you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]passionflounder 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Cuck-muzzle mandates were largely psychological. Their general use furnished a constant reminder that we were in "unprecedented" times. They also reinforced the premise that a centralized authority could credibly micromanage how individuals behaved and set the table for the future creation of a new criminal class.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Cuck-muzzle mandates

Man, what a literary piece of art.

Masks probably work, if everyone follows the instructions to the letter, which they literally can't.

The real lesson humanity should have learned is that apparently humanity is a shit species and the most effective way (for a technologically underdeveloped species) to deal with a pandemic is to infect everyone once a pandemic is declared and just see who lives or dies. This also accomplishes a genetic pool strengthening.

I really doubt the numbers regarding "saved lives", even more how many high quality years of life have been saved.

I don't doubt that vaccines can theoretically work, but in this case it spread across the world before the vaccines were developed and a natural infection is still probably the best (although most unpleasant) way to get protection.

[–]weavilsatemyface 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Masks probably work, if everyone follows the instructions to the letter

Not a chance.

Surgical masks are not designed to prevent viruses getting through. They don't even prevent smoke particles getting through, and they are tens of times larger than viruses. The smallest smoke particles are typically 2.5 micrometres in diameter. Covid virions are typically 60-140 nanometres in diameter so the biggest Covid virus particles are nearly 20 times smaller than the smallest smoke particles. Trying to block airborne viruses like Covid with a surgical mask or a cloth mask is like trying to block mosquitoes with a tennis net.

So forget surgical masks. They're designed to stop droplets, not airborne viruses, and frankly even in the limited use of surgery under controlled conditions, there is no evidence that they reduce or prevent infections (citations supplied on request). Surgical masks, even in surgery, have no discernible effect on infection rates.

N95 masks are better, and if used correctly and tightly fitted, they may even be moderately effective for an hour or two. I say may because there is no good evidence that they actually are effective in the real-world, but theoretically based on laboratory tests where the edges of the mask are glued down over an air intake, so as to give a perfect and permanent fit, they seem to block virus-sized particles.

So I'll allow that, if N95 masks are used perfectly, they might block some percentage of airborne viruses for a limited time. Whether that corresponds to a lower risk of infection is another question: theoretically, even a single virus getting through could be enough to infect you. In practice, that's not likely, but if we're going to accept that masks theoretically block viruses under perfect conditions when we know that in practice the conditions are never perfect, then it's only right to also accept that theoretically even a single virus getting through could infect you.

So the big question is, even if you use a N95 surgical mask perfectly, and it blocks (say) 90% of virus particles, does that reduce the risk and severity of infection? Very likely not by much. Look at it this way: suppose somebody is firing a machine gun straight at you. If you block 90% of the bullets, you'll still be just as dead as if you blocked 10% of the bullets.

(The analogy with a virus with a 99.99% survival rate is not perfect.)

There's another catch. When you inhale, any viruses in the air you breath are just as likely to be exhaled again before they can latch onto cells in your nose or lungs and infect them. But if you are wearing a mask, some percentage of those exhaled virus particles will be caught in the mask, where you are likely to re-inhale them on the next breath, giving them a second chance to latch onto a cell. We know that masks can become contaminated with bacteria and fungi, and that you can then breathe those bacteria in from your own mask. So it's theoretically possible that wearing a mask for long periods of time might increase your chance of viral infection. Which might explain these results.

CC u/Zommy

[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

There are good reasons we've NEVER had an accepted coronavirus vaccine. One of those reasons is previous attempts have created antibody-dependent enhancement of disease or ADE - for a brief period it seems to protect, but it actually makes the disease WORSE.

If I could find that out 3 years ago then there is zero chance the powers that shouldn't be didn't know that.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

One of those reasons is previous attempts have created antibody-dependent enhancement of disease or ADE - for a brief period it seems to protect, but it actually makes the disease WORSE.

If you post such statements, please add a citation.

[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was able to find loads about it at the beginning, same as (to my own surprise) I found plenty of studies showing masks don't work - at all, for anything - and then saw those same studies vanishing off the net.

I was looking at the mask studies as I presumed they must do something and was trying to build a case for them, but found the total opposite. Every study done found they were pretty useless, even at what they were intended for, which is to stop staff accidentally spitting into open wounds during surgery. When actually studied, infection rates were identical with or without the masks. Many of the studies were done with dentists, who also found they make zero difference.

Studies looking at other uses, such as stopping or reducing flu infections found them also totally fucking useless.

Now it's surprisingly hard to find those studies, as they've been systematically removed. I saved a number of links and they soon turned to 404s, with my favorite being a page saying 'If you are looking for the study showing masks are ineffective against influenza infection, it has been removed due to the ongoing pandemic."

They literally censored real-world data because it went against the narrative.

So should I bother trying to find the studies proving previous coronavirus attempts create ADE? Nah.

Look for yourself, and be sure to use Google, so you can waste your time instead of mine.

Or just ask Fauci:

https://youtu.be/ZrWAqpPGAxQ?si=DuJXXlAvqIwGby24&t=188

"Certain diseases" include coronaviruses, and that lying weasel knew that full well.