Coronavirus

Elibank

Well-known member
Messages
2,118
Reaction score
1,358
Location
Derbyshire
Ta.



"I don't know" is the most underused phrase throughout this pademic, except in response to "when will we regain all our former freedoms".

All we appear to know is:

the vast majority survive CV19 with no ill effects;
The average age of a death "with CV19" is above the life expectancy;
The NHS coped, but has been retasked to the CV19HS;
tasked to vaccinate 15MM (and counting) folk;
Backlog of properly ill folk coming just now;
Suicide rate appears to have doubled;
Freedoms stolen; Freedoms lost will never be regained
Precedent set (Lockdown and State control over humanity and destiny)
Young people have had their lives destroyed, when they are at next to no risk
Grandpa can't even dance on the table;
Marginalised and old left to die a lonely inhuman death;

China and the heads of tech companies, food delivery companies etc. the laughing all the way to the bank
Economy in tatters ("That's OK, it's the New "Green" Economy, stoopid!")


Interesting vid here, but of course, the "cancellers" won't like what he says because of who he is but worth a half hour IMHO...


Unlocked 🔑 on Twitter: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality https://t.co/lnxvxX2l5x" / Twitter
https://www.pscp.tv/w/1jMJgpZBLOmxL
Un-locked 🔑: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality" (pscp.tv)
Some really good negative stuff there, mate
 

westie4566

Well-known member
Messages
9,232
Reaction score
3,554
Location
Aberdeen
Ta.



"I don't know" is the most underused phrase throughout this pademic, except in response to "when will we regain all our former freedoms".

All we appear to know is:

the vast majority survive CV19 with no ill effects;
The average age of a death "with CV19" is above the life expectancy;
The NHS coped, but has been retasked to the CV19HS;
tasked to vaccinate 15MM (and counting) folk;
Backlog of properly ill folk coming just now;
Suicide rate appears to have doubled;
Freedoms stolen; Freedoms lost will never be regained
Precedent set (Lockdown and State control over humanity and destiny)
Young people have had their lives destroyed, when they are at next to no risk
Grandpa can't even dance on the table;
Marginalised and old left to die a lonely inhuman death;

China and the heads of tech companies, food delivery companies etc. the laughing all the way to the bank
Economy in tatters ("That's OK, it's the New "Green" Economy, stoopid!")


Interesting vid here, but of course, the "cancellers" won't like what he says because of who he is but worth a half hour IMHO...


Unlocked 🔑 on Twitter: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality https://t.co/lnxvxX2l5x" / Twitter
https://www.pscp.tv/w/1jMJgpZBLOmxL
Un-locked 🔑: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality" (pscp.tv)
Sums it up perfectly Seeking.

Thanks for that! (y)

I'm just waiting to see what the next gambit to keep us cowed will be. ****, just as I type this (note the timeline) yet again ANOTHER new variant that threatens the vaccine...headlines in the News at Ten. Now there's shock.

When will everyone realise that we're being taken for a ride on this one?

Edited to add, just listening to the report. They actually slipped in 'new virus' in amongst the new variant talk. I'm shocked.

Subliminal advertising has been banned in this country for decades...yet here's ITV doing it in a News Report.

Feel free everyone to watch back and listen.
 
Last edited:

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
993
Reaction score
663
Location
Lancashire


Signs that the vaccine magic is happening


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
2,057
Reaction score
781
Location
Mid Wales
Ta.



"I don't know" is the most underused phrase throughout this pademic, except in response to "when will we regain all our former freedoms".

All we appear to know is:

the vast majority survive CV19 with no ill effects;
The average age of a death "with CV19" is above the life expectancy;
The NHS coped, but has been retasked to the CV19HS;
tasked to vaccinate 15MM (and counting) folk;
Backlog of properly ill folk coming just now;
Suicide rate appears to have doubled;
Freedoms stolen; Freedoms lost will never be regained
Precedent set (Lockdown and State control over humanity and destiny)
Young people have had their lives destroyed, when they are at next to no risk
Grandpa can't even dance on the table;
Marginalised and old left to die a lonely inhuman death;

China and the heads of tech companies, food delivery companies etc. the laughing all the way to the bank
Economy in tatters ("That's OK, it's the New "Green" Economy, stoopid!")


