14 ms·

For those commenting that it's just common cold and about herd immunity, I think we should not miss out on overload on our medical system. This is what happene

For those commenting that it's just common cold and about herd immunity, I think we should not miss out on overload on our medical system. This is what happened in India, due to high number of cases (even if mild) the medical infrastructure completely crashed under the load and lead to far more deaths than just a flu could have caused. Wear mask and stay indoors if possible

incrudible 5y ago
> Wear mask and stay indoors if possible For all we know about transmission, you should stay outdoors, if possible. If this isn't possible, maximize ventilation. Limit contacts in general. Masks have a very modest impact on transmission.
- timmf 5y ago
  I do agree with all your points, except: > Masks have a very modest impact on transmission They are an effective measure which has lead to significant decrease in infection rates. There are of course parameters like the type of mask.
  - mathverse 5y ago
    How many people are even using those masks correctly? There's a lot of people going around with old and contaminated masks or wearing them improperly.
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      "People aren't using them properly" is an argument for better education, not ditching the things.
      - mathverse 5y ago
        And I have mentioned ditching the things where? It's an argument for not "relying that much" on an unreliable use of such tool like masks.
- dageshi 5y ago
  I imagine they mean, avoid leaving home as much as possible.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  >Masks have a very modest impact on transmission. Please stop propagating this BS. If someone positive coughs in your direction but wears an FFP2 mask on and so do you, then the chance of you getting infected is much lower. That's why it's mandatory in Austria and why healthcare workers wear them, not because it's fashionable but to limit the spread of airborne disease which COVID is one. Granted, Austria failed to contain the spread of COVID, but not due to the FFP2 enforcement but mostly due to skeptics who refused vaccination, social distancing and other measures, plus lots of pointless and half-assed measures from the government that were more of a theater and were enforced too late in an attempt to not piss people off and not hurt the economy which turned into a self fulfilling prophecy and a negative feedback loop, creating more skeptics and more infectious in the long run.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - merpnderp 5y ago
    "Please stop propagating this BS." At least in the US hardly anyone has or uses FFP2 level masks (N95 here) and the government has not promoted them (except on the last page of the CDC page on masks with half a sentence saying they're better). And the data on cloth masks does show their effectiveness is much lower than initially advertised. If the parent was speaking about the US, then they weren't propagating BS, as hardly anyone speaks of N95's when talking about masks. I assume it is because the government ran a massive ad campaign to get people to not wear them in the beginning.
    - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
      > I assume it is because the government ran a massive ad campaign to get people to not wear them in the beginning. They said the the same thing in Europe, in order to prevent opportunists from scalping them and the general population from hoarding them, so the healthcare workers would have access to them. IMHO, intentionally deceiving the population in order to save masks for healthcare workers was a terribly short sighted move which cause more long term damage to the credibility of the governments when they pushed for compulsory mask wearing after the supply caught up. They could have been upfront about it and use every possible legal and gray-area channel to secure mask supplies before they could fall into the hands of opportunists, but instead, they chose to lie about it and treat everyone like dumb kids hoping people would fall for it. They did the same thing again when Israel announced the protection of the Pfizer vaccine is wailing and a third dose is needed but the EU governments said that's not needed, and then backtracking on that statement a few months later and now making it mandatory. Do you know the story of the boy who cried wolf? Yeah, this back-and-forth on the efficacy of masks and vaccines is exactly the ammunition Covid-deniers and anti-vaxxers needed and the useless governments just gave it to them on a silver platter.
