Wuhan virus 2020

[Jimbuna]

British commentators imagine traveling to Mallorca in the summer and for the first time not having to fear that German vacationers have blocked all pool loungers with their towels.

I've personal experiences of that on a few occasions

[Skybird]

Did I just say Germany manouvers still in Napoleonic squares? This is a translated text describing the story of the video that Catfish posted three days ago, on that German developers of a Corona vaccine who in return now gets sued by the German state. That video was in German, here you can get the story in English.

Unbelievable. This country is so sick.

German doctor develops corona antigen - and is reported by the state

Winfried Stöcker claims to have developed a corona antigen and tested it on volunteers. The result: Many antibodies were detected in 97 percent of the test persons. Instead of praise, the doctor fluttered into two advertisements, both from official bodies.

In addition to rapid antigen tests, Germany's great hope in the corona pandemic is still vaccination. The aim is to protect people against a severe course of the Covid-19 disease by activating the immune system .

German doctor develops effective corona antigen - and is reported by the state

Winfried Stöcker also researched with this goal and developed an antigen against Sars-CoV-2. But that also brought him two complaints that the official organs of the state and the state of Schleswig-Holstein brought against him. The "Spiegel" reports on this .
In Groß-Grönau, a small town in Schleswig-Holstein, Stöcker has its own laboratory. He has been researching there since he sold his company Euroimmun to a US company for 1.3 billion euros in 2017. In 2020 he started looking for a solution to the corona pandemic.

Stöcker's antigen offers many advantages compared to previous vaccines

The physician, specialist in laboratory diagnostics and recognized specialist in laboratory medicine, created an antigen that, according to him, offers many advantages. It can be stored in the refrigerator, can be delivered quickly and, in contrast to mRNA vaccines, which include the vaccines from Biontech / Pfizer and Moderna, does not have to be produced by the body itself.

But is it also armed against mutants? Yes, says Stocker. "You can now modify this part a little bit to include the mutants," he told the "Spiegel". On the other hand, the antigen cannot cause any damage, the doctor continues. Tests on volunteers, which include employees, his family and himself, have confirmed this.

Drosten and Streeck confirm Stöcker's results: the antigen works

Stöcker, convinced of its active ingredient, therefore wrote an email to Christian Drosten in May 2020 and shared his results with the chief virologist at the Berlin Charité. He replied that he could understand the self-experiment, but pointed out that the production of a vaccine would have to meet high quality standards if it was to be marketed.

Drosten also offered collegial help and suggested that Stöcker carry out neutralization tests for him. These check whether the test persons have developed antibodies that can switch off the virus. The results gave hope.

"I sent serum from me and during examinations it was found that the antibody I formed is able to neutralize the virus," Stöcker told the "Spiegel". A test by Hendrick Streeck, chief virologist at Bonn University Hospital, also gave a positive result.

Stöcker asks the Paul Ehrlich Institute for help - and is reported

While Drosten made it clear afterwards that he saw the whole thing as a "diagnostic examination, less than a test of vaccine effectiveness", Stöcker was motivated and sent the results to the Paul Ehrlich Institute, which is responsible for the approval of vaccines in Germany .

In an email to the chairman of the institute, Dr. Klaus Cichutek, asked Stöcker for approval for the immunization of volunteers. The laboratory doctor did not receive any feedback directly, but only by telephone from the institute's innovation office. While opinions differ on the content of the phone call, the consequences for Stöcker are a fact.

The Paul Ehrlich Institute filed a complaint against the doctor and reported its request to the State Office for Social Services in Schleswig-Holstein, which Stöcker also reported. It is "urgent, since it cannot be ruled out that further preparations and vaccinations, which may seriously endanger the health of the test subjects, will be carried out," quotes the "Spiegel" from the notification of the state office.

Stöcker stunned after ad: "Instead of taking up my advice, they slow me down"

Stöcker, who is represented in the proceedings by the FDP member of the Bundestag and lawyer Wolfgang Kubicki, does not understand this. "We would be able to counter the virus quickly and effectively. Instead of taking my advice and possibly having the positive results reproduced, they are holding me back."

