Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Did you pass any science classes in high school or did you drop out in 8th grade?
Masks don't prevent transmission of Viruses
- Thread starter Evmetro
- Start date
Did you pass any science classes in high school or did you drop out in 8th grade?
Not with so many idiots like ev who refuse to wear masks.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Ev isn't going to actually read the study or it's references. The headline is all he needs, as long as it says what he wants to believe.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
saltydancin
Verified User
Coronavirus once it was released will be around forever in the environment like other viruses, the virus mutates and it could become worse. The best way to beat viruses is thru antibodies, such as what the vaccines provide. There are worse viruses than corona such as the Marburg virus from Monkeys in Uganda, symptoms are high fever, and bleeding thru out the body, mortality rate 25-80%, much worse than corona, Ebola mortality 50-80%, rabies 100% mortality rate, smallpox 90% mortality and so on. Sars Cov2 or covid 19 has a mortality rate worldwide on 2 % so on a scale of badass viruses it rates far down the line.
Corona is showing long term effects on health of people who got over it. The lung damage is well known, but other organs are showing damage. There is also brain damage and thinking problems.https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...s can sometimes,completely within a few weeks.
canceled.2021.3
Former Vice President
So your stupidity is WuFlus fault?
It sounds like you may have made it past the title of the article. It is a big step above the average lefty reply here when you post something that demonstrates that you are commenting on an article that you actually read. The average lefty is only able to challenge the title of this thread and the article with no regard to the content of the article in question, but you took it a step further, congrats. On that note, I am glad to hear that you are agreeing with the content of the article, in spite of the title. You may have found a tidbit of information that fits your agenda, but you certainly did not refute any of the rest of the article or it's intended context. This is the kind of post that I had hoped to see when I posted this thread. Thanks again for endorsing the content of the article.
Not only has no lefty been able to quote any disputes with the article that the thread is about, but one lefty actually quoted something from the article that he endorses. Dutch Uncle completely agreed with the entire content of the article and even quoted a inconclusive but nice subjective tidbit that fits lefty agenda.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Thanks for admitting you intentionally misrepresented the content of the links.
I went back and read through our posts, and it appears that you did not disagree with anything at all in the article. In fact, you even found something from the article that you liked. I was impressed that you actually read the article that you commented on, so it is a very strong endorsement of the article when you only had good things to say about the content. Thanks for your endorsement.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
What you choose to see and what you choose not to see is as interesting as your leaps of assumptions. Please tell me more about your background so I can have a better understanding of you.
Did you post anything from the article that you dispute? Did you post anything from the article that you liked? Please show me what I didnt see correctly.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Yes. Yes. Look it up yourself. Do you know how to use the search function?
I did not need a search function to look over our posts, I just scrolled. I'm glad that you agree that you had zero disputes with the article, only endorsements.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Hence why you see only what you want to see. Thanks for agreeing with me.
If I didnt want to see what you post I'd use ignore. I enjoy reading your posts, and I enjoyed reading that you were actually commenting on an article that you really did read. It put you in a much higher category of lefties, since most lefties are unable to go any deeper than debating the title of the article. I also enjoyed how you posted zero disputes of the article, only endorsements. You obviously wanted me to see that you only have endorsements, or you would have posted something else, maybe some disputes.
Since you asked and continue on your idiotic quest let's examine it..
The author states :
Masks and respirators do not work. There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.
Except we quickly see that isn't true.
The very first study referenced is:
Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) "Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial", American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 - 419.
A review of that study shows that it does not state that masks don't work to prevent illness. The study is of 32 health care workers. In the study 2 people caught colds. One in each group. The conclusion of the study is that a larger study is needed.
Then there is this study:
Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) "Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis", CMAJ Mar 2016, cmaj.150835; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.150835
"We identified 6 clinical studies ... In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism."
This study does nothing to show that masks don't prevent illness. It only reports that surgical masks are just as efficient in preventing illness as N95 masks. No reasonable person could say this study shows masks don't work to prevent illness.
Finally we have this one -
Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) "Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis", Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, Pages 1934-1942, https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cix681
Nonetheless, our meta-analysis revealed that use of both N95 respirators and medical masks was associated with up to 80% reduction in risk of SARS.
...
Our analysis confirms the effectiveness of medical masks and respirators against SARS. Disposable, cotton, or paper masks are not recommended.
Compare the statement in Red from the actual study to what the author claims, "all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses".
Clearly the author's paper is bullshit and being on ResearchGate was never peer reviewed. No proper publication would have let such obvious errors in readings of the cited papers to be published. The author needs to retract this paper or risk losing academic credentials. Or perhaps being on Researchgate means they have no academic credentials.
After spending the 10 minutes to look at the studies that Rancourt claims say something that they don't, I did a little research on him. Rancourt is a piece of work, fired from his teaching position, sued for defamation and lost.
But it also led me to this lengthy rebuttal of his piece which tears apart Rancourt's argument point by point.
https://davidkylejohnson.wordpress....enis-rancourts-argument-that-masks-dont-work/
But it also led me to this lengthy rebuttal of his piece which tears apart Rancourt's argument point by point.
https://davidkylejohnson.wordpress....enis-rancourts-argument-that-masks-dont-work/
Congratulations on being the first lefty to be able to copy and paste some information that you dispute from the article to this thread, with an explanation of why you dispute it. You are the first lefty to actually dispute something from the article, so you are head and shoulders more intelligent than every other lefty so far.
As you pointed out, the author states that
"Masks and respirators do not work. There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles."
Did you find anything in that study that showed that masks work to stop the transmission of viruses or "respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles?"
Also, here is the conclusion that I read, and I have added bold to the part that you omitted:
Conclusion: Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds. A larger study is needed to definitively establish noninferiority of no mask use.
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with how the English language and scientific conclusions work.
"Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds. A larger study is needed to definitively establish noninferiority of no mask use." is not the same thing as
"all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses"
The study concludes it can't say that masks and respirators do not work to prevent cold but instead the only way to reach such a conclusion is a larger study.