- vaylian 5y ago
  > Masks have a very modest impact on transmission Do you have a source for that?
  - mrtesthah 5y ago
    Certainly if you wear loose fitting cloth masks like most people I see; they need to be FFP2-rated or N95, tight-fitting, and sanitized (heat, ozone, or UVC, etc.) or replaced between uses. Otherwise in general, they do work. https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-here-are-49-scientific-studies-that-explain-why-they-do/ https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-her...
  - crimsoneer 5y ago
    https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302 https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302 It's probably about a 10% reduction in incidence. Which I guess is quite modest in comparison to, say, vaccines.
  - incrudible 5y ago
    The (to my knowledge) largest study on community transmission finds ~10% reduction: https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_Second_Stage_Paper_20211108.pdf.pdf https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publicati... There are many other studies that find no or modest reduction. We need to accept lower results as an upper bound to effectiveness, especially when it comes to how the average person uses masks, versus how a health care professional.
    - chimprich 5y ago
      I had a quick scan of that paper and read "The results in all specifications are the same: we estimate a roughly 9% decline in symptomatic seroprevalence in the treatment group (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) = 0.91 [0.82, 1.00]) for a 29 percentage point increase in mask wearing over 8 weeks." So when mask use increased 29%, symptom prevalence reduced by 9%? That doesn't seem quite the same argument as the one you're making. > We need to accept lower results as an upper bound to effectiveness Why?
- dathinab 5y ago
  More like: > Wear mask and stay (in your) home. As in no contact > contact outside > contact inside Also assuming you are not in tight crowds outside or "outside but bad ventilated" areas (e.g. tends): longer contact outside without mask > longer contact inside with mask Not because masks don't work but because being outside has such a strong effect (assuming you are not in a crowded area, or some area which wrt. ventilation is only pseudo-outside or you stick very close to other persons outside of a crowd, or you insist to always be direct facing a person instead of being beside that person etc.) Or in other words beside outside being good ventilated you also have often less chances to directly cough at the face of a person, as you e.g. walk besides a person when taking a walk and activities being less crowded and as such it's easier to cough in a direction where no one is close by. It also means that there are good reasons to ware masks if you are in a crowded area outside, it's just most "outside activities" are not in very crowded areas and hence outside infection rates are way lower. We are also less outside then inside etc. Or at least that is how I understand it.
- smallerfish 5y ago
  > Masks have a very modest impact on transmission. False. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883189/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883189/
- xphilter 5y ago
  If masks didn’t work, surly we’d all have anecdotes of people catching covid while wearing a masks. I literally have not heard of a single story. Everyone I know who has caught covid was maskless (not even stories of people wearing masks poorly).
- teekert 5y ago
  "maximize ventilation", have you seen the gas prices lately ;)
- corinroyal 5y ago
  Actually, a recent metastudy found that masking reduces transmission by 53%, which is huge. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20211118/mask-wearing-cuts-new-covid-cases-study https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20211118/mask-wearing-cuts-n...
mathverse 5y ago
I am sorry but no. I have already lost 2 years of my life just following and obeying the orders. Enough is enough. This is not on me to solve. The government had enough time to convince everyone to vaccinate or prepare the healthcare sector for influx of cases of unvaccinated.
- kingkawn 5y ago
  You’ll learn the hard way then not to address nature at your convenience
- Mistletoe 5y ago
  It’s wild how few campaigns I am seeing for vaccination. I want 1950s era propaganda posters on every street corner and at every tv and radio break until we get these numbers to 100%.
  - Bud 5y ago
