Jump to content

Coronavirus - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

Sorry cant somehow link this.

 

According to a report in the Telegraph

 

Haedline

 

"Face masks unlikely to halt omicron variant’s spread, warns scientist"

 

The reasoning is that despite them still being mandatory in Scotland they did little to stop or lower the spread of the delta variant.

 

Here is what was said by Jim Naismith, director of the Rosalind Franklin Institute and professor of structural biology at the University of Oxford

 

"Despite the rules, the country saw a surge of Covid infections in the autumn, similar to rises seen in England."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Damn!  :(


And I didn't even make the top 5!


Any chance we could have a time out here guys?


I don't like it when the grown-ups are squabbling... :cry:

What grown ups ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Padders said:

What grown ups ?

😂

That's a fair comment. I should have dropped it and left the thread ages ago. 

But here I am, posting about how I should have stopped posting ages ago. 🤔

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

Sorry cant somehow link this.

 

According to a report in the Telegraph

 

Haedline

 

"Face masks unlikely to halt omicron variant’s spread, warns scientist"

 

The reasoning is that despite them still being mandatory in Scotland they did little to stop or lower the spread of the delta variant.

 

Here is what was said by Jim Naismith, director of the Rosalind Franklin Institute and professor of structural biology at the University of Oxford

 

"Despite the rules, the country saw a surge of Covid infections in the autumn, similar to rises seen in England."

Ive always failed to see how not wearing one makes things better, cases drop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, melthebell said:

Ive always failed to see how not wearing one makes things better, cases drop?

Ive always failed to see how wearing one is a problem , exemptions aside 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Melthe bell. The onus is on the side making the claim that they work not the other way round and so far the data shows they dont contribute much to combating the spread.

 

Of course the pro maskers will say they work as they believe all they are told.

 

As for the problems with wearing one, do you wear a nappy just in case? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

Melthe bell. The onus is on the side making the claim that they work not the other way round and so far the data shows they dont contribute much to combating the spread.

 

Of course the pro maskers will say they work as they believe all they are told.

 

As for the problems with wearing one, do you wear a nappy just in case? 

Does it cause you a problem wearing one ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

Melthe bell. The onus is on the side making the claim that they work not the other way round and so far the data shows they dont contribute much to combating the spread.

 

Of course the pro maskers will say they work as they believe all they are told.

 

As for the problems with wearing one, do you wear a nappy just in case? 

This says it all as far as im concerned

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6cTDGqcUp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DANMASK study and the big study in Bangladesh both showed less transmission with wide scale mask use as part of mitigation measures

The countries that have managed the disease best like Japan and S Korea and Singapore have very near ubiquitous mask use

Edited by butlers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, onewheeldave said:

But some data is highly usable, such as that concerning what percentages of non-vulnerable people are at risk from covid, and, on that, even the data from the mainstream narrative, which, IMO, is exaggerative, says it is very low: from that conclusions can be drawn.

You're starting from the point of view that things have been driven by the mainstream narrative and that therefore things that go against this are more reliable while things that go with it are less reliable. As a general theory, I think there is something to this. It does make sense to think about any biases in a reporting system whether the biases arise through corruption or otherwise. Although if you think the biases are huge then I still think one will be lucky to reach any firm conclusion. One problem, for our conversation, is that I don't accept that all the forces at work are served by exaggeration of the size of the problem. Governments around the World are generally interested in minimising the size of the problem experienced on their watch. I think the deaths attributed to covid are manipulated to be low. It's my view that they are 'shaded' low in the open, Western democracies and are massive understatements in many other countries. So there we go again, something I suspect you think is obvious turns out to be something I don't believe.

 

So back to the registration of deaths. The number and timing of deaths is a relatively simple exercise in counting using an established system that has been running for many years. Unless we have a really, really corrupted system, I think the number and timings of death will be relatively reliable. You've said you think the ONS is making a genuine effort to get the right number. How and where are they losing or gaining deaths without knowing it?

 

Anyway, as perhaps you suspect, I think the excess mortality figures are quite informative. I don't want to keep flogging the same argument but if you feel like doing me a favour would you take a peek at the excess mortality(%) figures on a weekly basis at https://ourworldindata.org . I won't ask you what you think of this data but it will only take a few minutes to pull up the data for some supposedly high covid countries (eg Italy, the US and UK) and compare them to some low covid countries (eg Norway, Finland and New Zealand). See what you think it means. Better yet, have a think what you would expect to see before you take a peek. Sorry, I don't know a way of posting the graph for you here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

butlers

 

You mean this study.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4586/rr-6

 

"That suggests that all mitigating measures that have been taken in Denmark to prevent a second wave had no tangible effect on the spread of Covid-19. Those measures included a universal mask mandate."

 

And this one which deals primarily with surgical masks

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-y

 

They have also been recent scientific reports that state that the methods used to evaluate the effectivness (aerosol spraying etc) has be scientifically flawed.

 

It seems that the data available that shows they have very little effect from Scotland, Denmark and other places is somehow wrong!

Edited by Dromedary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something for you to get your teeth into.  Looks like the jurys out on masks.

 

"47 studies confirm ineffectiveness of masks for COVID and 32 more confirm their negative health effects"

 

An extract from some of the studies.

“Exercise with facemask; Are we handling a devil’s sword?” – A physiological hypothesis

No evidence to suggest that wearing a mask during exercise offers any benefit from the droplet transfer from the virus.
“Exercising with facemasks may reduce available Oxygen and increase air trapping preventing substantial carbon dioxide exchange. The hypercapnic hypoxia may potentially increase acidic environment,cardiac overload, anaerobic metabolism and renal overload, which may substantially aggravate the underlying pathology of established chronic diseases”
 

Airborne coronavirus particle (<0.125 micron) will pass directly through a N95 face mask.

SIZE OF THE CORONAVIRUS: Size can vary but all are smaller than 0.3 micron .
“Human coronaviruses measure between 0.1 and 0.2 microns, which is one to two times below the cutoff” This “cut off” is referring to the size an N95 mask can trap. Most of us, are not using MEDICAL or regular N95s.

FACE MASK SIDE EFFECTS AND HEALTH IMPLICATIONS

1. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery
Face mask side effects include lowered oxygen levels.
This study proved that surgeons that wore a mask in surgery for an hour + had significant reductions in blood oxygen saturation.
This is relevant because most of us are being made to wear face masks at work for the whole shift, long journeys on public transport, and when we are in a public places doing shopping etc. and this requires a degree of exertion that is not taken into account.
“Considering our findings, pulse rates of the surgeon’s increase and SpO2 decrease after the first hour.”
Decreasing oxygen and increasing carbon dioxide in the bloodstream stimulates a compensatory response in the respiratory centers of the brain. These changes in blood gases result in increases in both frequency and depth of breaths. This exposes another risk – if your mask traps some virus you are breathing more hence increasing viral load and exposure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.