The results of his self-testing on volunteers can hardly be the reason. Out of 100 test persons, 97 have high concentrations of antibodies and are immunized - and grateful. "I did it because the situation required it and because I trust him," says Stocker's colleague Elisabeth Meißner to "Spiegel".

Stöcker's "Plan B": Antigen's recipe put on the Internet - now he is hoping for the manufacturer

Meißner's boss doesn't let the ads stop him. Instead of marketing himself, he publishes the blueprint for the antigen in order to be able to disseminate it. His hope: that manufacturers "offer the antigen so that every doctor can buy it". The health professionals can then administer the antigen to their patients. "Then everyone would be helped," said Stöcker, who also answered the question of the legality of this Plan B in the affirmative.

For this purpose, Stöcker put the formulation of the antigen on his homepage and now hopes that a manufacturer will access it. First, however, the antigen would have to be produced in large numbers, tested on a large scale and then approved - a process that takes time. Financially, however, Stöcker does not bring anything one way or the other - in the case of production by a manufacturer, he does not see a cent.

It should be examined to what degree profit interests by other manufacturers have influenced the decision to get rid of Stöcker and to dump his work. Would not be the first time that such itnerests motvate for trying to suppress unwanted competition and competitors that are superior int heoir offer or cheaper and threaten the business model. Last but not least nutrition supplements.

We do not have healt care systems. We have desease benefitting systems. These are eocnomic systems with a producer who manufactures a good that he weant to sell, and for selling it, he needs customers. Customers of medical driugs are not heaölthy people, but ill people. The system thus has an inbuild strong economc and systemtic interest to not let people get too heaölthy, beacuse ehalthy people are a dursbanc eint eh systenm, and cnanot be made fincial use of. They must be mad eill or mius be tlaked into beign ill despite beign ehalthy so that they take drugs they do nto need and then get sick by them and then indeed are ill.

The system is a terribly flwaed design from all beginning on. Becasue even if company have no brutally egoist agendas, they nevertheless need to earn hiueg profits: not just for the slaary for their over-paid CEOs , and to poay dioviodnec of thir investors, but also for paying for developin new antibiotics, certain vaccine I heard that are in hgih demand, new treatment. The system cannot function with people being too healthy.

The only answer i see is to somehow replace it with a system that is not depending on financial inputs of any kind. I do not know how to do that, and I am certainly not talking about an communist model ("The state pays for all"...), since in that it is neverthelss the citizens who needs to pay for sure sicne he pays the state, no matter the propaganda.

We should realise however, that the system we have now leads millions every year into illness, keeps tens of millions in desease, kills life quality of many, and lead them into suffering, and final death under severe health handicaps. Its not a health care system, its a desease care system. Treating symptoms endlessly, is profitable, curing people: ends the income.

Next there is the food industry, beign a relevant concern regarding their lies on sugar, fructose, glucose and corn syrup, the still claimed though proven wrong benefit of low salt, plant oils wioth their plenty of Omega-6, and many more. But lets stop it here, else I need a doubled dose of pills today.

The EU has allowed the US finally to export its highly toxic new corn syrup named High Fructose Corn Syrup HFCS to the European citizens, over here it is better known as Isoclucose, or Isomeratzucker in German. It boosts fattiness in record times and is much more dangerous and a more serious a health concern than any of the other sugar-related health-damaging topics before. Its the neutron bomb of fructose-glucose related sweetening, it lets insuline resistence explode like a supernova. Thats shws where the priorities of that villain named "EU" lie. The interest of the people it is not.

They give us poisons to consume, and industrial wastes! They treat us like waste-eating pigs! And demand us to even pay for that : paying with money for the "privilege" to eat that sh!t, paying with out health for our stupidity!

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Did I just say Germany manouvers still in Napoleonic squares? This is a translated text describing the story of the video that Catfish posted three days ago, on that German developers of a Corona vaccine who in return now gets sued by the German state. That video was in German, here you can get the story in English.