    We had plenty of posters and advertising on this. Vaccination rates were great in early 2021, before an entire major political party decided to cynically pretend that fighting vaccination was somehow defending "freedom".
- Dumblydorr 5y ago
  How was the government supposed to convince anti-vaxxers to do what they believe contains micro chips or what they believe is worse than the virus itself? This isn't on the government, this is on anti-vaxxers for swallowing garbage information, hook line and sinker. And you didn't lose 2 years of your life. You're alive, you didn't die due to the pandemic, did you? That's much less than can be said for 5 million others, mostly older or unhealthy to begin with. They're dead because people didn't follow the guidelines early and it kept spreading and spreading. So, be grateful you're not dead, and do your part to increase collective resilience.
  - mathverse 5y ago
    >How was the government supposed to convince anti-vaxxers to do what they believe contains micro chips or what they believe is worse than the virus itself? This isn't on the government, this is on anti-vaxxers for swallowing garbage information, hook line and sinker. This is solely on the government. It's immoral to keep vaccinated people in uncertainty and include them in any sort of lockdowns. >And you didn't lose 2 years of your life. You're alive, you didn't die due to the pandemic, did you? That's much less than can be said for 5 million others, mostly older or unhealthy to begin with. They're dead because people didn't follow the guidelines early and it kept spreading and spreading. This is not arguing in good faith. Healthy people in their 30s are not dying. Of all the 0.5m children infected in Israel only 200 were severe cases. >So, be grateful you're not dead, and do your part to increase collective resilience. I already did my part. Now my part will be attending a demo with all those "antivaxx / 5G chips believing people" and I will fight for my right to live a normal life.
impendingchange 5y ago
But it is the common cold: https://www.bitchute.com/video/UvuXzdVwj3ed/ https://www.bitchute.com/video/UvuXzdVwj3ed/ Get lots of Vitamin D from sunlight and be sure to take your Vitamin C. Breathe lots of fresh, unfiltered air. Keep the curve low.
- nojito 5y ago
  The common cold doesn't flood ICUs and pushed them to 125% capacity.
throwawaylinux 5y ago
Politicians have had time to start improving healthcare systems. Corporations that currently pay no taxes could help to fund this stuff. Billions of dollars of war industry purchases could have been slightly delayed. Billionaires could have chipped in a bit more, and we could have started ratcheting up capacities and capabilities of hospitals and healthcare systems. But no it seems that's all teetering on the brink of collapse for some astounding reason. So it's become quite clear to me that we are not, in fact, "all in this together". The situation is that the ruling class are in it for themselves, and they are demanding everybody else lose their jobs and businesses and we comply and mask up and shut ourselves in, so that they all may carry on as usual and refuse to invest our own money in our healthcare systems. Given what we know about this situation now, I think perhaps a better approach might be to instead not comply with these demands. Ridicule and hound and vote out anybody who insists that after two years of complying we have to continue to shut ourselves away because the healthcare systems they have not adequately invested in are still on the brink of collapse.
- danaris 5y ago
  I'm sorry, what? "The ruling class has proven that they don't actually care about anyone else"—yes, that's a reasonable message to take away from the past year and a half... "...So we should stop abiding by all the good medical advice and just party" how the hell do you come to that conclusion? The reasonable conclusion to come to from your first two paragraphs is something along the lines of "So we should protest the politicians who want to deny the science, boycott the companies that are actively making things worse, and push for real societal change that prioritizes human lives and well-being over corporate profits." You're basically saying, "The very wealthy just want us all to shut up and die, but screw them! We should all get out there and die very loudly!"
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    I'm not sure what it is exactly you are unclear on, but that is certainly not what I am saying. I'm saying what I wrote no more and no less. If you want to reduce it to a quip it would be the exact opposite, we should get out and live.