Interesting vid here, but of course, the "cancellers" won't like what he says because of who he is but worth a half hour IMHO...


Unlocked 🔑 on Twitter: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality https://t.co/lnxvxX2l5x" / Twitter
https://www.pscp.tv/w/1jMJgpZBLOmxL
Un-locked 🔑: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality" (pscp.tv)
I see Karen had her say ;)
 

westie4566

Well-known member
Messages
9,232
Reaction score
3,554
Location
Aberdeen
I see Karen had her say ;)
Do you only get called Karen on the weekend - or is it Wednesdays and Thursdays? 😂

You're the biggest 'Karen' on here. No meat to your posts...just worthless one liners.

BTW, I seriously can't remember the last thing you ever posted re fishing - care to refresh my memory?

At least Seeking was trying to get out among the grayling recently. (y)

Before you slag folk off on a fishing forum...look to your own content first chum:)

I'm fairly sure there are hundreds of groups out there more suited to your C19 input than the SFF....maybe you should hang out there and knock yourself out with the like minded?
 

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
2,057
Reaction score
781
Location
Mid Wales
Do you only get called Karen on the weekend - or is it Wednesdays and Thursdays? 😂

You're the biggest 'Karen' on here. No meat to your posts...just worthless one liners.

BTW, I seriously can't remember the last thing you ever posted re fishing - care to refresh my memory?

At least Seeking was trying to get out among the grayling recently. (y)

Before you slag folk off on a fishing forum...look to your own content first chum:)

I'm fairly sure there are hundreds of groups out there more suited to your C19 input than the SFF....maybe you should hang out there and knock yourself out with the like minded?
and who are you to judge? Set yourself up as some kind of forum god? Expert on coronavirus?

The forum is a place to share ideas, I have posted plenty on here and if you actually checked seekings links that he posted the first person to comment was 'Karen'. But no I bet you don't.

I fish the Wye, I comment on the Wye. Its a river in wales / england where the spring salmon can be fish of a lifetime. Along with asome friends I started the WyeSalmon Association (https://www.wyesalmon.com/) (https://www.facebook.com/WyeSalmonAssociation/) where we volunteer our services to try to improve the river, all for nothing .......

At the moment I'm testing 3 sites on a main tributary for phosphates as we now have lots of 'chicken farms' on the river and the algal bloom in the summer is killing everything while the EA / NRW just look on, it can't be the farmers can it?

I've fished the N Esk, the beat that finishes (d) where the westwater comes in and I've fished the Loups and many other rivers in Scotland but when I come up against people with your encyclopaedic knowledge of fishing I tend to listen.

Get over yourself.
 
Last edited:

seeking

Well-known member
Messages
4,518
Reaction score
1,055
Location
Yorkshire (werethereagodit'dbegod'sowncountry)


Signs that the vaccine magic is happening


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Wow. Vacccine Magic!

"WTF" as someone young enough to be immune to the blasted virus may say.

What an amazing conclusion. "vaccine magic": In the world of confirmation bias, perhaps.

On the basis of that graph (note the lack of error bars) surely there's no statistical manner to distinguish them, bearing in mind natural variation.

Also, doesn't explain the higher than expected ONS death rates in the older cohorts (vaccinated first) ;) but maybe that's within range too...

EDIT: ok, sorry, you were having a laugh... apologies I missed it, and my SOH has gone AWOL together with my former freedoms.
 

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
2,057
Reaction score
781
Location
Mid Wales
More on the controversy of mask wearing

DANMASK-19, the first trial of mask use during covid-19, was “negative.” Masks didn’t work. We knew this before the trial was published because we were told so on social media. The authors were reported by the media to be struggling to find a major journal for their trial.1 Journals weren’t proving brave enough to publish the study, said the authors, and they didn’t make a preprint available.

