Heaven and Hell

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:20:04 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2021 5:42 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

I have been trying to tell you that Fauci is an incompetent bum that has NO BUSINESS on the public payroll. He NEVER served as ANY sort of medical expert save in the CDC, not from actual practice but from sitting around and reading papers written by others.
So much wrongness!

https://www.zippia.com/advice/dr-ant...uci-resume-cv/

Frank, you present a resume for Fauci that you are plainly unable to read yourself. Why is that? Fauci served a two year internship which was required for his MD and then went directly to the NIH where he spent his entire life never seeing another patient since. You are so ****ing sick it is unbelieveable.

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 7:58:28 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:33 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7,
wrote:
1979:
Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell?
A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are
the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are
the engineers, and the British are the police.
In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the
cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are
the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers.

2029:
Doordash are the police
Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government
Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks
And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1
room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were
suspended due to covid-28
This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from
Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal
pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force
more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so
far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is
funny and laughs about this in public!

Most of the posters here don't know what science is but
since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to
the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any
advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be
missed in the least after they are gone.

Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a
reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks
from Stanford
University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia".

I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a
liar.

The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the
mask religion:

https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/

Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data.

The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read.
Really?
Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/
Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk
it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the
first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT
result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it
off so I can breathe easier?
The Politfact article points out what is generally available on
the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated
by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is
not in itself a scientific journal article.

A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the
search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal
protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits,
the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread
of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social
distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks
provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that
wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an
insignificant way during relatively static activities like
attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher
efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks.
Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an
article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible
attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have
been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing?

This is what the CDC says about masks:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html
Here, print yourself a poster:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf

This study does not say that masks do
nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf
Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What
is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold
stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all
about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to
keep you down -- you and John Galt?

As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little
protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the
user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a
better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to
understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask
wearing. Here, again:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html

Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

For a round up of mask studies, see

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence

My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that
masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask
wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in
claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of
the pandemic theater.

I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research?

Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"?

When did you stop beating your wife?

I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really
should have used a parallel sentence structure.

It's been said before, but you are a remarkably tedious person.

:-) And I ask inconvenient questions!

I really am curious how you found such an obscure source of
right-leaning opinion. SWPRS doesn't seem like the thing that would
turn up in normal searches, unless perhaps one indicated the direction
one was already leaning.
I don't remember. Frequently I follow links repeatedly, and have found
that if I don't mark what I find interesting it is quite hard to find
using a search engine later.

I really am curious how you categorize swprs as "right wing". There is
certainly skepticism about the worldwide covid response, is that all
there is to it? I'm not sure that's a specifically right wing position
outside the US.

I found their website valuable because it's not just unsupported
opinion, it has a wealth of links to supporting documents, and some that
are not supporting.
It is extremely difficult to discover how much each medical facility is being paid to report covid-19 deaths so I simply used the last lowest figure I saw which is $39,000 for cleanup and $11,000 to report the death.

On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 4:57:54 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 21.04.2021 um 22:44 schrieb Radey Shouman:

Essentially you're telling me that I really should wear a
St. Christopher medal, because it's easier on the pocket than a rabbit's
foot, less likely to smell bad, and won't offend vegans, while
completely begging the question of how either one does any good at all.
Funnily enough, this St Christopher's medal (or something else) has all
but stalled the flu season world-wide; there is no "flu season" 2020/21
to speak of in Europe or the USA.
https://www.today.com/health/flu-season-2020-2021-flu-activity-historic-lows-mask-wearing-t207131
Rolf, this is pure bull****. covid-19 IS influenza. I will show you a chart. On this chart it shows the SARS-Cov-1 pandemic of 2018

On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 4:57:54 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 21.04.2021 um 22:44 schrieb Radey Shouman:

Essentially you're telling me that I really should wear a
St. Christopher medal, because it's easier on the pocket than a rabbit's
foot, less likely to smell bad, and won't offend vegans, while
completely begging the question of how either one does any good at all.
Funnily enough, this St Christopher's medal (or something else) has all
but stalled the flu season world-wide; there is no "flu season" 2020/21
to speak of in Europe or the USA.
https://www.today.com/health/flu-season-2020-2021-flu-activity-historic-lows-mask-wearing-t207131
Tom Kunich's profile photo
Tom Kunich

Rolf, this is pure bull****. covid-19 IS influenza. I will show you a chart.. On this chart it shows the SARS-Cov-1 pandemic of 2018 was classified as a flu pandemic and so is the SARS-Cov-2. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...nchs-data.html

" writes:

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:44:48 PM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote:

The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health
go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years
ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit
analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news.

