bigrod

I'm sorry, but this isn't exactly true. I know they have changed the narrative, but in May, this appeared on the CDC website: “Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene and face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning. We identified several major knowledge gaps requiring further research, most fundamentally an improved characterization of the modes of person-to-person transmission.”

So, I should tell doctors not to use masks for what they were actually designed for? That is your argument? They were designed to keep contaminants from open wounds. They were not designed for virus protection. They stop a virus like a chain link fence stops a fly. Maybe to you the OSHA argument "sounds" like a bunch of crap, but maybe you should check into it for yourself. Or just continue to let the media tell you what to think. So let me ask you this: If we have had time to do studies to do a 180 on the first determination that masks served no useful purpose, to now they are lifesavers, why have we not had time to determine the validity of the PCR test. Why does the public not know how many false positives this test is producing? How can you possibly trust a test when you have no idea what it is giving you? Why have they not had time to isolate the virus? These have always been among the very first steps in the past, so why have the "experts" decided this is not necessary? Isn't this what the "experts" are supposed to be doing? Why are we continuing to believe them instead of holding them accountable?

First of all, we don't really know if that 130k number is correct. It is based on a bad test with unknown validity. If you don't know the rate of false positives, you are not getting good data. Crap in-crap out. Secondly, how many people die from the flu every year? If this was not in our face every single day, do you really think anyone would know there was a new virus? There are many new/mutated viruses every single year - that is how they survive. There are many studies that show that wearing a mask does nothing but break down your own immune system, making you more susceptible to said virus, or anything else. One of the major ways humans rid their own waste is through exhalation. I'm not making this up, it is science. So you are not getting enough oxygen because of the mask, which isn't good for your immune system. You are not able to get rid of your own waste, so you continue to breathe it, which isn't good for your immune system. Not only that, but the mask starts to break down after a few hours, so now you are breathing plastics and fibers into your system. How many people wear the same mask day after day. Shouldn't it be disposed of in a hazardous waste container? There are plenty of videos out there showing that within seconds of putting on a mask, your oxygen level is well below OSHA set limits and your carbon dioxide is in toxic limits. Personally, I didn't believe this when I saw it, so we actually did these tests where I work. Within seconds, people being tested were around 14.5% oxygen (OSHA says 19.5% is the low limit), and their carbon dioxide was well above the 5000 ppm OSHA toxic limit. We couldn't tell what it was because it was higher than the 10,000 limit of our gauge. So we are supposed to make our people wear masks which put us in violation of OSHA standards. All of this because, even though I feel great and rarely get sick, I may potentially be carrying a virus that may potentially infect someone else that may potentially get inside my 6 ft perimeter for a virus with a <0.5% IFR. I guess to some, this makes sense.

You can't seriously believe this, can you? All we are really doing making this last longer than any other virus in history. Also, there is plenty of actual science out there that does indeed say that wearing a mask is doing more harm than good.

If you apply any method of critical thinking at all, it's not a deep dig. It's all right there on the surface. You just have to open your eyes to see it. And yes, there are definitely career liars involved.

I'm not implying any party affiliation. You may take my comments as argumentative, but I am sincere when I say I don't see anything of value in what the WHO or CDC has said. I am not sure why you would ignore the many times they have been wrong just because they work for a 3 letter agency (that is corporate supported, by the way). I guess that's the benefit of living in our country (at least for now). We can agree to disagree.

Who are the people who know what they are talking about? What have you seen from the CDC that has made their numbers so trustworthy? They can't even differentiate people dying from Covid and people dying with Covid. They are still using a highly subjective PCR test (that has not even been standardized) that was not intended for diagnosing disease. It is not testing for a virus, but a RNA sequence, and they still have not determined a false positive rate from this test. They haven't determined that because they aren't even sure what the RNA sequence means because they still have not even isolated the virus. These have always been among the first steps in the past. Why are we deviating from everything we have used in the past for this virus? They have simply not done their due diligence. My question is why, and why are we still listening to them? No matter which side of this you fall on, this nicest thing you can say is that it has been a monumental case of mismanagement. I have heard from many people in my area who have symptoms or contact with people who have positive results that many doctors are not even giving the test anymore because it is so unreliable. And this is how the CDC is deriving it's numbers? The following is an excerpt from a NYT article from 2007 where the PCR test led the false belief of an epidemic. It was the start of a bizarre episode at the medical center: the story of the epidemic that wasn’t. For months, nearly everyone involved thought the medical center had had a huge whooping cough outbreak, with extensive ramifications. Nearly 1,000 health care workers at the hospital in Lebanon, N.H., were given a preliminary test and furloughed from work until their results were in; 142 people, including Dr. Herndon, were told they appeared to have the disease; and thousands were given antibiotics and a vaccine for protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, including some in intensive care. Then, about eight months later, health care workers were dumbfounded to receive an e-mail message from the hospital administration informing them that the whole thing was a false alarm. Not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed with the definitive test, growing the bacterium, Bordetella pertussis, in the laboratory. Instead, it appears the health care workers probably were afflicted with ordinary respiratory diseases like the common cold. Now, as they look back on the episode, epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular (PCR) test that led them astray. At least we are learning from our past mistakes, right? If you care to read the whole article, here is the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html

I think Uwe would be a great dog name. Jurkin probably won't cut it... I had a black lab years ago that I named Sabo, after the Reds third baseman at the time.

No, I'm getting it too.

