4 ms·

> wearing masks Reasonable at first. Once it was known that the virus is transmitted via aerosols then forcing masks was the wrong thing to do, specially on ch

> wearing masks Reasonable at first. Once it was known that the virus is transmitted via aerosols then forcing masks was the wrong thing to do, specially on children. Useless and damaging. > minimizing in-person interactions What benefit did it achieve? As a quarantine it was too leaky and it also led to mass psychological distress. > funding medical research What medical research? For some reason, the most obvious approach, repurposed drugs, was nowhere in sight. If anything demonizing it was the official policy (ie. the smear campaign against ivermectin).

wewtyflakes 3y ago
> Useless and damaging. This seems like a ridiculous thing to say; both useless _and_ damaging? Even if one of these things were true, they can't _both_ be true. > What benefit did it achieve? Minimizing the spread of covid. > What medical research? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed > the most obvious approach, repurposed drugs, was nowhere in sight Didn't the J&J vaccine use a more traditional approach? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine Also, people tried repurposing drugs (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19). So your claim of "nowhere in sight" is incorrect.
- toast0 3y ago
  > Didn't the J&J vaccine use a more traditional approach? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine Not really. This was the first widely deployed modified adenovirus vaccine. Not the first developed, but if I'm remembering correctly, none of the others made it out of trials.
- OCASMv2 3y ago
  > This seems like a ridiculous thing to say; both useless _and_ damaging? Even if one of these things were true, they can't _both_ be true. Of course they can: useless at preventing disease, damaging to the social development of children. > Minimizing the spread of covid. Did it? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed The result: injections sold as vaccines that don't do what you expect a vaccine to do: stop transmission. > Also, people tried repurposing drugs (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19). Individuals did, not the government, and the former were punished by the latter for it.
  - MeImCounting 3y ago
    "noun 1. a substance used to stimulate immunity to a particular infectious disease or pathogen" Vaccines activate immunity against specific pathogens, reducing infection severity and transmission risk. COVID-19 vaccines decrease disease severity and transmission probability. This whole thing of "they arent vaccines" is bologna and everyone knows it
    - OCASMv2 3y ago
      With such a broad definition, sneezing on somebody would be considered vaccination.
      - MeImCounting 3y ago
        This is actually not too far off from how rudimentary vaccines work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine "Vaccine" is actually a pretty broad term and loses usefulness in these conversations outside of its use as a rhetorical tool. Yes MRNA vaccines are vaccines and yes they are different from other types of vaccine such as Live-attenuated vaccines, conjugate vaccines and others.
        OCASMv2 3y ago
        They're also by design inferior to other vaccines since they only target one specific antigen, rendering them useless very quickly against highly mutagenic viruses (like coronaviruses).
        MeImCounting 3y ago
        The quick adaptability of mRNA vaccines to new variants is a key advantage, not a weakness. Their rapid development and adaptability make them probably the best type of vaccine for fighting quickly mutating viruses. This is shown by the rapidity and relative ease of development and deployment of bivalent vaccines. mRNA vaccines are one of the great technological triumphs of the American industry and science apparatus.
cyberax 3y ago
> Reasonable at first. Once it was known that the virus is transmitted via aerosols then forcing masks was the wrong thing to do, specially on children. Useless and damaging. And that's the reason we have governments for. So that people like you can't do unlimited damage. You can privately hate the government, but as long as you follow the rules, the damage is contained. Masks saved people, including children: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9968482/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9968482/
- OCASMv2 3y ago
  > this paper does not estimate the effect of wearing masks, but rather the effect of mandating mask wearing This study doesn't control its variables properly. Places with no mask mandates are also places where people typicaly didn't take other precautions such as avoiding mass gatherings.
  - cyberax 3y ago
    And? You mentioned that masks were harmful to children, without citing a single reliable source.
    - OCASMv2 3y ago
      "The hypotheses for the influence of face mask wearing on emotion recognition were partially supported. Results showed that whereas anger was better recognized, happiness and sadness were impaired in their recognition. ... Therefore, the differential impact of face masks on emotion recognition can have an effect on children’s social interactions. For example, better recognition of anger can facilitate greater physical and social distance from one another (Calbi et al., 2021). On the other hand, lower recognition of happiness and sadness can be potentially detrimental for children’s social interactions. Happiness has been identified as key to boosting social interactions (Quoidbach et al., 2019), whereas recognizing sadness in others is important to display appropriate interpersonal emotion regulation (Kwon & López-Pérez, 2022)." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9637007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9637007/
    - 3y ago
FireBeyond 3y ago
> What medical research? For some reason, the most obvious approach, repurposed drugs, was nowhere in sight. What? The vaccines we do have are because we have vaccines for coronaviruses in animals and had nearly a decade of work for using them in humans. > the smear campaign against ivermectin The smear campaign against a drug that did not, does not, and could not work, because it is an antiparasitic, not an antiviral? Combatting disinformation (and at a certain point, it became deliberate disinformation) is not a "smear campaign".
- OCASMv2 3y ago
  > The vaccines we do have are because we have vaccines for coronaviruses in animals and had nearly a decade of work for using them in humans. Which vaccine specifically are you talking about here? > The smear campaign against a drug that did not, does not, and could not work, because it is an antiparasitic, not an antiviral? I see you haven't checked out the research that's been done this past decade: https://portlandpress.com/biochemj/article/443/3/851/80615/Ivermectin-is-a-specific-inhibitor-of-importin https://portlandpress.com/biochemj/article/443/3/851/80615/I...
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    > I see you haven't checked out the research that's been done this past decade: The first reference to that study? "Ivermectin for COVID-19: Addressing Potential Bias and Medical Fraud" > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8774052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8774052/ "The results suggest that the significant effect of ivermectin on survival was dependent on largely poor-quality studies. ... This highlights the need for rigorous quality assessments, for authors to share patient-level data, and for efforts to avoid publication bias for registered studies. These steps are vital to facilitate accurate conclusions on clinical treatments." More specifically, to your point, and the research you cite, what actually appears to be happening: > [patients] who were infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (five with AIDS-defining conditions) and harbored Strongyloides stercoralis received ivermectin on a compassionate basis for persistent intestinal infection. Strongyloides. A _parasite_. I hate the "I did my research" trope and everything surrounding it.