Are you saying the current government health mandates are
unreasonable? Limiting attendance, closing some activities, limiting
travel, and others.

Yes. Arbitrarily denying people the right to work or operate their
businesses, closing schools, subjecting populations to the equivalent of
house arrest (not in the US as far as I know, but you can now be
arrested in Ontario for being on the street without sufficient reason).

https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugee...ation-faq.html
What vaccines are required for U.S. immigration?
At this time,* vaccines for these diseases are currently required for U.S. immigration:

Mumps
Measles
Rubella
Polio
Tetanus and diphtheria
Pertussis
Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib)
Hepatitis A
Hepatitis B
Rotavirus
Meningococcal disease
Varicella
Pneumococcal disease
Seasonal influenza

So is it OK to require the danged furners to get vaccinated to get
into the land of milk and honey? But its unreasonable to require
those already here? Above is a federal law. Probably been on the
books for decades and decades.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-man...aws/index.html
State Vaccination Requirements
State laws establish vaccination requirements for school
children. These laws often apply not only to children attending public
schools but also to those attending private schools and day care
facilities. States may also require immunization of healthcare workers
and of patients/residents of healthcare facilities.

So it is OK for most, all the states, to make school children and
healthcare workers get vaccinated but current health rules are
unreasonable?

Maybe I am just not following you too well. We currently have federal
and state health laws for diseases and many other things. And have
had these for decades and decades. And we have state laws regulating
population, attendance. Such as certain buildings cannot safely
accommodate too many people. And vehicles like buses cannot carry too
many people. But you are saying all these laws are illegal and the
population should rise up and overthrow the oppressors?

We have never had a law that required vaccination for anyone just
because of US residence. We have never had the current sort of opaque,
unaccountable administrative rulemaking over, for example, how many
people you can have in your own house for dinner. Are you really saying
that covid regulations are not a major increment in government power?
Mr. Beattie will perhaps take the time to explain to us hoi polloi why
it's all legal, but it certainly has not been customary up to very
recently.

I am in favor of regulations with a clearly articulated rational basis,
and transparent rules that limit their scope of application. When the
call was "14 days to flatten the curve", I was in favor, it made sense
to me. But after 14 days, and 14 days, and another 14 days, we have a
pandemic raj that makes rules about every aspect of everyday life
without public oversight, and without feeling the need to explain their
actions. California, for example, has repeatedly denied FOIA requests
for the data that underlie their pandemic regulations. Michigan and
Oregon are attempting to make mask mandates permanent.

When I look at the actual curves for hospital admissions, deaths, or
covid cases I just don't see where, for example, the legal restrictions
made in South Dakota cause their curves to bend in way that that those
of North Dakota didn't -- there just isn't much evidence that legal
restrictions have done any good, and it should be obvious that they have
had heavy costs, not just in money but also in lives.

I believe that voluntary behavior changes have made a significant
difference in the pandemic progress. These are done in self interest,
they need not be mandated with criminal penalties. Those that are
unlikely to voluntarily change their behavior due to risk are also
unlikely to change their behavior due to regulation. Many of our fine
leaders are among this group.

Frank Krygowski writes:

[ ... ]

The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health
go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years
ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit
analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news.

Not all decisions were good, but many were. Much can be explained by
the fact that this virus was completely unknown. Measures and
recommendations changed as more was learned.

But assuming you're smarter than Tom ("There have been only 4000
deaths"), care to tell us what you would have done at what point in
time, had you been in charge?