Unbelievable. This country is so sick.

It should be examined to what degree profit interests by other manufacturers have influenced the decision to get rid of Stöcker and to dump his work. Would not be the first time that such itnerests motvate for trying to suppress unwanted competition and competitors that are superior int heoir offer or cheaper and threaten the business model. Last but not least nutrition supplements.

We do not have healt care systems. We have desease benefitting systems. These are eocnomic systems with a producer who manufactures a good that he weant to sell, and for selling it, he needs customers. Customers of medical driugs are not heaölthy people, but ill people. The system thus has an inbuild strong economc and systemtic interest to not let people get too heaölthy, beacuse ehalthy people are a dursbanc eint eh systenm, and cnanot be made fincial use of. They must be mad eill or mius be tlaked into beign ill despite beign ehalthy so that they take drugs they do nto need and then get sick by them and then indeed are ill.

The system is a terribly flwaed design from all beginning on. Becasue even if company have no brutally egoist agendas, they nevertheless need to earn hiueg profits: not just for the slaary for their over-paid CEOs , and to poay dioviodnec of thir investors, but also for paying for developin new antibiotics, certain vaccine I heard that are in hgih demand, new treatment. The system cannot function with people being too healthy.

The only answer i see is to somehow replace it with a system that is not depending on financial inputs of any kind. I do not know how to do that, and I am certainly not talking about an communist model ("The state pays for all"...), since in that it is neverthelss the citizens who needs to pay for sure sicne he pays the state, no matter the propaganda.

We should realise however, that the system we have now leads millions every year into illness, keeps tens of millions in desease, kills life quality of many, and lead them into suffering, and final death under severe health handicaps. Its not a health care system, its a desease care system. Treating symptoms endlessly, is profitable, curing people: ends the income.

Next there is the food industry, beign a relevant concern regarding their lies on sugar, fructose, glucose and corn syrup, the still claimed though proven wrong benefit of low salt, plant oils wioth their plenty of Omega-6, and many more. But lets stop it here, else I need a doubled dose of pills today.

The EU has allowed the US finally to export its highly toxic new corn syrup named High Fructose Corn Syrup HFCS to the European citizens, over here it is better known as Isoclucose, or Isomeratzucker in German. It boosts fattiness in record times and is much more dangerous and a more serious a health concern than any of the other sugar-related health-damaging topics before. Its the neutron bomb of fructose-glucose related sweetening, it lets insuline resistence explode like a supernova. Thats shws where the priorities of that villain named "EU" lie. The interest of the people it is not.

They give us poisons to consume, and industrial wastes! They treat us like waste-eating pigs! And demand us to even pay for that : paying with money for the "privilege" to eat that sh!t, paying with out health for our stupidity!

So you rail against a government-industrial complex that would stifle a corona vaccine with minimal side effects, but you continue to deny the science associated with the fact that masks and social distancing don't actual prevent the spread of virus unless you do it before it spreads past 1% of the population. Perhaps you'll question the "experts" more often.

We have Dr Fugazi here in the US telling people to double mask even though recent research in Japan shows diminishing returns or even increased risk if you wear more than one mask. We have older studies showing masks outside a clinical setting are not effective due to untrained wearers contaminating themselves and others.

We have many studies showing that social distancing and other non-pharmaceutical intervention doesn't work once more than 1% of a population are infected in an epidemic/pandemic.

We continue with Dr Fugazi telling people that even if they are vaccinated they can't leave their bunkers until everyone is vaccinated - all while refusing to disclose his conflict of interest in that he'll be getting paid every time a vaccine is manufactured because he holds patents on key components necessary for their manufacture. That he funded coronavirus research in Wuhan is such a huge conflict of interest, he shouldn't even be allowed any involvement in policy making. That his wife is in charge of ethics concerning vaccines is another huge conflict.

In short - *anyone* in any government who is setting policy for covid or any other thing associated with public health and safety needs to be 100% vetted and even the appearance of impropriety needs to be disqualifying then from that position.