wewtyflakes 3y ago

> Useless and damaging. This seems like a ridiculous thing to say; both useless _and_ damaging? Even if one of these things were true, they can't _both_ be true. > What benefit did it achieve? Minimizing the spread of covid. > What medical research? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed > the most obvious approach, repurposed drugs, was nowhere in sight Didn't the J&J vaccine use a more traditional approach? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine Also, people tried repurposing drugs (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19). So your claim of "nowhere in sight" is incorrect.

toast0 3y ago
> Didn't the J&J vaccine use a more traditional approach? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janssen_COVID-19_vaccine Not really. This was the first widely deployed modified adenovirus vaccine. Not the first developed, but if I'm remembering correctly, none of the others made it out of trials.
OCASMv2 3y ago
> This seems like a ridiculous thing to say; both useless _and_ damaging? Even if one of these things were true, they can't _both_ be true. Of course they can: useless at preventing disease, damaging to the social development of children. > Minimizing the spread of covid. Did it? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed The result: injections sold as vaccines that don't do what you expect a vaccine to do: stop transmission. > Also, people tried repurposing drugs (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19). Individuals did, not the government, and the former were punished by the latter for it.
- MeImCounting 3y ago
  "noun 1. a substance used to stimulate immunity to a particular infectious disease or pathogen" Vaccines activate immunity against specific pathogens, reducing infection severity and transmission risk. COVID-19 vaccines decrease disease severity and transmission probability. This whole thing of "they arent vaccines" is bologna and everyone knows it
  - OCASMv2 3y ago
    With such a broad definition, sneezing on somebody would be considered vaccination.
    - MeImCounting 3y ago
      This is actually not too far off from how rudimentary vaccines work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine "Vaccine" is actually a pretty broad term and loses usefulness in these conversations outside of its use as a rhetorical tool. Yes MRNA vaccines are vaccines and yes they are different from other types of vaccine such as Live-attenuated vaccines, conjugate vaccines and others.
      - OCASMv2 3y ago
        They're also by design inferior to other vaccines since they only target one specific antigen, rendering them useless very quickly against highly mutagenic viruses (like coronaviruses).
        MeImCounting 3y ago
        The quick adaptability of mRNA vaccines to new variants is a key advantage, not a weakness. Their rapid development and adaptability make them probably the best type of vaccine for fighting quickly mutating viruses. This is shown by the rapidity and relative ease of development and deployment of bivalent vaccines. mRNA vaccines are one of the great technological triumphs of the American industry and science apparatus.

