Vaccine

Randomized trials provide the best available research evidence to inform health-care decisions and are considered the gold standard for determining intervention effects. But no randomized studies have shown that masks in children are effective. Instead, there are observational studies of uneven quality that reach conflicting conclusions.
 
Roadrunner said:
I'm curious. You repeatedly doubt the value of vaccines, and suggest people should develop immunity by surviving an infection. But then why do you trust the antibody treatments more than vaccines? The monclonal antibodies are mass produced in a lab by scientists, and delivered to qualified patients through IVs - if staff are available. There are risks associated with the antibody therapy too. Do you trust these therapies because there hasn't been a disinformation campaign to try to plant seeds of doubt? Note that the monoclonal antibodies will only work if they recognize the spike protein, and as SARS-Cov2 continues to replicate, variants can develop to avoid neutralization.
Click to expand...

Last week, anonymous posters with the portrait of Stanford University Professor of Medicine Dr. Jay Bhattacharya were plastered on kiosks around the Stanford campus, linking him to COVID deaths in Florida. Even though cumulative age-adjusted COVID mortality is lower in Florida than in most other large states, these smears appeared.

E9zpW8MWQAcIEYe.png
 
Bruddah IZ said:
Randomized trials provide the best available research evidence to inform health-care decisions and are considered the gold standard for determining intervention effects. But no randomized studies have shown that masks in children are effective. Instead, there are observational studies of uneven quality that reach conflicting conclusions.
Click to expand...
Link to randomized control trial demonstrating that surgical masks are effective at reducing covid transmission:

www.poverty-action.org

The Impact of Community Masking on COVID-19: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in Bangladesh | IPA

www.poverty-action.org www.poverty-action.org
 
dad4 said:
Link to randomized control trial demonstrating that surgical masks are effective at reducing covid transmission:

www.poverty-action.org

The Impact of Community Masking on COVID-19: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in Bangladesh | IPA

www.poverty-action.org www.poverty-action.org
Click to expand...
But I like that they relied on blood testing for anti-bodies as opposed to the opaque PCR during their Cluster Randomized Trial study. Not the same as RCT. What's interesting is that case numbers were low prior to the study but they had their highest case spikes post-study.
 
Bruddah IZ said:
This is not an individual RCT.
Click to expand...
No, it is cluster RCT, also very well respected. Even Grace has stopped pretending that surgical masks don't work.

There is a good reason for using cluster RCT.

Try to design an individual RCT for a device, worn by an infected person, to limit airborne disease transmission.

Keep it ethical. No forced participation or deliberate exposure of subjects.

And within budget. Don't assume we can hand out 200,000 cell phones or ankle bracelets to help with contact tracing.

And don't give me some underpowered thing that always returns "answer unclear". If I wanted that, I'd use a magic 8 ball.

Details please. If you are asking for it one, describe how to do it.
 
dad4 said:
No, it is cluster RCT, also very well respected. Even Grace has stopped pretending that surgical masks don't work.

There is a good reason for using cluster RCT.

Try to design an individual RCT for a device, worn by an infected person, to limit airborne disease transmission.

Keep it ethical. No forced participation or deliberate exposure of subjects.

And within budget. Don't assume we can hand out 200,000 cell phones or ankle bracelets to help with contact tracing.

And don't give me some underpowered thing that always returns "answer unclear". If I wanted that, I'd use a magic 8 ball.

Details please. If you are asking for it one, describe how to do it.
Click to expand...
a. Against the prime I said that masks might work a little and said they’d primarily be useful indoors, at least on a micro level. Against the delta, particularly on an unvaxxed person, I don’t think they work very well at all
b. On a macro level (talking now county state or national level) I don’t think they make much of an impact. I said maybe 5-15% reduction in transmissions. The Texas county level study previously posted seems to support this conclusion. It’s probably due to masks not being very beneficial in the kinds of places you need to worry about: hospitals, in the home, schools (since long exposure and Ill fitting), airlines; are security theater for indoor dining bars and theaters; and because the use of so many masks is improper or the mask itself is poor. Putting people in masks in the market or doctors waiting room may help with the odd case or two but if the person wasn’t standing in one place they probably wouldn’t have caught it any way.
c. The Bangladesh study is not very “well respected” except in your Koolaid religious circles. It’s problematic for both the maskers and anti maskers. It didn’t really prove anything beyond there’s some potential there for surgical masks or higher grade masks but the degree of potential is still up there: which takes us back to where we started: masks probably help a little at least pre delta….quite possibly very little
d. If your public policy is dependent on cloth masks post Bangladesh, your public policy is flawed.
 