[Skybird]

I have questioned the social distancing of 1.5-2 meters as way too close already last year, and said that it does not protect against standing and slowly wallowing aerosol clouds in enclosed compartments and room. Wioth slow air cleaning, 8-10m.

FFP2 masks do indeed not fulyl prevent infecitons, but as their specificaiton says, FFP2/KN95 standard must filter 19 out of 20 particles. actually good quality FFP2 filters filter even almost 99% if correctly worn.

They trick is that any cloth you wear will reduce the virus load durign an exposition. Some do that more, some do that less. The virus load correclates with the severity of the developing case, since more virusses infecting on exposition shortens the time the immune system is left with to adapt before virus numbers overwhelm the organism. Any reduction of virus load works the probabilties in your favour. Even a sheet of paper will do that, although not too efficient, but they deflect parts of the air stream blwon into your face directly. But if you stay aorund, the aersols surroundign you nevertheless will reach deep into your breathing system. Aerosols in the air can stand there for long time to come, and that'S why it is important to not stay in them for long. The filter on your face then will only extend the time until virus load you inhale becomes critical.

What is so difficult in these things. I dont get it.

Imagine a winter day, you leave the house, and breath in and out, coming out of the warmth. What happens? You seem to breath out a cloud of fog. Thats is aerosol. When a smoker stands near by, you smell the burning tobacco, that is another, even finer aerosol, even if there is no smoke visible. As long as you smell it, there is aerosol . A weather mist, a fog that forms up out there, also is a form of aerosol - and it stands in the sky for hours, that fine it is, it does not just drop down to the ground - if it would, it would be called rain and the water "particles" would be much greater, being pulled down by their own weight.

Small particles hold a smaller virus load each of them, but they get inhaled much deeper into the lung, and so are considered to be more dangerous. Bigger particles hold bigger virus loads, but are not getting inhaled as deep into the lung.

Virus load during exposition is a key variable. Keep it low by the means available to you. Distancing, limited time to stay, wearing masks.

14 months and one sitll needs to explain the most simple basics. Unbelievable. Hopeless.


And the other thing. Some of the vaccines , or even just one, was confirmed to give sterile immunity, means: the person cannot be carrier and infect others while not getting ill himself. The others give the described vaccination protection to the person (their immune system is "live"), but they can still be carrier and infect others. Thats why it makes sense to argue that vaccinated people should not run aorund with unvaccinated people.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I have quesitoned the social distancing of 1.5-2 meters as way too close already last year, and said that it doe snot prptect against standing and slowly wallowing aerosol clouds in enclosed compartments and room.


FFP2 masks do indeed not fulyl prevent infecitons, but as their specificaiton says, FFP2/KN95 standard must filter 19 out of 20 particles. actually good quality FFP2 filters filter even almost 99% if correctly worn.



They trick is that any cloth you wear will reduce the vorus load durign an exposition. The virus load coprreclates with the severity of the dveloping case, since more vorusses ifnecting on exposition shortens the time the immune system is left with to adapt before vorus numbers overwhelm the organism. Any reduction of virus load works the probabilties in your favour. Ebven a sheet of paper will do that, although not too efficient. Aeroisols int he air can stand thgere for long time to come, and that'S why it is impront to not stay in t hem for long. The filter on your face then will only extend the time until virus load you inhale becomes critical.



What is so difficult in these things. I dont get it.

I'd take a look at recent studies postulating that the reasons masks are partially effective is the same reason cold and flu precipitously decline spring and summer - it's not acting as a filter all that much due to improper wear resulting in exhalate leakage around mask edges, it's humidifying the inhalate, which then coats your mucosal membranes, making it easier to clear any virus you do inhale.

In Germany FFP2 or KN95 might be the standard. In the US, many people are wearing any number of face coverings - bandanas, gaiters, t-shirt material, etc. - because state health authorities are only concerned with health theater and not being held liable rather than actual health.

