Fear and Loathing, a Rat Flu Odyssey

[MultiVerse]

At what point are posts like this considered unfounded, harmful conspiracy and deleted along with the user accounts who post them?

It's a shit study. Peer review pointed out its obvious flaws:

- The authors misleadingly frame their study

- The trial is also severely underpowered

- Issues around outcome measurement further reduce the effective power of this study

- Only 46% mask compliance with the intervention group

- The study took place over 1 month and may not have captured any infections contracted during the last part of the study period

- Zero insight about masks controlling transmission

- Statistically flawed, didn't correct statistically for false positive antibody tests

- Controlling for false positives, the study indicates masks are 66% effective for the wearer

[huckbucket]

It's a shit study. Peer review pointed out its obvious flaws:


- The authors misleadingly frame their study
- The trial is also severely underpowered
- Issues around outcome measurement further reduce the effective power of this study
- Only 46% mask compliance in the intervention group
- Zero insight about masks controlling transmission
- Statistically flawed, didn't correct statistically for false posties with antibody tests
- Controlling for false postives, the study indicates mask are 66% effective for the wearer

science denier!

[old goat]

But they may become awesome pinball players.

Not without a sense of smell. Sheesh.

[rideit]

And the anti-masker arguments don’t factor in viral load and symptom severity. It can be the difference between life and death, IMO.

[old goat]

I can not disagree, but she appears to have made some questionable decisions regarding cosmetic surgery. Definitely unacceptably shallow of me, and hypocritical too, given my ugly face.

As the lady says--"It costs a lot of money to look this cheap."

[Sharon Needles]

TY multiverse

Edit- this is why you need to let idiots parrot bad ideas/info. So morons like myself can counter that idiocy in the future with shit we learn in response to said idiocy that was allowed to stay.

[Name Redacted]

[The AD]

Thanks again Ron for showing us you have no understanding of how to interpret a basic scientific paper. That paper doesn't say what you think it does. It says wearing a mask around a bunch of unmasked, infected, mouth breathers won't protect you. Most of us with half a brain understand that universal mask use is to prevent infected people from spreading the virus.

The tests I gave him show no sense at all*

* Just to keep the Tommy theme going.

[summit]

I had a passenger on my bus today who works in admin at our overrun hospital. She was like “they’re not even reporting flu so all these cases are probably just flu”...um...pretty sure they arrive at the covid numbers based on positive covid tests.

We’re up against people who have really deeply unconsciously committed to the idea that you make your own reality by what you choose to believe. That kind of thing can be really effective at shaping a positive successful life if you’re in a field that doesn’t require real critical thinking, and many don’t.

We are testing for flu but not seeing a lot of flu.

COVID PCRs do not detect flu.

[Name Redacted]

We are testing for flu but not seeing a lot of flu.

COVID PCRs do not detect flu.

Yep, I recently got tested for two different kinds of flu and Covid at the Silverthorne testing site. Just one nose swab. Super easy, no line, no appointment, no payment.

[The AD]

As the lady says--"It costs a lot of money to look this cheap."

My other favorite Dolly quote, when asked how long it takes to do her hair: "I don't know, I'm never there!"

[MakersTeleMark]

[ron johnson]

It's a shit study. Peer review pointed out its obvious flaws:

- The authors misleadingly frame their study

- The trial is also severely underpowered

- Issues around outcome measurement further reduce the effective power of this study

- Only 46% mask compliance with the intervention group

- The study took place over 1 month and may not have captured any infections contracted during the last part of the study period

- Zero insight about masks controlling transmission

MV looks like he knows what he is talking about, but he is just copy and pasting this response during the peer review process: https://pubpeer.com/publications/478...6D64DDB57F3A70

For which the authors responded: https://ugeskriftet.dk/dmj/response-...-masks-outside

After which it was peer-reviewed and published in a medical journal. This is the only RCT we have on masks. Blindly calling it shit is nonsense.

- Statistically flawed, didn't correct statistically for false positive antibody tests

- Controlling for false positives, the study indicates masks are 66% effective for the wearer

How did you reach this conclusion?

[Benny Profane]

Are you really arguing that masks don't work. What is wrong with you?

[ron johnson]

Thanks again Ron for showing us you have no understanding of how to interpret a basic scientific paper. That paper doesn't say what you think it does. It says wearing a mask around a bunch of unmasked, infected, mouth breathers won't protect you. Most of us with half a brain understand that universal mask use is to prevent infected people from spreading the virus.

Actually I was told in this thread that masks now protect the wearer too.

[Mr. Mike]

We are testing for flu but not seeing a lot of flu.

COVID PCRs do not detect flu.

we aren't seeing a lot of flu? Does that indicate that social distancing and wearing masks, which we have never done in this country before, reduces the transmission of an infectious disease? Stunning if true. Must be a conspiracy.

[rod9301]

Danish mask study finally released.... and the difference in infection rates between the mask and non mask groups wasn't statistically significant (1.8% vs 2.1%): https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

Anyone preaching masks at this point is a science denier.

Can't imagine how accurate this study is. How would you know if people really use masks?

And how about the Asian countries that use masks routinely and have a lot fewer cases?

And did the study look at mask wearers not infecting other people? Which would be really hard to measure.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

[rideit]

Ron thinks that 1 million US deaths is ‘acceptable risk’.
Because he is a bot.

[jono]

- Controlling for false positives, the study indicates masks are 66% effective for the wearer

Weakness of data aside, it's interesting that this seems to be about the average reported for wearer protection.

My totally non-scientific compilation of not N95 or better mask studies seems to hover around in the 60-70% range. So thanks for confirming my confirmation bias!

[ron johnson]

Combine that study with this one: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....21.20208728v2

And the tens of other studies I can site....

Plus these graphs:

https://rationalground.com/mask-charts/
https://rationalground.com/more-mask-charts/

And this:



And the evidence against masks is incredibly strong.

[rideit]

What’s it like to live in Opposite World?
Will you be happy With 1 million US deaths?
Because that is the eventual outcome of your ‘argument’.
If one life can be saved, like your mother’s, would masks be worth it?
What is the realistic downside to them, again?

[ron johnson]

Are you really arguing that masks don't work. What is wrong with you?

Really? You think there is no value in finding out how much masks help?

[Benny Profane]

Are you like this in real life?

[ron johnson]

Can't imagine how accurate this study is. How would you know if people really use masks?

Participates are given guidelines, and then asked how well they followed the guidelines.

And how about the Asian countries that use masks routinely and have a lot fewer cases?

What about all the countries that use masks routinely and have a lot more cases?

And did the study look at mask wearers not infecting other people? Which would be really hard to measure.

No. Look at the graphs I posted above.

[Dantheman]

And the tens of other studies I can site....

Heh.