incrudible 5y ago

> Wear mask and stay indoors if possible For all we know about transmission, you should stay outdoors, if possible. If this isn't possible, maximize ventilation. Limit contacts in general. Masks have a very modest impact on transmission.

timmf 5y ago
I do agree with all your points, except: > Masks have a very modest impact on transmission They are an effective measure which has lead to significant decrease in infection rates. There are of course parameters like the type of mask.
- mathverse 5y ago
  How many people are even using those masks correctly? There's a lot of people going around with old and contaminated masks or wearing them improperly.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    "People aren't using them properly" is an argument for better education, not ditching the things.
    - mathverse 5y ago
      And I have mentioned ditching the things where? It's an argument for not "relying that much" on an unreliable use of such tool like masks.
dageshi 5y ago
I imagine they mean, avoid leaving home as much as possible.
ChuckNorris89 5y ago
>Masks have a very modest impact on transmission. Please stop propagating this BS. If someone positive coughs in your direction but wears an FFP2 mask on and so do you, then the chance of you getting infected is much lower. That's why it's mandatory in Austria and why healthcare workers wear them, not because it's fashionable but to limit the spread of airborne disease which COVID is one. Granted, Austria failed to contain the spread of COVID, but not due to the FFP2 enforcement but mostly due to skeptics who refused vaccination, social distancing and other measures, plus lots of pointless and half-assed measures from the government that were more of a theater and were enforced too late in an attempt to not piss people off and not hurt the economy which turned into a self fulfilling prophecy and a negative feedback loop, creating more skeptics and more infectious in the long run.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- merpnderp 5y ago
  "Please stop propagating this BS." At least in the US hardly anyone has or uses FFP2 level masks (N95 here) and the government has not promoted them (except on the last page of the CDC page on masks with half a sentence saying they're better). And the data on cloth masks does show their effectiveness is much lower than initially advertised. If the parent was speaking about the US, then they weren't propagating BS, as hardly anyone speaks of N95's when talking about masks. I assume it is because the government ran a massive ad campaign to get people to not wear them in the beginning.
  - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
    > I assume it is because the government ran a massive ad campaign to get people to not wear them in the beginning. They said the the same thing in Europe, in order to prevent opportunists from scalping them and the general population from hoarding them, so the healthcare workers would have access to them. IMHO, intentionally deceiving the population in order to save masks for healthcare workers was a terribly short sighted move which cause more long term damage to the credibility of the governments when they pushed for compulsory mask wearing after the supply caught up. They could have been upfront about it and use every possible legal and gray-area channel to secure mask supplies before they could fall into the hands of opportunists, but instead, they chose to lie about it and treat everyone like dumb kids hoping people would fall for it. They did the same thing again when Israel announced the protection of the Pfizer vaccine is wailing and a third dose is needed but the EU governments said that's not needed, and then backtracking on that statement a few months later and now making it mandatory. Do you know the story of the boy who cried wolf? Yeah, this back-and-forth on the efficacy of masks and vaccines is exactly the ammunition Covid-deniers and anti-vaxxers needed and the useless governments just gave it to them on a silver platter.
vaylian 5y ago
> Masks have a very modest impact on transmission Do you have a source for that?
- mrtesthah 5y ago
  Certainly if you wear loose fitting cloth masks like most people I see; they need to be FFP2-rated or N95, tight-fitting, and sanitized (heat, ozone, or UVC, etc.) or replaced between uses. Otherwise in general, they do work. https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-here-are-49-scientific-studies-that-explain-why-they-do/ https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-her...
- crimsoneer 5y ago
  https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302 https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302 It's probably about a 10% reduction in incidence. Which I guess is quite modest in comparison to, say, vaccines.
- incrudible 5y ago
  The (to my knowledge) largest study on community transmission finds ~10% reduction: https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_Second_Stage_Paper_20211108.pdf.pdf https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publicati... There are many other studies that find no or modest reduction. We need to accept lower results as an upper bound to effectiveness, especially when it comes to how the average person uses masks, versus how a health care professional.
  - chimprich 5y ago
    I had a quick scan of that paper and read "The results in all specifications are the same: we estimate a roughly 9% decline in symptomatic seroprevalence in the treatment group (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) = 0.91 [0.82, 1.00]) for a 29 percentage point increase in mask wearing over 8 weeks." So when mask use increased 29%, symptom prevalence reduced by 9%? That doesn't seem quite the same argument as the one you're making. > We need to accept lower results as an upper bound to effectiveness Why?
dathinab 5y ago
More like: > Wear mask and stay (in your) home. As in no contact > contact outside > contact inside Also assuming you are not in tight crowds outside or "outside but bad ventilated" areas (e.g. tends): longer contact outside without mask > longer contact inside with mask Not because masks don't work but because being outside has such a strong effect (assuming you are not in a crowded area, or some area which wrt. ventilation is only pseudo-outside or you stick very close to other persons outside of a crowd, or you insist to always be direct facing a person instead of being beside that person etc.) Or in other words beside outside being good ventilated you also have often less chances to directly cough at the face of a person, as you e.g. walk besides a person when taking a walk and activities being less crowded and as such it's easier to cough in a direction where no one is close by. It also means that there are good reasons to ware masks if you are in a crowded area outside, it's just most "outside activities" are not in very crowded areas and hence outside infection rates are way lower. We are also less outside then inside etc. Or at least that is how I understand it.
smallerfish 5y ago
> Masks have a very modest impact on transmission. False. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883189/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883189/
xphilter 5y ago
If masks didn’t work, surly we’d all have anecdotes of people catching covid while wearing a masks. I literally have not heard of a single story. Everyone I know who has caught covid was maskless (not even stories of people wearing masks poorly).
teekert 5y ago
"maximize ventilation", have you seen the gas prices lately ;)
corinroyal 5y ago
Actually, a recent metastudy found that masking reduces transmission by 53%, which is huge. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20211118/mask-wearing-cuts-new-covid-cases-study https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20211118/mask-wearing-cuts-n...