The below illustrates the issue with the general public regarding wearing of masks.

https://t.co/UmgpFkybAd

[Skybird]

The filter material (meltblow), will get wet from the breathing, yes. It should be replaced, else the moisture will allow even more virusses to pass through it, it then is almost a bridge. The masks need to be dried. The the trick is: do not use one mask too long in a row, (is literally printed on every package over here), there is a time limit these masks should be worn in one row.

I use a UVC light for desinfecting them, inside a box. Scepticism is on the order regarding boxes with inbuild UVC-LED (like beign on the market for years now to clean smartphones). They almost all are fake LEDs, just violet LEDs. As far as I heard, the so-called banana test is reliable. - The principle of UV-C desinfection is proven and much used in water purifying, hospitals, ambulance vans...

And another tip, in the open, talking to somebody make sure you position yourself so that the wind is coming from the side (or your back ). Do exactly the other way around than a hunter would prefer: avoid having the wind in your face, blowing from the direction where the other stands. No brainer.


Wearing two masks, i only took note of the first such message, and it was about wearing a surgical mask and a cotton amsk together. Makes sense to e, but the moisture thign sneed toi be tracked. Doing so with FFP2 masks is imo not recommandable, the breathing becomes too heavy, I would expect. But that is what they did not recommend anyway. Just surgery masks and cotton mask. Why not wearing just an FFP mask in the first...?



I am a night man, I get out of bed very late, but go to beed extremely late as well, 3-4 am. I prefer to go to supermarkets in the night hours, currently. Meets my living rythm. And has only a tenth or less of people around, compared to the day. I chose those times where visitor frequency is the lowest. Since the night is mine anyway, I really dont mind.

Never ring my door bell before 10am in the morning, if you want to grow old.

[Skybird]

FOCUS writes:

Where did the Sars-Cov-2 coronavirus come from? The answer is politically sensitive. A WHO investigation on site in Wuhan considers a laboratory accident to be "extremely unlikely". One group of scientists sees it differently and calls for further investigations.

The origin of the corona outbreak in Wuhan has still not been finally clarified. A broad scientific consensus is the zoonosis, according to which Sars-Cov-2 has jumped from an animal to a human. This is also the conclusion reached by the experts from the World Health Organization (WHO) who, after a long tug-of-war with China, researched the origin in Wuhan.

The "most likely route" of transmission to humans is from bats via another animal as an intermediate host, said WHO team leader Peter Ben Embarek at the subsequent press conference in February. The WHO experts considered a laboratory accident "extremely unlikely".

Possibility of a laboratory accident: New examination requested in an open letter

"If there is even a residual probability that makes a laboratory accident appear possible, you have to test it," emphasizes Günter Theißen, professor of genetics at the Friedrich Schiller University in Jena, in an interview with " ntv ". Theißen is a co-signer of an open letter from various scientists, which was published by the " New York Times" on Thursday, among others .

The signatories call for a new, comprehensive investigation into the origin of the virus. Due to the strong influence of China , they consider the investigations on behalf of the WHO to be "not a thorough, credible and transparent investigation". In addition to the 17 international scientists, 17 Chinese scientists were also directly involved in the WHO study. One was dependent on the information from the Chinese authorities. The results should have been approved by both teams. According to the letter, the scientific informative value is "severely impaired".

Theißen also emphasized in an interview with "ntv": "We don't want to stir up prejudices, we just want to know how it was. And there are just a lot of possibilities. But we don't have the impression that it is currently really free of prejudice like one Criminal case is determined in all directions. "

The search for origin is politically sensitive

The problem: The search for the origin of the pathogen is considered politically sensitive, as China fears that it will be denounced as the culprit for the pandemic. If the virus had actually escaped from a laboratory, compensation claims could threaten worldwide. Theißen says: "We have a lot of indications that the zoonosis hypothesis is favored because it is probably the most politically innocuous." The pandemic would therefore have a natural cause - and "there would be no one who would be directly or indirectly responsible".

He emphasizes: "Even after a year there is still no reliable evidence that Covid-19 is a zoonosis." He himself thinks the laboratory hypothesis is more likely. Especially because coronavirus research was carried out in Wuhan.