I sincerely wish him the best, but the things he said he was excited about in their style of play, don't really strike me as his strengths. I guess it depends on how you look at it, but I felt like we played played him at the wing to the detriment of the team in some ways. He never developed a handle or shot that allowed him to pull his defender away from the paint. But, maybe a new coach can get him to play with a passion and desire that we rarely saw during his three years in Bloomington.

You are wrong again. SARS is caused by a coronavirus. Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a viral respiratory disease of zoonotic origin caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-1), the first-identified strain of the SARS coronavirus species severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (SARSr-CoV).

You are absolutely incorrect. I never made that claim. YOU need to validate your "facts."

Yeah, I had written the caption' "This guy is available" under it, but for some reason it didn't show up.

But it was based on data, not just a position: “We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing. They’re following asymptomatic cases. They’re following contacts. And they’re not finding secondary transmission onward. It’s very rare.”

No, you are wrong. I know that's hard for you to take, but you are wrong. There is no Coronavirus vaccine. Why don't we have a vaccine for the common cold? They are trying to develop a vaccine to modify RNA and it has been wildly unsuccessful. So far, in every case, it produces so many antibodies that it starts attacking the host organs. I didn't state anything about how i wanted the facts to come out. You are the one with on here with a crystal clear agenda.

To me, the bigger question is why are we not studying this more when it has been shown to work for similar viruses in the past? Instead, the powers that be are pushing for a vaccine. Coronaviruses have been around since the '60's and there hasn't been a successful vaccine yet. So instead of testing a possible solution that already exists, we are counting on a RNA modifying vaccine for a virus (first time ever) that has been wildly unsuccessful in animal trials. Why? I get the whole idea that these have to be trialed in double blind studies to prove their effectiveness and that people with political or financial ties should not be trusted. Let's just make sure we use the same criteria when the vaccine comes out. Will there be a double blind study? Will all of the government officials and advisors that have financial interests suddenly be ignored?

I’m not a collector, but I have a few handguns. Truthfully, my favorite is probably a Springfield 45. It’s a little heavy to carry, especially fully loaded, but I took is with me to a week-long handgun course at Frontsight in Nevada a few years ago and had a blast. 400 people walking around with handguns and I never felt safer in my life. I think I went through 800 rounds while I was there. Anyway, some of the others in my class had 9mm’s and they had to hit the steel plate targets two, three, sometimes four times to knock them down in our competitions. Mine went down first shot every time. I don’t think it has ever jammed on me. Just a nice, solid handgun. Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners

We all need a little humor about this... Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

C'mon, do you really think people are protesting over face masks? Blows my mind that people think it is selfless to worry about what everyone else is doing. We have been fed this idea that if I get the virus, it's someone else's fault. Viruses have been around for a long time - take responsibility for yourself and do what you think is necessary to be safe. It is selfless to take care of yourself so that you are not a burden to society. Sure, I totally get that in some cases it can't be helped, but why does everyone have to give up their livelihood because some are compromised (many from choosing self-sabotaging habits like smoking, over-eating unhealthy foods, and inactivity)? Those compromised need to quarantine or otherwise protect themselves. I mean, how screwed up are we when we claim to be worried about everyone's health, but fast food restaurants are deemed essential?

All the data I have seen says the opposite. I have seen several surgeons and virologists who have said the virus is too small to be stopped by the masks and that using masks in this way is totally not what they were designed for. I have read many who say the masks are actually making your immune system worse. The problem with this whole thing is that you can find information to justify whatever you want, so there really is not common enemy. We are dealing with a virus that has a 99.8% survival rate. It effects people who mainly have other conditions, just like the seasonal flu. Some people, who have strong immune systems, barely know they have it. The only consistent message is fear, fear ,fear. But, if the masks are effective, by all means, the individual should decide that they are worried about it and wear theirs and not worry about the people who are not wearing them. This whole thing has been about taking power away from the individual. Most of the people who are not wearing masks are not concerned about the mask, they are concerned about what loss of freedom comes next.

No matter which side of the argument you fall on, we know unequivocally that the data cannot be trusted. I read a story today that said a papaya and a goat both tested positive for the virus. The fact is, finding how many false positives a test produces is always one of the first things done, and it has yet to be done for this virus. There are always false positives. But then, they are using a subjective test that both the inventor and the CDC says should not be used for diagnostic purposes, so there's that. There are also studies that indicate that that antibodies are much more prevalent (50 to 85 times) in tested populations than originally thought, which would make this virus even less lethal. I'm not sure where the under reporting is coming from unless it is assumption. I've seen many more reports from doctors, nurses, and administrators saying they are being pressured to label everything Covid. Oddly, once reporting for Covid started ramping up, the seasonal flu numbers magically decreased. So much so, the CDC decided they were no longer going to track it. I guess if the statistics don't say what you want them to, you have to manipulate the data until it does.

What data are you basing this on?

Hard for the filter to catch the creative use of compound curse words

We know that the data cannot be trusted. The data going in is bad, so obviously the data coming out is as well. The CDC's own website said that their case and death totals include both confirmed and "presumptive positive" cases. Recently, they changed presumptive to "probable," but then go on to say it's based on presumptive evidence. Many have already said the symptoms vary wildly from one case to the next, so I'm not sure how accurate presumptive case are. Oddly enough, the CDC's web site also says the RT-PCR test that is being used for diagnosis is not to be used for diagnostic purposes and that they can't guarantee all results are accurate. All pretty odd stuff...