Vaccine

Grace T. said:
Yeah yeah yeah we know the drill. My representation of the study is that there’s quite a lot in there for both sides to hate and there’s quite a lot for both to criticize by way of methodology. I think we just both proved that. But between you and me, its only the true believer that tried to argue this study is great for masking.
Click to expand...
You said what you wanted to be true, and then pretended that it was in the study. The study specifically disavows your chosen misrepresentation:

”Our results should not be taken to imply that masks can prevent only 10% of COVID-19 cases, let alone 10% of COVID-19 mortality.”

It is the first sentence of the bottom paragraph on page 30.

Go ahead and make your “masks = religion” rhetoric. Whatever. Toss in a few ad hominem attacks while you’re at it.

The study itself is worth reading,

 
N00B said:
Sure feels like it, which is saying a lot… I had always hoped mankind had grown in the last few thousand years.

Guess the fear of social isolation is an age old tool wielded to protect the general populace.
Click to expand...

I know there are treatments today for Hansen's. Is there a vaccine?
 
dad4 said:
You said what you wanted to be true, and then pretended that it was in the study. The study specifically disavows your chosen misrepresentation:

”Our results should not be taken to imply that masks can prevent only 10% of COVID-19 cases, let alone 10% of COVID-19 mortality.”

It is the first sentence of the bottom paragraph on page 30.

Go ahead and make your “masks = religion” rhetoric. Whatever. Toss in a few ad hominem attacks while you’re at it.

The study itself is worth reading,

Click to expand...
I specifically noted there’s a potential upside there (note also it’s not as easy as multiplying the 10% by 4). I also noted there was probably a discount there since the study measured both masks and distancing effects instead of isolating the distancing effects out. And I’m the one that’s hearing only what they want to be true????
 
Grace T. said:
I specifically noted there’s a potential upside there (note also it’s not as easy as multiplying the 10% by 4). I also noted there was probably a discount there since the study measured both masks and distancing effects instead of isolating the distancing effects out. And I’m the one that’s hearing only what they want to be true????
Click to expand...
Your summary was the one specifically disavowed by the study authors.

Why should I treat it as anything other than deliberate misrepresentation?

There is plenty to discuss with the right way to isolate the mask effect from the distance effect, as well as whether and how you can extrapolate from 28% to higher percentages.

But if you're going to flat out lie about what is and is not in the study, then there is no point in having that discussion with you.
 
dad4 said:
Your summary was the one specifically disavowed by the study authors.

Why should I treat it as anything other than deliberate misrepresentation?

There is plenty to discuss with the right way to isolate the mask effect from the distance effect, as well as whether and how you can extrapolate from 28% to higher percentages.

But if you're going to flat out lie about what is and is not in the study, then there is no point in having that discussion with you.
Click to expand...

In one of Grace's multiple universes, she is telling the truth,
 
dad4 said:
Your summary was the one specifically disavowed by the study authors.

Why should I treat it as anything other than deliberate misrepresentation?

There is plenty to discuss with the right way to isolate the mask effect from the distance effect, as well as whether and how you can extrapolate from 28% to higher percentages.

But if you're going to flat out lie about what is and is not in the study, then there is no point in having that discussion with you.
Click to expand...

Again, man, you are hearing what you want to hear. I said there was potential upside. But you are taking a mixed study and trying to use it to say "yeah masking!" And then saying I'm the one that sees what she wants to.

What's truly funny is despite all the data being presented and the fact that much of Europe and several industries have disavowed it, you are still willing to die on the cloth mask hill. That reminds me of conversations back at the Div School with the Catholics debating the perpetual virginity of the Virgin Mary and when presented with evidence that Jesus's brother was the first leader of the church, they will go to any steps to rewrite the record to save that one hill. Faith man...funny thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top