Coronavirus

[Baloo]

https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human-body/truth-about-face-masks-and-covid-revealed/news-story/ccaefaecc2de8ecfba359c817dc2fad7

Little to no difference.

The paper’s authors acknowledge that the trials they considered were prone to bias and didn’t take into account inconsistent use of masks.

Much like Climate Change scientific reports, there will always be "experts" around to interpret the data in whatever way you want to hear it. The fact it's in a Murdoch publication should raise suspicion.

Here's the first three links from a "scientific study on use of masks" Google. They would suggest the opposite of what the News Ltd piece says.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

Surgical masks reduce COVID-19 spread, large-scale study shows

Researchers found that surgical masks impede the spread of COVID-19 and that just a few, low-cost interventions increase mask-wearing compliance.

med.stanford.edu

Largest study on masks and Covid-19 demonstrates their effectiveness in the real world

Testing the NORM program for reducing Covid-19 infections Photo courtesy Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA). While guidance and official policy on masking has evolved over the course of the pandemic

egc.yale.edu

 

[Scoop]

The paper’s authors acknowledge that the trials they considered were prone to bias and didn’t take into account inconsistent use of masks.

Much like Climate Change scientific reports, there will always be "experts" around to interpret the data in whatever way you want to hear it. The fact it's in a Murdoch publication should raise suspicion.

Here's the first three links from a "scientific study on use of masks" Google. They would suggest the opposite of what the News Ltd piece says.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

Surgical masks reduce COVID-19 spread, large-scale study shows

Researchers found that surgical masks impede the spread of COVID-19 and that just a few, low-cost interventions increase mask-wearing compliance.

med.stanford.edu

Largest study on masks and Covid-19 demonstrates their effectiveness in the real world

Testing the NORM program for reducing Covid-19 infections Photo courtesy Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA). While guidance and official policy on masking has evolved over the course of the pandemic

egc.yale.edu

Sure.

“But a recent Cochrane Review — considered the gold standard of evidence-based medicine — is perhaps the closest medical conclusion on the validity of masks.

The review assessed 78 high-quality scientific studies. And its findings are illuminating.”

It’s not a Murdoch study. It’s 78 reports by the Cochrane Review results reported By Murdoch.

Mask mandates were done with the best of intent. Effectiveness is another thing.

 

[Baloo]

Sure.

“But a recent Cochrane Review — considered the gold standard of evidence-based medicine — is perhaps the closest medical conclusion on the validity of masks.

The review assessed 78 high-quality scientific studies. And its findings are illuminating.”

It’s not a Murdoch study. It’s 78 reports by the Cochrane Review results reported By Murdoch.

Mask mandates were done with the best of intent. Effectiveness is another thing.

"considered the gold standard of evidence-based medicine — is perhaps the closest medical conclusion on the validity of masks"
"And its findings are illuminating."

That is Murdoch fluff.

 

[SiberianTiger]

Murdoch fluff is Lachlan being sued by the Dominion voting machine company. Just because two parties sue each other doesn't necessarily mean they're enemies. Lawsuits can be used to provide the pretence of opposition for division and conquest of third parties (ie. you). They can also be used for pay-offs and very large sums of money are involved. Even 'independent' journalists avoid this, because they're mostly not independent.

If a 'RWNJ' radio host in the US is sued for a billion bucks, hypothetically, he'll never pay, because that wouldn't be the latter case, but the former one (ie. proving he's not an intelligence agency asset when he absolutely is).

If one falls for the divide and conquer game, one is not resisting Rupert, but doing as he wants.

There are those high up in the World who want to pigeon-hole people. In Medieval times there was a thing called a dovecote. It was a tower with holes for pigeons. The 'wild' pigeons used it to nest and the dovecotters harvested eggs by day and even the birds themselves at night.

Don't be a pigeon. And don't pigeon-hole others. True RWNJs are pigeons in a hole, as are LWNJs. Break free from your hole.

 

[Scoop]

Here's a good take on the same set of reports from Slate.