I don't assume that I am smarter than Tom, although we certainly do not
agree on many points. And I think I bored the group with a response to
a similar question not long ago -- I can't be arsed to try to find it.

So, who was "in charge"? Anthony Fauci? Donald Trump? Angela Merkel?
Jacinda Ardern? Everyone, even those of us who are merely expected to
bow to that hat on a stick, has a role to play. Since your question is
so vague, I'll interpret it as "What would you have done had you,
unaccountably, found yourself philosopher king of America?"

Free hospital care (as in, pay nothing) for anyone with Covid from a
care home, until clearly not contagious.

Subsidised hospital care (as in, pay an affordable and predictable
amount) for all Covid sufferers, to keep them out of the general
population. Additional charges will apply if you check out early AMA.

Needless to say, actually doing this with the pharmaco-medical vampire
squid that we have created would require several years worth of GDP, but
perhaps not less than the cost of the upcoming covid relief pork barrel
act.

This could be hard on the medical staff, in terms of burnout and in terms
of infection, so expedited licensing for any doctors or nurses from
Kazakhstan, or Zimbabwe, or wherever, that have found themselves working
in quickie marts or driving ubers.

Serious research into early covid treatment with already approved drugs.
There seems to be a variety of approaches around the world, some of
which may well be working. I have no idea if hydroxychloroquine, or
ivermectin, or any other particular drug is the key, but I'll bet there
is one and it's clear that the vampire squid has no interest in anything
not patentable.

No school closings or remote school, at least for those 14 and under.
Early retirement with reduced pensions for any teachers that don't want
to work.

Repeal of laws prohibiting the wearing of masks in public places (there
were quite a few). Let individuals decide if they want to wear a mask.

Restrictions on public gatherings and other activities that have a
clearly articulated rational basis, transparent limits on the scope and
term of application, and consider the human costs involved.

Outlaw any digital pandemic simulation that can't be done using pencil
and paper, without notes.

On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 8:21:49 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
" writes:
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:44:48 PM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote:

The decisions we're seeing governments make in the name of public health
go so far beyond what would have been considered reasonable two years
ago, and are so far divorced from any kind of rational cost vs benefit
analysis that I am gobsmacked every time I read the news.

Are you saying the current government health mandates are
unreasonable? Limiting attendance, closing some activities, limiting
travel, and others.

Yes. Arbitrarily denying people the right to work or operate their
businesses, closing schools, subjecting populations to the equivalent of
house arrest (not in the US as far as I know, but you can now be
arrested in Ontario for being on the street without sufficient reason).

https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugee...ation-faq.html
What vaccines are required for U.S. immigration?
At this time,* vaccines for these diseases are currently required for U..S. immigration:

Mumps
Measles
Rubella
Polio
Tetanus and diphtheria
Pertussis
Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib)
Hepatitis A
Hepatitis B
Rotavirus
Meningococcal disease
Varicella
Pneumococcal disease
Seasonal influenza

So is it OK to require the danged furners to get vaccinated to get
into the land of milk and honey? But its unreasonable to require
those already here? Above is a federal law. Probably been on the
books for decades and decades.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-man...aws/index.html
State Vaccination Requirements
State laws establish vaccination requirements for school
children. These laws often apply not only to children attending public
schools but also to those attending private schools and day care
facilities. States may also require immunization of healthcare workers
and of patients/residents of healthcare facilities.

So it is OK for most, all the states, to make school children and
healthcare workers get vaccinated but current health rules are
unreasonable?

Maybe I am just not following you too well. We currently have federal
and state health laws for diseases and many other things. And have
had these for decades and decades. And we have state laws regulating
population, attendance. Such as certain buildings cannot safely
accommodate too many people. And vehicles like buses cannot carry too
many people. But you are saying all these laws are illegal and the
population should rise up and overthrow the oppressors?

We have never had a law that required vaccination for anyone just
because of US residence. We have never had the current sort of opaque,
unaccountable administrative rulemaking over, for example, how many
people you can have in your own house for dinner. Are you really saying
that covid regulations are not a major increment in government power?
Mr. Beattie will perhaps take the time to explain to us hoi polloi why
it's all legal, but it certainly has not been customary up to very
recently.