"You can create a virus like that in the laboratory if you want"

The Wuhan Institute for Virology (WIV) collects and processes virus samples and also conducts research with coronaviruses from bats. "There they also genetically modified these viruses and introduced them into human cells to see how they behave in them," claims Theißen. And: "You can create a virus like this in the laboratory if you want to."

But how is the corona virus supposed to have gotten to the public? Theißen can imagine that an employee would have become infected through carelessness. Possibly without symptoms and without even realizing it.
Theißen and his co-signatories are calling for a new, comprehensive investigation of the origin. And as soon as possible. "I think the truth will come out sooner or later. It's just that it can take a long time. If crucial people don't cooperate, it may take too long and we already have the next pandemic," he warns.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

FOCUS writes:

Where did the Sars-Cov-2 coronavirus come from? The answer is politically sensitive. A WHO investigation on site in Wuhan considers a laboratory accident to be "extremely unlikely". One group of scientists sees it differently and calls for further investigations.

The origin of the corona outbreak in Wuhan has still not been finally clarified. A broad scientific consensus is the zoonosis, according to which Sars-Cov-2 has jumped from an animal to a human. This is also the conclusion reached by the experts from the World Health Organization (WHO) who, after a long tug-of-war with China, researched the origin in Wuhan.

The "most likely route" of transmission to humans is from bats via another animal as an intermediate host, said WHO team leader Peter Ben Embarek at the subsequent press conference in February. The WHO experts considered a laboratory accident "extremely unlikely".

Possibility of a laboratory accident: New examination requested in an open letter

"If there is even a residual probability that makes a laboratory accident appear possible, you have to test it," emphasizes Günter Theißen, professor of genetics at the Friedrich Schiller University in Jena, in an interview with " ntv ". Theißen is a co-signer of an open letter from various scientists, which was published by the " New York Times" on Thursday, among others .

The signatories call for a new, comprehensive investigation into the origin of the virus. Due to the strong influence of China , they consider the investigations on behalf of the WHO to be "not a thorough, credible and transparent investigation". In addition to the 17 international scientists, 17 Chinese scientists were also directly involved in the WHO study. One was dependent on the information from the Chinese authorities. The results should have been approved by both teams. According to the letter, the scientific informative value is "severely impaired".

Theißen also emphasized in an interview with "ntv": "We don't want to stir up prejudices, we just want to know how it was. And there are just a lot of possibilities. But we don't have the impression that it is currently really free of prejudice like one Criminal case is determined in all directions. "

The search for origin is politically sensitive

The problem: The search for the origin of the pathogen is considered politically sensitive, as China fears that it will be denounced as the culprit for the pandemic. If the virus had actually escaped from a laboratory, compensation claims could threaten worldwide. Theißen says: "We have a lot of indications that the zoonosis hypothesis is favored because it is probably the most politically innocuous." The pandemic would therefore have a natural cause - and "there would be no one who would be directly or indirectly responsible".

He emphasizes: "Even after a year there is still no reliable evidence that Covid-19 is a zoonosis." He himself thinks the laboratory hypothesis is more likely. Especially because coronavirus research was carried out in Wuhan.

"You can create a virus like that in the laboratory if you want"

The Wuhan Institute for Virology (WIV) collects and processes virus samples and also conducts research with coronaviruses from bats. "There they also genetically modified these viruses and introduced them into human cells to see how they behave in them," claims Theißen. And: "You can create a virus like this in the laboratory if you want to."

But how is the corona virus supposed to have gotten to the public? Theißen can imagine that an employee would have become infected through carelessness. Possibly without symptoms and without even realizing it.
Theißen and his co-signatories are calling for a new, comprehensive investigation of the origin. And as soon as possible. "I think the truth will come out sooner or later. It's just that it can take a long time. If crucial people don't cooperate, it may take too long and we already have the next pandemic," he warns.

Considering that they were previously conducting gain of function experiments with western funding (because it was deemed too dangerous to do it in western nations' own labs), that the lab in question is suspected of conducting bioweapons research, and, given chinese culture which results in hiding the truth of screwing things up rather than upsetting the socialist harmony, a lab escape is far more likely than a simple zoonosis event.