There’s Still Not Strong Evidence That Masks Protect Against COVID

The gold standard of evidence-based medicine has not shown the effectiveness of masks against the coronavirus.

slate.com

"Ultimately, the decision about whether to mask comes down to personal feelings about risk tolerance, collective action, and the effects of masks—or COVID itself—on quality of life. People disagree on all three counts, so it’s unlikely we will ever come to a consensus. It doesn’t look like “the science” is going to be a tiebreaker anytime soon. More than showing whether or not masks work, the Cochrane Review finds that the kind of evidence gathered so far can’t really answer the question. Maybe that’s a good reason to let people decide for themselves"

 

[SiberianTiger]

Here's a good take on the same set of reports from Slate.

There’s Still Not Strong Evidence That Masks Protect Against COVID

The gold standard of evidence-based medicine has not shown the effectiveness of masks against the coronavirus.

slate.com

"Ultimately, the decision about whether to mask comes down to personal feelings about risk tolerance, collective action, and the effects of masks—or COVID itself—on quality of life. People disagree on all three counts, so it’s unlikely we will ever come to a consensus. It doesn’t look like “the science” is going to be a tiebreaker anytime soon. More than showing whether or not masks work, the Cochrane Review finds that the kind of evidence gathered so far can’t really answer the question. Maybe that’s a good reason to let people decide for themselves"

Unfortunately, many don't decide for themselves. That requires truthful information to be readily available to all. That would involve a disclosure of the intelligence service manipulation techniques that were used and that won't happen unless Trump is the saviour. I'm expecting flying pigs with swine flu before that.

 

[Baloo]

Here's a good take on the same set of reports from Slate.

There’s Still Not Strong Evidence That Masks Protect Against COVID

The gold standard of evidence-based medicine has not shown the effectiveness of masks against the coronavirus.

slate.com

"Ultimately, the decision about whether to mask comes down to personal feelings about risk tolerance, collective action, and the effects of masks—or COVID itself—on quality of life. People disagree on all three counts, so it’s unlikely we will ever come to a consensus. It doesn’t look like “the science” is going to be a tiebreaker anytime soon. More than showing whether or not masks work, the Cochrane Review finds that the kind of evidence gathered so far can’t really answer the question. Maybe that’s a good reason to let people decide for themselves"

IMHO Quality of Life shouldn't be a factor in a scientific study on the effectiveness of masks. From what I have read, their summation is taking into account that everyone wont wear masks, hence without everyone wearing masks, mandating mask wearing isn't very effective.

This from a study where the authors go on to say "The paper’s authors acknowledge that the trials they considered were prone to bias and didn’t take into account inconsistent use of masks."

Now compare that with the 3 studies I posted. Thos that concentrated on the effectiveness of masks without factoring in whether people will wear them, like to wear them, or look god in them. They are pretty conclusive that wearing a mask decreases the chance of catching covid compared to not wearing a mask.

 

[Scoop]

IMHO Quality of Life shouldn't be a factor in a scientific study on the effectiveness of masks. From what I have read, their summation is taking into account that everyone wont wear masks, hence without everyone wearing masks, mandating mask wearing isn't very effective.

This from a study where the authors go on to say "The paper’s authors acknowledge that the trials they considered were prone to bias and didn’t take into account inconsistent use of masks."

Now compare that with the 3 studies I posted. Thos that concentrated on the effectiveness of masks without factoring in whether people will wear them, like to wear them, or look god in them. They are pretty conclusive that wearing a mask decreases the chance of catching covid compared to not wearing a mask.

3 studies vs 78. It still doesn’t add up. People can choose. Quality of life is absolutely a factor, if you have existing issues then you should do everything you can to protect yourself.

 

[Baloo]

Quality of life has no bearing on the efficiency of masks. None what's so ever.

 

[DavidSSS]

I suppose surgeons shouldn't bother wearing masks when cutting people open now?

