t's Time for the Scientific Community to Admit We Were Wrong About COVID and It Cost Lives

[RSF]

On 2/2/2023 at 10:18 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Yes?

He did not understand the post when claiming the Doc said that masks were 100% effective lol.  He pointed out cloth masks are almost useless in practice because when you are put getting groceries or whatever the second the person pulls his mask off, or wears it wrong, your cloth mask does nothing to protect you from the viral load leaving his body.

That's the science

 

It was a joke...of COURSE he misread it.

[IanforHeisman]

On 2/2/2023 at 2:53 PM, AztecAlien said:

Yet cloth masks were 95% ineffective.  

When it comes to life or death.. 5 percent is quite a bit in my opinion.

 

 

Werent the masks responsible for a massive drop in flu numbers as well? Maybe I’m remembering wrong.

[RSF]

On 2/2/2023 at 10:22 PM, IanforHeisman said:

 

Werent the masks responsible for a massive drop in flu numbers as well? Maybe I’m remembering wrong.

3 pages back and you will find that which you seek.

[renoskier]

On 2/2/2023 at 8:16 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Exactly.  That's the science.  Masks work if EVERYBODY wears them.  They don't protect you from infection they only lessen the viral load you spread while wearing one.  So if one guy pulls it down and you are next to him...your mask does nothing.  Same for everyone wearing it around him.

In theory masks work.  In practice they don't because people gunna people....I blame boomers.

,,,except for the "boomers" part 

[AztecAlien]

On 2/2/2023 at 9:18 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Yes?

He did not understand the post when claiming the Doc said that masks were 100% effective lol.  He pointed out cloth masks are almost useless in practice because when you are put getting groceries or whatever the second the person pulls his mask off, or wears it wrong, your cloth mask does nothing to protect you from the viral load leaving his body.

That's the science

 

I am going to kindly disagree about not understanding the entire post. 

[Spaztecs]

On 2/2/2023 at 2:48 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

No, I'm saying he should be blaming scientifically illiterate politicians who falsely claimed to be speaking on behalf of the entire scientific community when they implemented policies that in no way shape or form "followed the science".  

Because they did not claim to be speaking on behalf of the ENTIRE scientific community---falsely.

 

 

As far as what actions are worse, the anti vaxxing door knob licking right wingers by orders of magnitude.  I was just speaking towards where his ire in the article would be better directed.  

 

My original point was, don't blame the scientific community for being falsely misrepresented in the media and by pols.  Not there fault.

 

It's to late to vent your ire at the source. Pandoras box was opened and we can't put the shit back.

There is far more efficacy in an all hands on approach to solving the problems. Then, you figure out how to prevent it in the future.

Being angry at the ChiComms, Covid denial, and anti-vaxx rhetoric, did nothing towards solving the problems. And, we heard far more rhetoric and disinformation about those things than people wanting to do their bit to solve the problems.

It did turn out to be a good thing for our Constitutional Republic as those wanting a RW Authoritarian takeover died off in large numbers.

Albeit, a phyrric win.

[happycamper]

On 2/2/2023 at 4:48 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

No, I'm saying he should be blaming scientifically illiterate politicians who falsely claimed to be speaking on behalf of the entire scientific community when they implemented policies that in no way shape or form "followed the science".  

I mean... the policies that people complained the most about did "follow the science".

You gotta be vaccinated to be a healthcare worker

you gotta mask up and social distance prior to vaccines

keeping schools open is going to cause a teacher supply collapse

all of that was... right. and happened. 

so what is he complaining about again?

 

 

[happycamper]

On 2/2/2023 at 4:53 PM, AztecAlien said:

Yet cloth masks were 95% ineffective.  

lol. no. it means they reduced infections by 5% in a study. they were only 95% ineffective compared to, well, solitary confinement. 

Compared to vaccines? I don't know. I looked for a similar study to compare apples to apples, but there didn't seem to be one yet. Articles did note how much breakthrough infections for vaccinated individuals were significantly less transmissible. So, if vaccines decrease total infections by... let's say half, then masks are 90% ineffective (compared to vaccines). 

which you said was "worse" than how much environmental damage. So... an overall reduction of 5% of infections... I'd have to say that 5% of species haven't gone extinct because of cloth mask trash. 5% of the earth's biomass hasn't been extinguished. 5% of the earth isn't uninhabitable to life to due cloth masks. We haven't lost 5% of ecosystem diversity because of cloth masks.

so it seems like you made a wild ass claim I said was impossible to compare, and then you went out and found me a study that not only made it possible to compare but made your comparison look hilariously stupid

thanks, I guess

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 2/2/2023 at 9:27 PM, RSF said:

3 pages back and you will find that which you seek.

No it's not.  A far bigger attribute was people not touching each other and spacing...

Listen to the doctor in this thread.  Masks did shit.

 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 2/3/2023 at 7:33 AM, happycamper said:

I mean... the policies that people complained the most about did "follow the science".

You gotta be vaccinated to be a healthcare worker

you gotta mask up and social distance prior to vaccines

keeping schools open is going to cause a teacher supply collapse

all of that was... right. and happened. 

so what is he complaining about again?

 

 

Pro longed school closures was not following the science.

Mask mandates for kids in school was not following the science.

Closing the beaches, parks and camp grounds was not following the science.

Shutting down small businesses but keeping open Walmart was not following the science

Allowing and encouraging 20 million people to mass protest was not following the science

 

[RSF]

On 2/3/2023 at 11:02 AM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

No it's not.  A far bigger attribute was people not touching each other and spacing...

Listen to the doctor in this thread.  Masks did shit.

 

I think he just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express once.