Bottom line ,- you can *never* trust the CCP to be truthful.

[Jimbuna]

[Jimbuna]

UK Education Secretary Gavin Williamson tells the BBC's Andrew Marr the reopening of schools in England on Monday is intended to be irreversible.

He says longer school days and shorter holidays could be among measures to help pupils in England catch up on lost learning.

Two-thirds of parents are worried about lost learning, but most are happy to see their children go back to the classroom, a survey suggests.

Boris Johnson urges caution as England takes the first step on his roadmap to ending lockdown with the reopening of schools.

Labour's shadow health secretary Jon Ashworth condemns the proposed 1% pay rise for nurses in England.

Meanwhile, nurses are calling for updated guidance on protective equipment, arguing current recommendations are out of date.

People aged 56 to 59 are being invited to make vaccination appointments this week in England as the rollout continues.

The US Senate has approved a $1.9tn Covid relief package, including payments of $1,400 (£1,012) for most Americans.

[Skybird]

Germany should have led the world at handling the pandemic. But experts slam Merkel's vaccine response as a disaster.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/07/europe/germany-vaccine-disaster-grm-intl/index.html

[3catcircus]

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/...cid=mm7010e3_w

Debate please - CDC's own stats shows masks virtually worthless.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

Danish mask study results = masks made no difference.

[Skybird]

Strange. In the CDC study I read again and again that public mitigation measures and wearing masks helped to slow down the pandemic, and you just summarize that as "almost worthless". Hä...?



They mentioned some confounders however, means those variabvles that maybe also may have had an effect were not controlled in the design. But rasinbf what the ylisted as confoundign variable, none of them I see to have any claim for a confusion of that mask are "almost worthless".



The danish study indicates under its conclusions that they meant surgical masks, giving them an efficient infection reduction of 50%. It calls masks a "plausible measure", and reiterates that observational studies show that masks mitigate Covid 19 infections.


In the disucssion of their results, the authors mention nthemselevs that their study has severla limitations, look these up. And add to them the reader's feedback by Carl Llor. What he says about social living realities - spacing, curfews, and a not overly crowded living enviuronbment anyway - is a relevant concern, as valid imo as the fact that the study had a dominance of subjects representing a low mask wearing adherence. These throw off the representational vale of the Danish sample for many other places in the world, including the densely populated European and American states and cities.



We have comrpable obersations in Germany. In several northern regions that are not as dersnely populated than lets say the Ruhrgebiet area, infeciton numbers and death counts were much lower for very logn time, untilt he mutations spread. The contrast between mask-wearer and non-wearers here would is not as intense as in a densely cowded city of the Ruhr area, or a metropole. The lesser density in population and trafficking travellers provides a reduction of infection opportunities and so positive effects of mask wearing will contrast less intensely against the environmental settings.



I do not udnerstand the big thing you try to make out of masks. When you sneezed before Corona, you probably were polite enough to turn away formt he toher or hold the hand before your mouth. Askl yoruslef why you did that. The basic idea of blockign or disrutping airstreams with aerosol to delay the spreading of aerosol clouds, as well as filtering more or less particles due to mesh size, si so elemental that I really do not know what is there to discuss so bitterly, in fact it is boring. It also goes pretty much selfexplanatory that the longer you stay inside an aerosol cloud, the bigger the totla particle load defeating the mnask'S mesh and so accumulating in the subjects nostirls, yew, mouth. Masks do not filter 100%, but only less. With a good mask it takes longe rtime to, and with less efficient material it takes shorter time, wearing mistakes or correct wearing not considered.



To claim form those tow studies that wearinbg amsks is "alomost useless", is a huge exaggeration. Even the Danish authors say that this should not be the conclusion.



Stop being so clever and a number junkey in bit to split hairs for proving a point. Simply apply some healthy reason instead.