I am in favor of regulations with a clearly articulated rational basis,
and transparent rules that limit their scope of application. When the
call was "14 days to flatten the curve", I was in favor, it made sense
to me. But after 14 days, and 14 days, and another 14 days, we have a
pandemic raj that makes rules about every aspect of everyday life
without public oversight, and without feeling the need to explain their
actions. California, for example, has repeatedly denied FOIA requests
for the data that underlie their pandemic regulations. Michigan and
Oregon are attempting to make mask mandates permanent.

When I look at the actual curves for hospital admissions, deaths, or
covid cases I just don't see where, for example, the legal restrictions
made in South Dakota cause their curves to bend in way that that those
of North Dakota didn't -- there just isn't much evidence that legal
restrictions have done any good, and it should be obvious that they have
had heavy costs, not just in money but also in lives.

I believe that voluntary behavior changes have made a significant
difference in the pandemic progress. These are done in self interest,
they need not be mandated with criminal penalties. Those that are
unlikely to voluntarily change their behavior due to risk are also
unlikely to change their behavior due to regulation. Many of our fine
leaders are among this group.

Unfortunately Jay is doing nothing more than trying to make excuses for a government that is NOT being run by a President but by an invisible oligarchy. Biden is nothing more than a figurehead of these people who believe that they can escape punishment by remaining invisible. I have shown everyone that 1. Covid-19 is nothing more than another influenza and nothing more. 2. None of the numbers make he slightest sense. If an additional 538,000 people fell victim to covid-19 that would be an additional 20% of deaths above the normal yearly death rate and that would stand out like a sore thumb. But none of this has been happening. Money has been flowing out of the US treasury to medical facilities or has it? While most assuredly medical facilities have falsified causes of death to get on the payroll by using PCR as a diagnosis tool would allow them to legally say that they had covid-19 deaths, we could not possibly have a 20% increase in deaths without families all over the US talking about it and they aren't. What we have is people saying things like "I got covid and it was terrible". i am not seeing people speaking of all of their relatives dying from covid instead of pneumonia. Because the lockdown had EXACTLY the opposite effect of what was expected - people began taking much better care of themselves very soon after the media purposely tried to scare them into doing all the wrong things, the numbers of deaths this year a FAR below normal. Pneumonia is down 30% older people are much healthier. Democrats and the Lame Stream Media are in deep **** since no one believes a word they say now. The important thing is to discover who is running this government since Biden can't even control his bed wetting. These people are guilty of Grand Treason and should be held fully accountable.

On 4/22/2021 9:41 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 3:20:04 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2021 5:42 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

I have been trying to tell you that Fauci is an incompetent bum that has NO BUSINESS on the public payroll. He NEVER served as ANY sort of medical expert save in the CDC, not from actual practice but from sitting around and reading papers written by others.
So much wrongness!

https://www.zippia.com/advice/dr-ant...uci-resume-cv/

Frank, you present a resume for Fauci that you are plainly unable to read yourself. Why is that? Fauci served a two year internship which was required for his MD and then went directly to the NIH where he spent his entire life never seeing another patient since. You are so ****ing sick it is unbelieveable.



People with memory longer than gnats know the ******* well
from previous adventures:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=gallo+fauc...IH&t=h_&ia=web

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/21/2021 10:58 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:33 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7,
wrote:
1979:
Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell?
A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are
the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are
the engineers, and the British are the police.
In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the
cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are
the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers.

2029:
Doordash are the police
Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government
Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks
And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1
room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were
suspended due to covid-28
This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from
Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal
pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force
more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so
far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is
funny and laughs about this in public!

Most of the posters here don't know what science is but
since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to
the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any
advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be
missed in the least after they are gone.

Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a
reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks
from Stanford
University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia".

I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a
liar.

The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the
mask religion:

https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/

Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data.

The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read.
Really?
Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/
Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk
it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the
first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT
result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it
off so I can breathe easier?
The Politfact article points out what is generally available on
the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated
by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is
not in itself a scientific journal article.