When the mythical trial was finally published last week in the Annals of Internal Medicine we didn’t need to read it. We already knew its damning verdict on mask wearing. Social media told us as much. Eminent professors of evidence based medicine, Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, confirmed this in an article for the Spectator.2

Except that if you read the published paper you find almost the exact opposite.345 The trial is inconclusive rather than negative, and it points to a likely benefit of mask wearing to the wearer—it did not examine the wider potential benefit of reduced spread of infection to others—and this even in a population where mask wearing isn’t mandatory and prevalence of infection is low. This finding is in keeping with summaries of evidence from Cochrane

The DANMASK-19 trial was performed in Denmark between April and May 2020, a period when public health measures were in effect, but community mask wearing was uncommon and not officially recommended. [1] All participants were encouraged to follow social distancing measures. Those in the intervention arm were additionally encouraged to wear a mask when in public and were provided with a supply of 50 surgical masks and instructions for proper use. Crucially, the outcome measure was rates of infection among those encouraged to wear masks and not in the community as a whole, so the study could not evaluate the most likely benefit of masks, that of preventing spread to other people. The study was designed to find a 50% reduction in infection rates among mask wearers. Among the 4862 participants who completed the trial, infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 of 2392 (1.8%) in the intervention arm and 53 of 2470 (2.1%) in the control group. The between-group difference was −0.3% point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4%; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). This led to the published conclusion: “The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.” The conclusion initially appears obtuse (what is the unambiguous answer to the question—do masks work or not?) but in reality, is very astute and avoids the common error of banally interpreting a statistically non-significant result as a “negative” trial.

source - https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4586

 

seeking

Well-known member
Messages
4,518
Reaction score
1,055
Location
Yorkshire (werethereagodit'dbegod'sowncountry)
More on the controversy of mask wearing

DANMASK-19, the first trial of mask use during covid-19, was “negative.” Masks didn’t work. We knew this before the trial was published because we were told so on social media. The authors were reported by the media to be struggling to find a major journal for their trial.1 Journals weren’t proving brave enough to publish the study, said the authors, and they didn’t make a preprint available.

When the mythical trial was finally published last week in the Annals of Internal Medicine we didn’t need to read it. We already knew its damning verdict on mask wearing. Social media told us as much. Eminent professors of evidence based medicine, Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, confirmed this in an article for the Spectator.2

Except that if you read the published paper you find almost the exact opposite.345 The trial is inconclusive rather than negative, and it points to a likely benefit of mask wearing to the wearer—it did not examine the wider potential benefit of reduced spread of infection to others—and this even in a population where mask wearing isn’t mandatory and prevalence of infection is low. This finding is in keeping with summaries of evidence from Cochrane

The DANMASK-19 trial was performed in Denmark between April and May 2020, a period when public health measures were in effect, but community mask wearing was uncommon and not officially recommended. [1] All participants were encouraged to follow social distancing measures. Those in the intervention arm were additionally encouraged to wear a mask when in public and were provided with a supply of 50 surgical masks and instructions for proper use. Crucially, the outcome measure was rates of infection among those encouraged to wear masks and not in the community as a whole, so the study could not evaluate the most likely benefit of masks, that of preventing spread to other people. The study was designed to find a 50% reduction in infection rates among mask wearers. Among the 4862 participants who completed the trial, infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 of 2392 (1.8%) in the intervention arm and 53 of 2470 (2.1%) in the control group. The between-group difference was −0.3% point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4%; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). This led to the published conclusion: “The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.” The conclusion initially appears obtuse (what is the unambiguous answer to the question—do masks work or not?) but in reality, is very astute and avoids the common error of banally interpreting a statistically non-significant result as a “negative” trial.

source - https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4586

So, more correctly:

Masks have no clear benefit in stopping you getting infected by CV19, and because of the nature of the experiment there was no evidence that wearing a mask was a "positive", so in order to evaluate whether the "mythical benefit" for muzzling the public (at great environmental cost) outweighs the multiple harms i.e. it stops others getting infected if you have CV19...

wait for it... (classic fund-grabbing moment coming)

we need more research.

Quelle surprise


Memento mori
(highly unlikely from CV19)
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
9,400
Reaction score
2,846
The final paragraph of that article is... worrying.