mathverse 5y ago

I am sorry but no. I have already lost 2 years of my life just following and obeying the orders. Enough is enough. This is not on me to solve. The government had enough time to convince everyone to vaccinate or prepare the healthcare sector for influx of cases of unvaccinated.

kingkawn 5y ago
You’ll learn the hard way then not to address nature at your convenience
Mistletoe 5y ago
It’s wild how few campaigns I am seeing for vaccination. I want 1950s era propaganda posters on every street corner and at every tv and radio break until we get these numbers to 100%.
- Bud 5y ago
  We had plenty of posters and advertising on this. Vaccination rates were great in early 2021, before an entire major political party decided to cynically pretend that fighting vaccination was somehow defending "freedom".
Dumblydorr 5y ago
How was the government supposed to convince anti-vaxxers to do what they believe contains micro chips or what they believe is worse than the virus itself? This isn't on the government, this is on anti-vaxxers for swallowing garbage information, hook line and sinker. And you didn't lose 2 years of your life. You're alive, you didn't die due to the pandemic, did you? That's much less than can be said for 5 million others, mostly older or unhealthy to begin with. They're dead because people didn't follow the guidelines early and it kept spreading and spreading. So, be grateful you're not dead, and do your part to increase collective resilience.
- mathverse 5y ago
  >How was the government supposed to convince anti-vaxxers to do what they believe contains micro chips or what they believe is worse than the virus itself? This isn't on the government, this is on anti-vaxxers for swallowing garbage information, hook line and sinker. This is solely on the government. It's immoral to keep vaccinated people in uncertainty and include them in any sort of lockdowns. >And you didn't lose 2 years of your life. You're alive, you didn't die due to the pandemic, did you? That's much less than can be said for 5 million others, mostly older or unhealthy to begin with. They're dead because people didn't follow the guidelines early and it kept spreading and spreading. This is not arguing in good faith. Healthy people in their 30s are not dying. Of all the 0.5m children infected in Israel only 200 were severe cases. >So, be grateful you're not dead, and do your part to increase collective resilience. I already did my part. Now my part will be attending a demo with all those "antivaxx / 5G chips believing people" and I will fight for my right to live a normal life.

impendingchange 5y ago

But it is the common cold: https://www.bitchute.com/video/UvuXzdVwj3ed/ https://www.bitchute.com/video/UvuXzdVwj3ed/ Get lots of Vitamin D from sunlight and be sure to take your Vitamin C. Breathe lots of fresh, unfiltered air. Keep the curve low.

nojito 5y ago
The common cold doesn't flood ICUs and pushed them to 125% capacity.

throwawaylinux 5y ago

Politicians have had time to start improving healthcare systems. Corporations that currently pay no taxes could help to fund this stuff. Billions of dollars of war industry purchases could have been slightly delayed. Billionaires could have chipped in a bit more, and we could have started ratcheting up capacities and capabilities of hospitals and healthcare systems. But no it seems that's all teetering on the brink of collapse for some astounding reason. So it's become quite clear to me that we are not, in fact, "all in this together". The situation is that the ruling class are in it for themselves, and they are demanding everybody else lose their jobs and businesses and we comply and mask up and shut ourselves in, so that they all may carry on as usual and refuse to invest our own money in our healthcare systems. Given what we know about this situation now, I think perhaps a better approach might be to instead not comply with these demands. Ridicule and hound and vote out anybody who insists that after two years of complying we have to continue to shut ourselves away because the healthcare systems they have not adequately invested in are still on the brink of collapse.

danaris 5y ago
I'm sorry, what? "The ruling class has proven that they don't actually care about anyone else"—yes, that's a reasonable message to take away from the past year and a half... "...So we should stop abiding by all the good medical advice and just party" how the hell do you come to that conclusion? The reasonable conclusion to come to from your first two paragraphs is something along the lines of "So we should protest the politicians who want to deny the science, boycott the companies that are actively making things worse, and push for real societal change that prioritizes human lives and well-being over corporate profits." You're basically saying, "The very wealthy just want us all to shut up and die, but screw them! We should all get out there and die very loudly!"
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  I'm not sure what it is exactly you are unclear on, but that is certainly not what I am saying. I'm saying what I wrote no more and no less. If you want to reduce it to a quip it would be the exact opposite, we should get out and live.