A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the
search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal
protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits,
the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread
of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social
distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks
provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that
wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an
insignificant way during relatively static activities like
attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher
efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks.
Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an
article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible
attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have
been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing?

This is what the CDC says about masks:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html
Here, print yourself a poster:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf

This study does not say that masks do
nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf
Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What
is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold
stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all
about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to
keep you down -- you and John Galt?

As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little
protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the
user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a
better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to
understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask
wearing. Here, again:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html

Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

For a round up of mask studies, see

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence

My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that
masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask
wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in
claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of
the pandemic theater.

I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research?

Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"?

When did you stop beating your wife?

I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really
should have used a parallel sentence structure.

It's been said before, but you are a remarkably tedious person.

:-) And I ask inconvenient questions!

I really am curious how you found such an obscure source of
right-leaning opinion. SWPRS doesn't seem like the thing that would
turn up in normal searches, unless perhaps one indicated the direction
one was already leaning.

I don't remember. Frequently I follow links repeatedly, and have found
that if I don't mark what I find interesting it is quite hard to find
using a search engine later.

I really am curious how you categorize swprs as "right wing". There is
certainly skepticism about the worldwide covid response, is that all
there is to it? I'm not sure that's a specifically right wing position
outside the US.

I'm aware of some skepticism about some aspects of the COVID response,
for example Dutch punks protesting their right to party after curfew.
And obviously different countries had different policies - like Sweden
and Britain trying for herd immunity instead of shutdowns. That
indicates disagreements. (And we've now seen how some of those alternate
policies have worked out.)

I don't know the politics of the Dutch punks. But I know that among my
acquaintances in real life and online, skepticism about COVID in general
and about mitigation measures such as distancing, masks and vaccines
correlate strongly with right-leaning politics. I'd say the split can
now be characterized as the great bulk of knowledgeable scientists and
medicos on one side, and right wingers on the other.

So when a fairly anonymous agency puts up a long article promoting
skepticism of COVID measures, it's likely right wing.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 9:05:11 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2021 10:58 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:33 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 5:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/21/2021 9:48 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 2:14:44 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 1:28:54 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 7:12:26 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/19/2021 8:35 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Monday, April 19, 2021 at 12:55:49 AM UTC-7,
wrote:
1979:
Q. What is the difference between Heaven and Hell?
A: In Heaven, the French are the chefs, the Italians are
the lovers, the swiss are the bankers, the Germans are
the engineers, and the British are the police.
In Hell, the Germans are the police, the British are the
cooks, the Italians are the engineers, the French are
the bankers, and the Swiss are the lovers.

2029:
Doordash are the police
Google are the engineers, the bankers, and the government
Safeway and McDonalds are the cooks
And there are no lovers, since we all live alone in 1
room apartments due to covid-26, and visiting hours were
suspended due to covid-28
This is not that far off. The latest study on masks from
Stanford University is that masks can cause pneumococcal
pneumonia. Fauci is literally murdering people to force
more and more people to use vaccines for which he has so
far earned over $9 million. Fauci actually thinks this is
funny and laughs about this in public!

Most of the posters here don't know what science is but
since they dislike my comments they will turn happily to
the dark side and kill themselves rather than take any
advice from me. Well, I can think of a few who won't be
missed in the least after they are gone.

Tommy, I believe that you are telling lies.... again. Please post a
reference to your remark that "The latest study on masks
from Stanford
University is that masks can cause pneumococcal pneumonia"..

I believe that failure to do will be proof positive that you are a
liar.

The Stanford piece this week was yet another blow to the
mask religion:

https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/sta...against-covid/

Not that anyone's religion will change from mere data.

The 'pneumonia' claim was in some other paper I did not read.
Really?
Gawd. https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...cks-evidence-/
Hmm. That article certainly sounds/reads like the kind of bunk
it purports to debunk. Putting aside the childlike style, the
first claim seems ridiculous to me - how could the mask NOT
result in less oxygen? And if it's not, why do I want to take it
off so I can breathe easier?
The Politfact article points out what is generally available on
the internet about the author and nature of the hypothesis stated
by the author -- who is not a representative of Stanford. It is
not in itself a scientific journal article.