[alum93]

I wear a mask in meetings at work because it is no big deal and the rona and flu continue to circulate.  My rational is even if i get minimal protection, that is better than zero.  There are only a couple of us still doing it.  And sitting in a room with 5-10 people for an hour when required doesn't bother me one bit.  Work provides the masks for free, KN95, and I am fortunate to have my own office and not sit in a cubicle all day with others.  Life goes on and I hope we never go back to lockdowns, but I sure am glad we had them back in 2020 until the vaccines were approved and we learned more about how to treat people with the virus.  

[Spaztecs]

On 2/3/2023 at 10:09 AM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

Pro longed school closures was not following the science.

Opening Schools with no Teachers ?

Brilliant.

Mask mandates for kids in school was not following the science.

Conceded

Closing the beaches, parks and camp grounds was not following the science.

Didn't you just say in your last post that distance was the Science ?

Shutting down small businesses but keeping open Walmart was not following the science.

That was stooopid. It only benefited the big boys

Allowing and encouraging 20 million people to mass protest was not following the science.

Absolute Political dumb phuckery 

 

 

[happycamper]

On 2/3/2023 at 12:09 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

Pro longed school closures was not following the science.

I mean... they were. Open schools meant teachers get covid. Teachers with covid can't teach. Multiple schools opened and closed and re-opened because of that. 

On 2/3/2023 at 12:09 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Mask mandates for kids in school was not following the science.

I mean... again, they were. The science showed less infections for respitory diseases with masks; we had not had a covid specific model yet. Even later, masks were proven to only be mildly effective... which was the best we had. 

On 2/3/2023 at 12:09 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Closing the beaches, parks and camp grounds was not following the science.

Depends on the beach, park, campground. Also, depends on the part. In April, May 2020? We just didn't know how Covid spread yet. That was following the science because, well, science learned. that's what it does. 

On 2/3/2023 at 12:09 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Shutting down small businesses but keeping open Walmart was not following the science

Sure it did. Limit interactions between people as much as possible. Lots of people get life necessities al Walmart. Furthermore,  Walmart offered curbside delivery with a handy dandy app. 

On 2/3/2023 at 12:09 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Allowing and encouraging 20 million people to mass protest was not following the science

 

Wait up, halfman. In this very post you said:

On 2/3/2023 at 12:09 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Closing the beaches, parks and camp grounds was not following the science.

So.... which is it? Furthermore, for most protests, which really kicked off in the summer, "the science" had already told us that the earlier recommendations didn't make sense. so....

[happycamper]

On 2/3/2023 at 12:02 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

No it's not.  A far bigger attribute was people not touching each other and spacing...

Listen to the doctor in this thread.  Masks did shit.

 

halfman, you like to base your opinions on research articles. there's a research article quoted in this thread that showed that villages in India that used cloth masks had a 5% reduction infections. That isn't "did shit"; that's a "small but measurable improvement". Furthermore the article shows much better results for N95 masks, which had always been recommended over cloth masks when available. 

[Spaztecs]

I just love the crowd that complains about how our kids have fallen behind, yet refuse to properly fund their Local Schools because of "muh Taxes are to high !"

They insist their kids move to the grade they are supposed to chronologically be in. Wouldn't it be smarter if the kids started back where they left off ?

If the parents are so concerned about their kids Education, why aren't they more involved in their local School outside of the anti- CRT freak shows ?

If the parents were truly concerned they would visit with their kids Teachers 2-3 times per month to see how things were going.

I did. There was no gap between what my kids were saying about homework/projects/grades and the report cards coming home. I made damned sure myself, my kids, and their Teachers were on the same page 

The Result ? My kids did quite well in School.

[GoDogs22]

On 2/3/2023 at 11:19 AM, Spaztecs said:

The Result ? My kids did quite well in School.

 

Novel concept. I can't even list the number of times that parents or kids have asked me 2 days before the quarter ends how they can bring their grade up, despite me sending updating grades weekly, and I can see that neither parent or student logged in to check on their grades at all during the quarter. Nor read the deficiency notice that I sent home, showing exactly what is missing and needs to be turned in. Or the number of parent contacts that go unanswered regarding grades/behavior/permission slips/anything from school.  But I can guarantee that the parents and students who check in on work and grades are always the ones with top grades and no behavior issues. 

[RSF]

On 2/3/2023 at 11:09 AM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

Mask mandates for kids in school was not following the science.

 

 

Ask any parent, they'll tell you kids don't just bring homework home from school.

[AztecAlien]

On 2/3/2023 at 11:21 AM, happycamper said:

halfman, you like to base your opinions on research articles. there's a research article quoted in this thread that showed that villages in India that used cloth masks had a 5% reduction infections. That isn't "did shit"; that's a "small but measurable improvement". Furthermore the article shows much better results for N95 masks, which had always been recommended over cloth masks when available. 

That research in the link wasn't some type of celebration regarding that 5% reduction in infection from cloth masks like you keep twisting it to be. It stated those numbers weren't good. But you be you.  

 

[happycamper]

On 2/3/2023 at 3:10 PM, AztecAlien said:

That research in the link wasn't some type of celebration regarding that 5% reduction in infection from cloth masks like you keep twisting it to be.

I literally never called it good. Before you even posted the link I called cloth masks "not good". Afterwards I called it "not good". 

I just thought your comparison of "amount of damage to ecosystem" to be hilariously dumb and then you went and proved it to be even more hilariously dumb than I could have possibly dreamed

On 2/3/2023 at 3:10 PM, AztecAlien said:

It stated those numbers weren't good. But you be you.  

 

lmao and you.... keep trying