cyberax 3y ago

> Reasonable at first. Once it was known that the virus is transmitted via aerosols then forcing masks was the wrong thing to do, specially on children. Useless and damaging. And that's the reason we have governments for. So that people like you can't do unlimited damage. You can privately hate the government, but as long as you follow the rules, the damage is contained. Masks saved people, including children: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9968482/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9968482/

OCASMv2 3y ago
> this paper does not estimate the effect of wearing masks, but rather the effect of mandating mask wearing This study doesn't control its variables properly. Places with no mask mandates are also places where people typicaly didn't take other precautions such as avoiding mass gatherings.
- cyberax 3y ago
  And? You mentioned that masks were harmful to children, without citing a single reliable source.
  - OCASMv2 3y ago
    "The hypotheses for the influence of face mask wearing on emotion recognition were partially supported. Results showed that whereas anger was better recognized, happiness and sadness were impaired in their recognition. ... Therefore, the differential impact of face masks on emotion recognition can have an effect on children’s social interactions. For example, better recognition of anger can facilitate greater physical and social distance from one another (Calbi et al., 2021). On the other hand, lower recognition of happiness and sadness can be potentially detrimental for children’s social interactions. Happiness has been identified as key to boosting social interactions (Quoidbach et al., 2019), whereas recognizing sadness in others is important to display appropriate interpersonal emotion regulation (Kwon & López-Pérez, 2022)." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9637007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9637007/
  - 3y ago

FireBeyond 3y ago

> What medical research? For some reason, the most obvious approach, repurposed drugs, was nowhere in sight. What? The vaccines we do have are because we have vaccines for coronaviruses in animals and had nearly a decade of work for using them in humans. > the smear campaign against ivermectin The smear campaign against a drug that did not, does not, and could not work, because it is an antiparasitic, not an antiviral? Combatting disinformation (and at a certain point, it became deliberate disinformation) is not a "smear campaign".

OCASMv2 3y ago
> The vaccines we do have are because we have vaccines for coronaviruses in animals and had nearly a decade of work for using them in humans. Which vaccine specifically are you talking about here? > The smear campaign against a drug that did not, does not, and could not work, because it is an antiparasitic, not an antiviral? I see you haven't checked out the research that's been done this past decade: https://portlandpress.com/biochemj/article/443/3/851/80615/Ivermectin-is-a-specific-inhibitor-of-importin https://portlandpress.com/biochemj/article/443/3/851/80615/I...
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  > I see you haven't checked out the research that's been done this past decade: The first reference to that study? "Ivermectin for COVID-19: Addressing Potential Bias and Medical Fraud" > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8774052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8774052/ "The results suggest that the significant effect of ivermectin on survival was dependent on largely poor-quality studies. ... This highlights the need for rigorous quality assessments, for authors to share patient-level data, and for efforts to avoid publication bias for registered studies. These steps are vital to facilitate accurate conclusions on clinical treatments." More specifically, to your point, and the research you cite, what actually appears to be happening: > [patients] who were infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (five with AIDS-defining conditions) and harbored Strongyloides stercoralis received ivermectin on a compassionate basis for persistent intestinal infection. Strongyloides. A _parasite_. I hate the "I did my research" trope and everything surrounding it.