A search of the Elsevier medical journal data base using the
search "effect! w/20 "face mask" or "surgical mask" or "personal
protective equipment"" turns up 2,538 articles. Skimming the hits,
the consensus seems to be that surgical masks help stop the spread
of droplets and aerosol from infected persons, and with social
distancing, reduce virus transmission. Poor fitting surgical masks
provide little protection to the wearer. There is evidence that
wearing a surgical mask may reduce blood oxygen levels in an
insignificant way during relatively static activities like
attending a college class. The effect is greater with higher
efforts, not surprisingly -- and with different masks.
Why are you pretending that the CDC themselves did not write an
article saying the same things? Why are you making any possible
attempt to hide the fact that masks do nothing and that there have
been studies for 40 years that all say the same thing?

This is what the CDC says about masks:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...sars-cov2.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html
Here, print yourself a poster:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...hers-Final.pdf

This study does not say that masks do
nothing. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/...mm6936a5-H.pdf
Why would the CDC recommend mask wearing if a mask did nothing? What
is in it for the CDC? The last time I checked, they did not hold
stock in J&J, 3M or the legion of other mask producers. Is it all
about the subjugation of ubermensch Tom Kunich? Are they trying to
keep you down -- you and John Galt?

As I was saying, loose fitting surgical masks provide little
protection to the wearer. A mask prevents or limits spread from the
user -- and along with social distancing reduces exposure. It is a
better version of coughing into your sleeve. Why is that so hard to
understand? Go back and slowly re-read the CDC guidance on mask
wearing. Here, again:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...-guidance.html

Read this, too: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

For a round up of mask studies, see

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence

My take on these, not having read them all, is that the evidence that
masks are helpful is weak. As for why the CDC would recommend mask
wearing, they're part of a government that has invested heavily in
claiming to be able to command the tide to go out. Masks are a part of
the pandemic theater.

I'm curious how you came upon an organization called Swiss Policy Research?

Did you begin by googling "masks don't work"?

When did you stop beating your wife?

I think I touched a nerve! But for an attempt at wit, you really
should have used a parallel sentence structure.

It's been said before, but you are a remarkably tedious person.

:-) And I ask inconvenient questions!

I really am curious how you found such an obscure source of
right-leaning opinion. SWPRS doesn't seem like the thing that would
turn up in normal searches, unless perhaps one indicated the direction
one was already leaning.

I don't remember. Frequently I follow links repeatedly, and have found
that if I don't mark what I find interesting it is quite hard to find
using a search engine later.

I really am curious how you categorize swprs as "right wing". There is
certainly skepticism about the worldwide covid response, is that all
there is to it? I'm not sure that's a specifically right wing position
outside the US.
I'm aware of some skepticism about some aspects of the COVID response,
for example Dutch punks protesting their right to party after curfew.
And obviously different countries had different policies - like Sweden
and Britain trying for herd immunity instead of shutdowns. That
indicates disagreements. (And we've now seen how some of those alternate
policies have worked out.)

I don't know the politics of the Dutch punks. But I know that among my
acquaintances in real life and online, skepticism about COVID in general
and about mitigation measures such as distancing, masks and vaccines
correlate strongly with right-leaning politics. I'd say the split can
now be characterized as the great bulk of knowledgeable scientists and
medicos on one side, and right wingers on the other.

So when a fairly anonymous agency puts up a long article promoting
skepticism of COVID measures, it's likely right wing.

Frank, why are you, like Jay, talking about things you don't understand? ALL of the US states that did not lock down had EXACTLY the same infection rates and supposed death rates and those who did. Sweden attempted to keep it out of nursing homes and had the same non-success as every other country but their rates of infection matched everywhere else.

You haven't the slightest understanding of disease and methods of spreading but want to pretend you do. Why is that? Because like Climate Change you read about it in Popular Mechanics?