’re actively sick and showing symptoms. “If you do not have these symptoms, you do not have to wear masks because there is no evidence that they protect people who are not sick,” she continued.

    In March 2020, the U.S. Surgeon General publicly agreed, tweeting a message stating, “Seriously people — STOP BUYING MASKS!” and going on to say that they are not effective in preventing the general public from catching coronavirus.4 As of March 31, 2020, WHO was still advising against the use of face masks for people without symptoms, stating that there is “no evidence” that such mask usage prevents COVID-19 transmission.5

    June: Public Should Wear a Face Mask

    By June 6, 2020, the rhetoric had changed. Citing “evolving evidence,” WHO reversed their recommendation, with Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO’s director general, advising governments to encourage the general public to wear masks where there is widespread transmission and physical distancing is difficult.6

    This encouragement turned into mandates in many areas, with threats of fines for those who did not comply. In Humboldt County, California, for instance, anyone who violated the order to wear face coverings in public could be fined $50 to $1,000 and/or face 90 days in jail for each day the offense occurred.7

    In Salem, Massachusetts, you could also be fined for not wearing a mask in public, including the common areas inside an apartment building.8 What’s the evolving evidence WHO referred to that made them reverse their position on masks for the healthy general public over a period of just two months? This remains unclear, but an interesting development did occur.

    WHO: Asymptomatic Transmission ‘Very Rare’

    During a June 8, 2020, press briefing — just two days after Ghebreyesus advised healthy people to start wearing masks — Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO’s technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that people who have COVID-19 without any symptoms "rarely” transmit the disease to others.9

    WHO’s interim guidance from June 5, 2020, supports Kerkhove’s statement, noting, “Comprehensive studies on transmission from asymptomatic individuals are difficult to conduct, but the available evidence from contact tracing reported by Member States suggests that asymptomatically-infected individuals are much less likely to transmit the virus than those who develop symptoms.”10

    If this is the case, though, the recommendation that healthy, asymptomatic people wear face masks or be locked down in their homes makes no sense, highlighting just one instance of the ongoing “COVID fog.”
    Not to be called out on their blatant contradictions, on June 9, 2020, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of WHO’s emergencies program, quickly backpedaled Van Kerkhove’s statement, saying the remarks were “misinterpreted or maybe we didn’t use the most elegant words to explain that.”11 Van Kerkhove also stated that the data she mentioned only came from a “small subset of studies,” and added:12

    “I wasn’t stating a policy of WHO or anything like that. I was just trying to articulate what we know. And in that, I used the phrase ‘very rare,’ and I think that that’s misunderstanding to state that asymptomatic transmission globally is very rare.”

    10 Million People, Not One Case of Asymptomatic Transmission

    After WHO’s asymptomatic spread debacle, talk of this topic died down considerably.13 But, quietly, a landmark study involving 9,899,828 million residents of Wuhan, China, was published in Nature Communications.14 The participants were tested for COVID-19 between May 14, 2020, and June 1, 2020.
    No new symptomatic cases, and 300 asymptomatic cases, were identified. Among the 300 asymptomatic cases, 1,174 close contacts were identified, and not one of them tested positive for COVID-19.

    Additionally, of the 34,424 participants with a history of COVID-19, 107 individuals (0.31%) tested positive again, but, importantly, none were symptomatic. As noted by the authors, "Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no 'viable virus' in positive cases detected in this study.”15 Tucker explained:16

    “The conclusion is not that asymptomatic spread is rare or that the science is uncertain. The study revealed something that hardly ever happens in these kinds of studies. There was not one documented case. Forget rare. Forget even Fauci’s previous suggestion that asymptomatic transmission exists but does not drive the spread. Replace all that with: never. At least not in this study for 10,000,000.”

    A meta-analysis of 21,708 at-risk people, of which 663 were COVID-19 positive and 111 were asymptomatic, also found that asymptomatic transmission rates may actually be “lower than those of many highly-publicized studies.”17 They suggested the prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases is 1 in 6, and found the relative risk of asymptomatic transmission was 42% lower than the risk of symptomatic transmission.

    In a preprint version of their study, the researchers noted, “Our estimates of the proportion of asymptomatic cases and their transmission rates suggest that asymptomatic spread is unlikely to be a major driver of clusters or community transmission of infection …”18 As Tucker noted:19

    “We keep hearing about how we should follow the science. The claim is tired by now. We know what’s really happening.

    The lockdown lobby ignores whatever contradicts their narrative, preferring unverified anecdotes over an actual scientific study of 10 million residents in what was the world’s first major hotspot for the disease we are trying to manage. You would expect this study to be massive international news. So far as I can tell, it is being ignored.”

    If Asymptomatic Spread Is Rare, Why Masks and Lockdowns?

    Widespread asymptomatic spreading is the only reason that lockdowns and mask usage among the healthy make sense. For months, health officials have been perpetuating the myth of asymptomatic spreading to escalate fear.