"You might expect a national body like Public Health England to offer the best advice on mask wearing, but PHE is no more after seven years of controversy.18 Its proximity to government and industry, together with funding cuts to local authorities, essentially set it up to fail and now to become the government’s fall guy for a flawed pandemic response. PHE is being replaced by a national institute for health protection, which may well be closer still to government and industry. When accountable national organisations move in the direction of political and commercial interests, public trust is eroded, and the power of unaccountable and self-serving social media platforms only grows."
So, more correctly:

Masks have no clear benefit in stopping you getting infected by CV19, and because of the nature of the experiment there was no evidence that wearing a mask was a "positive", so in order to evaluate whether the "mythical benefit" for muzzling the public (at great environmental cost) outweighs the multiple harms i.e. it stops others getting infected if you have CV19...

wait for it... (classic fund-grabbing moment coming)

we need more research.

Quelle surprise


Memento mori
(highly unlikely from CV19)
You are doing EXACTLY what the author of the article is so frustrated about, here - using data badly, on social media, to serve your agenda. You can't use the absence of a positive to prove a negative, however much you want to.
 

Walleye

Well-known member
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
2,015
Israel is more positive as they have vaccinated a much higher percentage of their population. 80% of over 60's have been vaccinated.
Screenshot_20210217-231336_Opera Touch.jpg
 

Andrew B

Well-known member
Messages
1,655
Reaction score
1,265
Genuine question - I thought the NHS was supporting care homes right now. Are they not?
They just like every other country have had the worst of it imo? No wonder Cuomo in New York is under fire right now for literally trying to cover up the real numbers of deaths in care homes.

So to give an update on my Grandmas situation we’ve had a right time of it, trying to keep her safe since her care home finally succumbed to Covid and for fear of losing her to the system we decided to get the ambulance to bring her to my Aunties who has a newly made nail studio in the garden which they converted into a place where my Auntie and my Niece could take shifts looking after and sleeping there with her.
Her care home had a 100% record and they’ve now had five deaths with another in critical care and worst of all it did seem to coincide with the team who turned up to vaccinate the inhabitants? Assuming they’d been in many other care homes that day it’s really knocked all the staff for six, given as they had done so well for so long in keeping the place safe.
I’ve tried to help myself by going to sit with her but it’s been really upsetting as I can’t attend to personal needs as she can’t even go to the toilet on her own anymore and it’s not surprising she’s confused.
I know others are going through this such as Salar Chaser and its so hard to see anyone deal with.
The care home has finally said they can have her back and unfortunately there’s no one decision to be made here that we are gonna be happy with as it’s taking a toll on my auntie who’s done an amazingly good job in keeping her safe but she’s ready for cracking up.
Never wanted for this to happen to my Grandma as she was so independent and active and her own words when she was mentally with it, was, I don’t want to get to the point where I’m just alive with no quality of life and I never disagreed.
 

Andrew B

Well-known member
Messages
1,655
Reaction score
1,265
Ta.



"I don't know" is the most underused phrase throughout this pademic, except in response to "when will we regain all our former freedoms".

All we appear to know is:

the vast majority survive CV19 with no ill effects;
The average age of a death "with CV19" is above the life expectancy;
The NHS coped, but has been retasked to the CV19HS;
tasked to vaccinate 15MM (and counting) folk;
Backlog of properly ill folk coming just now;
Suicide rate appears to have doubled;
Freedoms stolen; Freedoms lost will never be regained
Precedent set (Lockdown and State control over humanity and destiny)
Young people have had their lives destroyed, when they are at next to no risk
Grandpa can't even dance on the table;
Marginalised and old left to die a lonely inhuman death;

China and the heads of tech companies, food delivery companies etc. the laughing all the way to the bank
Economy in tatters ("That's OK, it's the New "Green" Economy, stoopid!")


Interesting vid here, but of course, the "cancellers" won't like what he says because of who he is but worth a half hour IMHO...


