Latest numbers on U.S. service members discharged for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine:
— Svetlana Shkolnikova (@svetashko) April 27, 2022
Army: 345
Navy: 798
Air Force: 287
Marine Corps: 1,968
Latest numbers on U.S. service members discharged for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine:
— Svetlana Shkolnikova (@svetashko) April 27, 2022
Army: 345
Navy: 798
Air Force: 287
Marine Corps: 1,968
Mayor Pete & Joe Biden are going to the White House Correspondent’s Dinner this weekend, which doesn’t require masks, while Biden administration simultaneously argues you have to wear masks on planes, trains & buses. @BretBaier filets Mayor Pete here: pic.twitter.com/PrLY1ljI3j
— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) April 28, 2022
Just a heads up for those running for School Board in the State of Florida. If you voted to mask our kids we are putting these signs right next to your political signs so that parents can make their informed decisions!#RNHAFL #RNHAFLInAction pic.twitter.com/ZRMbmjWucZ
— Republican National Hispanic Assembly of FL (@RNHAFL) April 30, 2022
JUST IN: CDC Restates Recommendation For Masks On Planes, Trains - https://t.co/0DJCof9JCM pic.twitter.com/uBiyFO2ZEN
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) May 3, 2022
Off to Eastern Europe Thursday and will enjoy my first trip with no mask on the US end. The CDC can 'restate' whatever they like. As long as they can't 'reINSTATE' their absurd nonsense, I am breathing free.Doc Holliday said:JUST IN: CDC Restates Recommendation For Masks On Planes, Trains - https://t.co/0DJCof9JCM pic.twitter.com/uBiyFO2ZEN
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) May 3, 2022
I ask @CDCDirector why she thinks the mask mandate for US citizens on planes is still needed but NOT Title 42 at the border?
— Elex Michaelson (@Elex_Michaelson) May 7, 2022
"Masks are very different...they belong in different buckets...We now have the tools to combat this pandemic...we no longer felt Title 42 was necessary" pic.twitter.com/JYeDtH7qvb
Good way to not answer a question.Cobretti said:I ask @CDCDirector why she thinks the mask mandate for US citizens on planes is still needed but NOT Title 42 at the border?
— Elex Michaelson (@Elex_Michaelson) May 7, 2022
"Masks are very different...they belong in different buckets...We now have the tools to combat this pandemic...we no longer felt Title 42 was necessary" pic.twitter.com/JYeDtH7qvb
Bill Gates on Covid 19.
— THENO1WAFFLER (@TheNo1Waffler) May 5, 2022
“We didn’t understand that it’s a fairly low fatality rate & that it’s a disease mainly in the elderly, kind of like flu is, although a bit different than that.” pic.twitter.com/qkJbOP05ww
Coronavirus wave this fall and winter could potentially infect 100 million, White House warns https://t.co/9SNQzGK1zz
— WXII 12 News (@WXII) May 7, 2022
Canon said:
Update: US airlines are free again….domestically. Transitting through Frankfurt on United, they applied German mask mandate. If you want a nice spot with ZERO Covid restrictions, however, come to Poland. I forgot how great this country is. It's like Germany without the snobs.
Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Listen to this crazy Broadway performer flip out over someone not wearing a mask correctly in the audience. These mask people are truly insane. pic.twitter.com/VDz6TCsOpS
— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) May 11, 2022
This is like an endorsement… https://t.co/NYiZqlWo1x
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) May 16, 2022
Cobretti said:Coronavirus wave this fall and winter could potentially infect 100 million, White House warns https://t.co/9SNQzGK1zz
— WXII 12 News (@WXII) May 7, 2022
the midtermicron variant is coming
Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
Sam gets triggered by people who know facts, BUbearinARKSam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
Please explain otherwise.Sam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
LOL... Sam thinking he knows more about masks than a surgeon that wears one daily in his career.Sam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
I know. Accepting that a 0.3 micron virus that is aerosolized and not in droplets can ne tough to accept after all the changing information over the last few years.Oldbear83 said:Sam gets triggered by people who know facts, BUbearinARKSam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
Take the win and enjoy.
BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
We knew in May of 2020 that the virus was spread via aerosolization rather than droplets.BUbearinARK said:I know. Accepting that a 0.3 micron virus that is aerosolized and not in droplets can ne tough to accept after all the changing information over the last few years.Oldbear83 said:Sam gets triggered by people who know facts, BUbearinARKSam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
Take the win and enjoy.
Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.BUbearinARK said:Please explain otherwise.Sam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.Sam Lowry said:Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.BUbearinARK said:Please explain otherwise.Sam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.
Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:
Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."
Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."
Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
comparing mask wearing in public to mask wearing in a surgery is just foolish.BUbearinARK said:The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.Sam Lowry said:Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.BUbearinARK said:Please explain otherwise.Sam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.
Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:
Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."
Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."
Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
Read the entire study and not just the memo put out by stanford. Read it critically and thoroughly. And then tell me if this was a good 'trial'. I didn't see informed consent (which is the cornerstone of clinical trials--I've run them in the past). I didn't see outcomes other than seropositovity in symptomatic (ie morbidity/mortality)
And "The intervention led to a 9.3% reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 sero- prevalence (which corresponds to a 103 fewer symptomatic seropositives) and an 11.9% reduction in the prevalence of COVID-like symptoms, corresponding to 1,587 fewer people reporting these symptoms.)". So in 350K people studied (spied upon) there was a difference of 100 symptomatic positives?
Now superimpose that study on the US.
I'll be sure if I'm old and ever find myself in a remote Bangledeshi village in an epidemic, I'll mask up
Study
https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf
The study I posted shows that there are no studies strong enough to dictate policy for a wider population.
oh, and btw, the rate in my county right now is 2/100000. More likely to get melanoma than corona. so wear your sun protection.
Because it makes low-information hystericals feel good and virtuous.ShooterTX said:comparing mask wearing in public to mask wearing in a surgery is just foolish.BUbearinARK said:The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.Sam Lowry said:Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.BUbearinARK said:Please explain otherwise.Sam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.
Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:
Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."
Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."
Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
Read the entire study and not just the memo put out by stanford. Read it critically and thoroughly. And then tell me if this was a good 'trial'. I didn't see informed consent (which is the cornerstone of clinical trials--I've run them in the past). I didn't see outcomes other than seropositovity in symptomatic (ie morbidity/mortality)
And "The intervention led to a 9.3% reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 sero- prevalence (which corresponds to a 103 fewer symptomatic seropositives) and an 11.9% reduction in the prevalence of COVID-like symptoms, corresponding to 1,587 fewer people reporting these symptoms.)". So in 350K people studied (spied upon) there was a difference of 100 symptomatic positives?
Now superimpose that study on the US.
I'll be sure if I'm old and ever find myself in a remote Bangledeshi village in an epidemic, I'll mask up
Study
https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf
The study I posted shows that there are no studies strong enough to dictate policy for a wider population.
oh, and btw, the rate in my county right now is 2/100000. More likely to get melanoma than corona. so wear your sun protection.
When the human body is opened up in a surgical procedure, the body is denied most of it's primary defenses, and foreign contaminants are given direct access to enter the body. The skin, nostril, mucus layers... so many defenses are completely bypassed because of a surgical incision. This is why a surgical room and all those who enter that space are required to take extra measures to create a sterile environment.
So how on earth is that comparable to a person walking in a park, or even in a crowded room? Are you saying that everyone in that room as massive lacerations which are exposing their internal body to the outside world? If that were true, then we would have far more deaths from major infections, than from Covid.
BUbearinARK said:The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.Sam Lowry said:Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.BUbearinARK said:Please explain otherwise.Sam Lowry said:Incorrect.BUbearinARK said:I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.
Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:
Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."
Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."
Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
Read the entire study and not just the memo put out by stanford. Read it critically and thoroughly. And then tell me if this was a good 'trial'. I didn't see informed consent (which is the cornerstone of clinical trials--I've run them in the past). I didn't see outcomes other than seropositovity in symptomatic (ie morbidity/mortality)
And "The intervention led to a 9.3% reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 sero- prevalence (which corresponds to a 103 fewer symptomatic seropositives) and an 11.9% reduction in the prevalence of COVID-like symptoms, corresponding to 1,587 fewer people reporting these symptoms.)". So in 350K people studied (spied upon) there was a difference of 100 symptomatic positives?
Now superimpose that study on the US.
I'll be sure if I'm old and ever find myself in a remote Bangledeshi village in an epidemic, I'll mask up
Study
https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf
The study I posted shows that there are no studies strong enough to dictate policy for a wider population.
oh, and btw, the rate in my county right now is 2/100000. More likely to get melanoma than corona. so wear your sun protection.
Osodecentx said:My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?quash said:Robert Wilson said:Cobretti said:Wonderful explanation of the real rationale for masking here from @Laurie_Garrett to the National Academy of Medicine in 2018.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 9, 2022
Hat tip @snorman1776. pic.twitter.com/Z3wSWAeFEI
Masks are dehumanizing
Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
Tell it to your surgeon.