    Now, as people are increasingly eager to return to some sense of normalcy, a mutated SARS-CoV-2 strain, which is supposedly more virulent, is said to have emerged and resulted in new, more severe lockdown restrictions in the U.K.20

    This perpetuation of fear has extended far beyond the initial purpose of the lockdowns, which was to flatten the curve and avoid overstressing hospitals. As Tucker pointed out, however, this has gradually changed such that now we’re facing lockdowns indefinitely.21

    “The initial round of lockdowns was not about suppressing the virus but slowing it for one reason: to preserve hospital capacity. Whether and to what extent the ‘curve’ was actually flattened will probably be debated for years but back then there was no question of extinguishing the virus. The volume of the curves, tall and quick or short and long, was the same either way. People were going to get the bug until the bug burns out (herd immunity).

    Gradually, and sometimes almost imperceptibly, the rationale for the lockdowns changed. Curve flattening became an end in itself, apart from hospital capacity. Perhaps this was because the hospital crowding issue was extremely localized in two New York boroughs while hospitals around the country emptied out for patients who didn’t show up: 350 hospitals furloughed workers.”

    Science is what should be used to dictate policy, but this isn’t what’s occurring. Ongoing testing of asymptomatic people is adding to the problem, as positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests are also being used as justification for keeping large portions of the world locked down.

    The problem is a positive PCR test does not mean that an active infection is present. The PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. However, the genetic snippets are so small they must be amplified in order to become discernible.

    What this does is amplify any, even insignificant sequences of viral DNA that might be present to the point that the test reads "positive," even if the viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive. These “positive” cases are keeping the pandemic narrative going.

    Case in point, between March 22 and April 4, 2020, 215 pregnant women admitted to a hospital in New York City were screened on admission for symptoms of COVID-19 and tested for the virus. Only 1.9% of the women had fever or other COVID-19 symptoms, and all of those women tested positive.

    Of the remaining women who were tested even though they had no symptoms, 13.7% were positive. This means that, overall, 87.9% of the women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had no symptoms,22 and the overwhelming research suggests they likely wouldn’t have transmitted the virus to others, either.

    Masks Are Ineffective

    What does the science say about masks for preventing COVID-19 infection? The first randomized controlled trial of more than 6,000 individuals to assess the effectiveness of surgical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection.

    The “Danmask-19 Trial,” published November 18, 2020, in the Annals of Internal Medicine,23 found that among mask wearers 1.8% (42 participants) ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% (53) among controls. When they removed the people who reported not adhering to the recommendations for use, the results remained the same — 1.8% (40 people), which suggests adherence makes no significant difference.

    Rational Ground also looked at COVID-19 cases from May 1, 2020 to December 15, 2020, in all 50 U.S. states, with and without mask mandates. Among states with no mask mandates, 17 cases per 100,000 people per day were counted, compared to 27 cases per 100,000 people per day in states with mask mandates24 — COVID-19 cases were higher in areas with mask mandates than without.

    The findings further call into question the effectiveness of mandated masks for preventing COVID-19, as does a case-control investigation of people with COVID-19 who visited 11 U.S. health care facilities. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report revealed factors associated with getting the disease,25 including the use of cloth face coverings or masks in the 14 days before becoming ill.

    The majority of them — 70.6% — reported that they “always” wore a mask, but they still got sick. Among the interview respondents who became ill, 108, or 70.6%, said they always wore a mask, compared to six, or 3.9%, who said they “never” did, and six more, or 3.9%, who said they “rarely” did.

    Taken together, this shows that, of the symptomatic adults with COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to 7.8% for those who rarely or never did.26

    Seeing Through the Fog

    An abundance of evidence suggests that locking down the healthy and mandating mask usage for those without symptoms is irrational, at best, and dangerous, at worst, considering both masks and lockdowns are associated with ill effects of their own.27 According to Tucker:28

    “With solid evidence that asymptomatic spread is nonsense, we have to ask: who is making decisions and why? Again, this brings me back to the metaphor of fog. We are all experiencing confusion and uncertainty over the precise relationship between the strategies and the goals of panoply of regulations and stringencies all around us.

    Even the rationale has become elusive – even refuted – as frustration and disorientation have displaced what we vaguely recall as clarity and rationality of daily life.”

    Living in such a fog can be intimidating, but the purpose of this article is not to spread more fear but, rather, to empower you with information. The fog of war, after all, is not always an impediment. It can also be used to gain advantage,29 and seeing through the fog is the first step to winning the war.


    • Sources and References :



    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  36. Gratitude expressed by:

Similar Threads

  1. The Risks vs. Benefits of Face Masks
    By Jude Iam in forum Coronavirus
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-27-2020, 07:59 AM
  2. PRESS RELEASE From Occupy Sonoma County HUGE VICTORY AGAINST GMOs!
    By EmeraldMatra in forum National & International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-18-2015, 02:02 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-08-2011, 10:57 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 01:04 PM
  5. Sonoma County Democratic Party Victory Celebration - You're Invited!
    By Alysson Wonderland in forum General Community
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-02-2008, 10:07 AM

Bookmarks