Unlocked 🔑 on Twitter: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality https://t.co/lnxvxX2l5x" / Twitter
https://www.pscp.tv/w/1jMJgpZBLOmxL
Un-locked 🔑: "WATCH: Pathologist Dr John Lee speaks COVID common sense -Why reliance on masks is “medical & scientific nonsense” -Dr Lee lambasts MSM “doom mongers” -Why lockdowns are “a very bad tool for coping with COVID” With @BareReality" (pscp.tv)
Lol ain’t that the truth.
Just to be clear and as I expected their are various things coming out now that shows that the same media that’s been used to “inform” everyone about this from the start, have been complicit in telling certain narratives?
Nobody ever really swallowed the actual story of the origin of this virus coming from a stall selling bats for food did they? I’m not into calling anyone who trusts everything they’re being told by all manner of sources..... news, big tech giants all on the same page. But I don’t think those who question some things by the media should be dismissed as well as it’s still the same media who’s lied before on major issues?
The latest video from Project Veritas tells you all you need to know on how these big tech people like Zucherberg who has become this so called doyen of facts on his Facebook where he tells it’s users they can’t question if the vaccine changes DNA and RNA?
Seems straightforward until a whistleblower showed him speaking to his staff on zoom and raising concerns about the worry that in such a short period we’ve no way of knowing if vaccines can alter DNA or RNA?

Doesn’t matter what the answer is to the above, it’s about the absolute hypocrisy of those running things and what they say when they not in public so you’ll have to forgive me for not trusting any of the various figures n graphs that gets put out there, as at best I can only presume they’re telling the absolute truth?
 

seeking

Well-known member
Messages
4,518
Reaction score
1,055
Location
Yorkshire (werethereagodit'dbegod'sowncountry)
...You are doing EXACTLY what the author of the article is so frustrated about, here - using data badly, on social media, to serve your agenda. You can't use the absence of a positive to prove a negative, however much you want to.

Dear oh dear. Please desist from creating your own straw men and continually making baseless accusations!

You clearly don't get how science works.

I haven't used the absense of a positive to PROVE a negative, so please desist from inventing stuff and putting words in my mouth.

Bear in mind one of my favorite sayings is "Absence of Evidence is Not Evidence of Absence"*



Here is exactly what I said, broken down, and I quote:

So, more correctly: Masks have no clear benefit in stopping you getting infected by CV19
True on the basis of the Danish study.



... because of the nature of the experiment there was no evidence that wearing a mask was a "positive"...
True on the basis of available evidence.



...in order to evaluate whether the "mythical benefit" for muzzling the public (at great environmental cost) outweighs the multiple harms i.e. it stops others getting infected if you have CV19... we need more research. ... Quelle surprise
Absolutely true.

The counterpoint that you try and promote on here: i.e. that you wearing a mask benefits others because they are less likely to get infected from you, is wholly unsupported to date because there's no available evidence. Fact.

This is therefore purely a hypothesis that needs proper RCT testing to get any idea whether it MAY OR MAY NOT be true!

I'm actually open minded but ambivalent. However the lack of evidence to support your a priori bias (IIRC you've alleged just that hypothesis a few times when speaking out in support of the enforced muzzling of free people) is worrying. Another interesting article for you not to read again is here:


Masking: A Careful Review of the Evidence – AIER
https://www.aier.org/article/masking-a-careful-review-of-the-evidence/


And finally:
Memento mori (highly unlikely from CV19)
100% spot on.

Get the idea?



Please do not try and create conflict when all you need to do is accept others hold different views and Lockdown sceptics should not be burned at the stake for doing so... Use your hatchet elsewhere, please.

Memento mori (highly unlikely from CV19)




*But neither is it a reason for draconian neo-fascistic control and subversion of normality for something that's 99.9% harmless
 
Last edited:

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
2,057
Reaction score
781
Location
Mid Wales
Please do not try and create conflict when all you need to do is accept others hold different views and Lockdown sceptics should not be burned at the stake for doing so... Use your hatchet elsewhere, please.
:ROFLMAO:


Its best really to let people read the evidence for themselves and let them make their own minds up.

I had my vaccine yesterday, no side effects as yet at all not even a sore arm.