And mayb elook at Asia where since almspot two decades they slow down pandemics of any kind by th epopulation showing big compliance in wearing masks. If in case of just a cold, in Japan an office employee wearing a masks in an act or respectcfully protecting others is no uncommon sight.



BTW, I do the same. Since years, though with surgical masks, not with FFP masks. A habit I copied from my mentor almost 40 years ago, who was Japanese.



With now being drugged with vitamines, I do need to do so less often, however. Where until Corona I had 3-4 colds per year, I now have not had any since 12 months.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Strange. In the CDC study I read again and again that public mitigation measures and wearing masks helped to slow down the pandemic, and you just summarize that as "almost worthless". Hä...?



They mentioned some confounders however, means those variabvles that maybe also may have had an effect were not controlled in the design. But rasinbf what the ylisted as confoundign variable, none of them I see to have any claim for a confusion of that mask are "almost worthless".



The danish study indicates under its conclusions that they meant surgical masks, giving them an efficient infection reduction of 50%. It calls masks a "plausible measure", and reiterates that observational studies show that masks mitigate Covid 19 infections.


In the disucssion of their results, the authors mention nthemselevs that their study has severla limitations, look these up. And add to them the reader's feedback by Carl Llor. What he says about social living realities - spacing, curfews, and a not overly crowded living enviuronbment anyway - is a relevant concern, as valid imo as the fact that the study had a dominance of subjects representing a low mask wearing adherence. These throw off the representational vale of the Danish sample for many other places in the world, including the densely populated European and American states and cities.



We have comrpable obersations in Germany. In several northern regions that are not as dersnely populated than lets say the Ruhrgebiet area, infeciton numbers and death counts were much lower for very logn time, untilt he mutations spread. The contrast between mask-wearer and non-wearers here would is not as intense as in a densely cowded city of the Ruhr area, or a metropole. The lesser density in population and trafficking travellers provides a reduction of infection opportunities and so positive effects of mask wearing will contrast less intensely against the environmental settings.



I do not udnerstand the big thing you try to make out of masks. When you sneezed before Corona, you probably were polite enough to turn away formt he toher or hold the hand before your mouth. Askl yoruslef why you did that. The basic idea of blockign or disrutping airstreams with aerosol to delay the spreading of aerosol clouds, as well as filtering more or less particles due to mesh size, si so elemental that I really do not know what is there to discuss so bitterly, in fact it is boring. It also goes pretty much selfexplanatory that the longer you stay inside an aerosol cloud, the bigger the totla particle load defeating the mnask'S mesh and so accumulating in the subjects nostirls, yew, mouth. Masks do not filter 100%, but only less. With a good mask it takes longe rtime to, and with less efficient material it takes shorter time, wearing mistakes or correct wearing not considered.



To claim form those tow studies that wearinbg amsks is "alomost useless", is a huge exaggeration. Even the Danish authors say that this should not be the conclusion.



Stop being so clever and a number junkey in bit to split hairs for proving a point. Simply apply some healthy reason instead.



And mayb elook at Asia where since almspot two decades they slow down pandemics of any kind by th epopulation showing big compliance in wearing masks. If in case of just a cold, in Japan an office employee wearing a masks in an act or respectcfully protecting others is no uncommon sight.



BTW, I do the same. Since years, though with surgical masks, not with FFP masks. A habit I copied from my mentor almost 40 years ago, who was Japanese.



With now being drugged with vitamines, I do need to do so less often, however. Where until Corona I had 3-4 colds per year, I now have not had any since 12 months.

My point is that the studies show reductions in the chance of being infected to be less than 2% (less than the margin of error) for the CDC study and to be statistically insignificant between the masked group and the control group (DANMASK).

This points to the fact that the public are not trained in the proper use of masks, so it's really just a psychological panacea for the vast majority. If the studies showed double digit decreases in the chance of being infected, I'd agree they are useful. Most people are not using N95s, and the masks that they are wearing, too many are wearing them incorrectly, making their use utterly worthless. Public health authorities would be better off not mandating masks because the fear of being infected would cause people to self isolate where needed and would not impact the ability of business and school to continue.

[Jimbuna]