Sounds like Murdoch media doing their usual misinterpretation for a headline, they are a reliable source for nothing at all.

DS

 

[Midsy]

I suppose surgeons shouldn't bother wearing masks when cutting people open now?

Blood and saliva, rather than airborne pathogens.

Maybe this is why countries are putting a stop to vaccine rollouts?

Now published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature: "The mRNA vaccines are neither safe nor effective, but outright dangerous"

Every health authority in the world should be warning the public about this.

dailyclout.io

 

[DavidSSS]

Blood and saliva, rather than airborne pathogens.

Maybe this is why countries are putting a stop to vaccine rollouts?

Now published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature: "The mRNA vaccines are neither safe nor effective, but outright dangerous"

Every health authority in the world should be warning the public about this.

dailyclout.io

Or maybe this is why we look at journal rankings.

I looked up the ranking of this one in immunology journals and, out of the top 214 journals on immunology . . . it wasn't on the list.

Not sure what sort of scientific journal has the second author's affiliation as "Albany Creek, Queensland, 4035" but I'm struggling to find the institution that is referring to.

A cursory search shows the usual nutter sites quoting this article.

In any case they are hardly proving a hypothesis by throwing around a few stats.

DS

 

[Redford]

Or maybe this is why we look at journal rankings.

I looked up the ranking of this one in immunology journals and, out of the top 214 journals on immunology . . . it wasn't on the list.

Not sure what sort of scientific journal has the second author's affiliation as "Albany Creek, Queensland, 4035" but I'm struggling to find the institution that is referring to.

A cursory search shows the usual nutter sites quoting this article.

In any case they are hardly proving a hypothesis by throwing around a few stats.

DS

Hah hah hah…yeah send all correspondence to Albany Creek, Queensland 4035.

Sounds like some Brisbane cafe owner who had to sell all his coffees etc through a take away window and is still aggrieved.

 

[year of the tiger]

Or maybe this is why we look at journal rankings.

I looked up the ranking of this one in immunology journals and, out of the top 214 journals on immunology . . . it wasn't on the list.

Not sure what sort of scientific journal has the second author's affiliation as "Albany Creek, Queensland, 4035" but I'm struggling to find the institution that is referring to.

A cursory search shows the usual nutter sites quoting this article.

In any case they are hardly proving a hypothesis by throwing around a few stats.

DS

I checked dailyclout first and it has been running some extreme conspiracy theories throughout the whole pandemic so I am not surprised.

The article is listed on the journals website, but I can’t see how it has been peer reviewed. I will leave it up to those who specialise in this space to comment on its veracity.

 

[Wildride]

I checked dailyclout first and it has been running some extreme conspiracy theories throughout the whole pandemic so I am not surprised.

The article is listed on the journals website, but I can’t see how it has been peer reviewed. I will leave it up to those who specialise in this space to comment on its veracity.

.

 

[Ian4]

I checked dailyclout first and it has been running some extreme conspiracy theories throughout the whole pandemic so I am not surprised.

probably an arm of the Murdoch media. All they ever do now is provide clickbait for the cookers.

Case in point… They post stuff that has a straight forward explanation for many, but gets interpreted in the wrong way by the gullible who are looking for any excuse to froth at the mouth

 

[Scoop]

Great podcast by Derek Thompson on "Plain English" about how the media handled Covid.

 

[Midsy]

Safe and effective…?

Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca) vaccine and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (TTS)

Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (TTS) is a rare syndrome that occurred in around 2 to 3 people per 100,000 who were vaccinated with AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca is no longer available in Australia from 21 March 2023.

www.health.gov.au

 

[MD Jazz]

Safe and effective…?

Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca) vaccine and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (TTS)

Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (TTS) is a rare syndrome that occurred in around 2 to 3 people per 100,000 who were vaccinated with AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca is no longer available in Australia from 21 March 2023.

www.health.gov.au

Safer than Covid?

 

[Midsy]

Safer than Covid?

For under 70’s, absolutely not.