I haven't been in 5G range yet so i'll report back further when I am.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Messages
838
Reaction score
621
Apropos masks

1. We know that masks help reduce bacterial and viral transmission, that's why they are obligatory for surgery. That is a fact.
2. We know that COVID is transmitted by aerosols and airborne droplets. That is a fact.
3. We can deduce that it is more likely than not, that wearing masks will, at least in some circumstances, reduce transmissions.
4. The precautionary principle tells us that if there is no harm involved in wearing a mask, then we should not wait for final scientific proof that wearing them is beneficial before wearing them.
5. It is likely that wearing masks have other behavioural benefits regardless of their efficacy; reminding people to take care and keep distance.
 

mows

Well-known member
Messages
4,103
Reaction score
2,734
Location
edzell
Apropos masks

1. We know that masks help reduce bacterial and viral transmission, that's why they are obligatory for surgery. That is a fact.
2. We know that COVID is transmitted by aerosols and airborne droplets. That is a fact.
3. We can deduce that it is more likely than not, that wearing masks will, at least in some circumstances, reduce transmissions.
4. The precautionary principle tells us that if there is no harm involved in wearing a mask, then we should not wait for final scientific proof that wearing them is beneficial before wearing them.
5. It is likely that wearing masks have other behavioural benefits regardless of their efficacy; reminding people to take care and keep distance.
We know that in hospitals where the best quality masks and mask compliance wearing has the largest infection rate for Covid.
Fact!
We dont know how effective, if at all, the masks are with aerols.
Fact!

Tangleds argument for masks, has went from
They are brilliant at stopping covid.
Anyone thats says otherwise is in denial.

To
They might make a very small difference.
Fact!
 

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
2,057
Reaction score
781
Location
Mid Wales
Sadly we have no facts as we have no 'control' to compare the mask wearing to, we need an area, lets say yorkshire, where there has been no vaccinations, to not wear masks and see what the difference is.

Otherwise its faith not science and we can all have an opinion.
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
2,258
Reaction score
830
Location
Isle of Lewis

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,103
Reaction score
1,841
Location
Cheshire
We in Scotland have an election in early May, so this came as no surprise -

I've got us through this and out the other end, vote for me.

I'm lifting restrictions faster than the other countries in the union.
Oh, did I mention, vote for me.
:rolleyes:
 

Nigel Passmore

Well-known member
Messages
492
Reaction score
768
More on the controversy of mask wearing

DANMASK-19, the first trial of mask use during covid-19, was “negative.” Masks didn’t work. We knew this before the trial was published because we were told so on social media. The authors were reported by the media to be struggling to find a major journal for their trial.1 Journals weren’t proving brave enough to publish the study, said the authors, and they didn’t make a preprint available.

When the mythical trial was finally published last week in the Annals of Internal Medicine we didn’t need to read it. We already knew its damning verdict on mask wearing. Social media told us as much. Eminent professors of evidence based medicine, Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, confirmed this in an article for the Spectator.2

Except that if you read the published paper you find almost the exact opposite.345 The trial is inconclusive rather than negative, and it points to a likely benefit of mask wearing to the wearer—it did not examine the wider potential benefit of reduced spread of infection to others—and this even in a population where mask wearing isn’t mandatory and prevalence of infection is low. This finding is in keeping with summaries of evidence from Cochrane

The DANMASK-19 trial was performed in Denmark between April and May 2020, a period when public health measures were in effect, but community mask wearing was uncommon and not officially recommended. [1] All participants were encouraged to follow social distancing measures. Those in the intervention arm were additionally encouraged to wear a mask when in public and were provided with a supply of 50 surgical masks and instructions for proper use. Crucially, the outcome measure was rates of infection among those encouraged to wear masks and not in the community as a whole, so the study could not evaluate the most likely benefit of masks, that of preventing spread to other people. The study was designed to find a 50% reduction in infection rates among mask wearers. Among the 4862 participants who completed the trial, infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 of 2392 (1.8%) in the intervention arm and 53 of 2470 (2.1%) in the control group. The between-group difference was −0.3% point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4%; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). This led to the published conclusion: “The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.” The conclusion initially appears obtuse (what is the unambiguous answer to the question—do masks work or not?) but in reality, is very astute and avoids the common error of banally interpreting a statistically non-significant result as a “negative” trial.

source - https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4586

This survey was published months ago not last week. The conclussions it reaches are what was reported at the time by the people you quote. I'm not sure what your point is?

This survey is the reason why mask wearing is compulosry not because it protects you but becasue it allegedly prevents you spreading. If this survey has studdied that and reached the same conclussion as protection there would be no ground for the justification on prevention. As far as I am aware (happy to be corrected) there has only been one recent survey on masks and spreading, but that was surprise, surprise, surprise based on modeling not a real control environment.

Regards

NHP
 
Top