Grace T. said:
a. Against the prime I said that masks might work a little and said they’d primarily be useful indoors, at least on a micro level. Against the delta, particularly on an unvaxxed person, I don’t think they work very well at all
b. On a macro level (talking now county state or national level) I don’t think they make much of an impact. I said maybe 5-15% reduction in transmissions. The Texas county level study previously posted seems to support this conclusion. It’s probably due to masks not being very beneficial in the kinds of places you need to worry about: hospitals, in the home, schools (since long exposure and Ill fitting), airlines; are security theater for indoor dining bars and theaters; and because the use of so many masks is improper or the mask itself is poor. Putting people in masks in the market or doctors waiting room may help with the odd case or two but if the person wasn’t standing in one place they probably wouldn’t have caught it any way.
c. The Bangladesh study is not very “well respected” except in your Koolaid religious circles. It’s problematic for both the maskers and anti maskers. It didn’t really prove anything beyond there’s some potential there for surgical masks or higher grade masks but the degree of potential is still up there: which takes us back to where we started: masks probably help a little at least pre delta….quite possibly very little
d. If your public policy is dependent on cloth masks post Bangladesh, your public policy is flawed.
Click to expand...
Ps if masks are working so great in the schools what’s the explanation for newsom a kids coming down with covid? Im sure given the recall and given the prior basketball camp story the newsoms were meticulous in masking their kids.
 
Grace T. said:
Ps if masks are working so great in the schools what’s the explanation for newsom a kids coming down with covid? Im sure given the recall and given the prior basketball camp story the newsoms were meticulous in masking their kids.
Click to expand...
Pps this is neither here nor there but the politico story on the kids being positive points out newsom is j&j vaxxed. Given the efficiency of that particular vaccine that’s sort of odd.
 
Grace T. said:
a. Against the prime I said that masks might work a little and said they’d primarily be useful indoors, at least on a micro level. Against the delta, particularly on an unvaxxed person, I don’t think they work very well at all
b. On a macro level (talking now county state or national level) I don’t think they make much of an impact. I said maybe 5-15% reduction in transmissions. The Texas county level study previously posted seems to support this conclusion. It’s probably due to masks not being very beneficial in the kinds of places you need to worry about: hospitals, in the home, schools (since long exposure and Ill fitting), airlines; are security theater for indoor dining bars and theaters; and because the use of so many masks is improper or the mask itself is poor. Putting people in masks in the market or doctors waiting room may help with the odd case or two but if the person wasn’t standing in one place they probably wouldn’t have caught it any way.
c. The Bangladesh study is not very “well respected” except in your Koolaid religious circles. It’s problematic for both the maskers and anti maskers. It didn’t really prove anything beyond there’s some potential there for surgical masks or higher grade masks but the degree of potential is still up there: which takes us back to where we started: masks probably help a little at least pre delta….quite possibly very little
d. If your public policy is dependent on cloth masks post Bangladesh, your public policy is flawed.
Click to expand...
sigh. Still at it?

No, against prime you said masks do nothing.

Then against alpha, as the evidence built up, you said maybe they help a little.

Then with an enormous RCT demonstrating that you’re full of shit, you say “well, they might have worked back then, but delta is different.”.

The scientific community has moved on from this, Grace. There is a broad concensus that masks reduce but do not eliminate covid transmission.

You can keep telling fools to skip masks. And Dizzy will keep telling them to skip vaccines. Many of those fools will believe you. In your own small way, you will help contribute to the deaths of some poorly educated and poorly informed people, and those with whom they associate.

Why you wish to do this is beyond me.
 
dad4 said:
sigh. Still at it?

No, against prime you said masks do nothing.

Then against alpha, as the evidence built up, you said maybe they help a little.

Then with an enormous RCT demonstrating that you’re full of shit, you say “well, they might have worked back then, but delta is different.”.

The scientific community has moved on from this, Grace. There is a broad concensus that masks reduce but do not eliminate covid transmission.

You can keep telling fools to skip masks. And Dizzy will keep telling them to skip vaccines. Many of those fools will believe you. In your own small way, you will help contribute to the deaths of some poorly educated and poorly informed people, and those with whom they associate.

Why you wish to do this is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Sigh. The religion again. Still at it.

you can look at the record. I know it’s the tendency of religious people to look at apostates harshly but I did say against the prime “masks help a little” at least on a micro view basis. You’ve never understood the distinction of the micro and macro basis which is why you assumed people would just mask in their houses.

then you grasp onto a rct like the other religious heads that was deeply flawed in both directions. First you keep clinging to the cloth masks even though the study showed no statistical impact. Then you cling to the surgical masks even though the study only showed a statistical impact on the old. Then you ignore the other problems with the study such as that it has distance coupled in there, enforcement was coupled in there (and it reverted back once removed) and with the compliance it had it showed a very small change and that it was mostly the pre delta wave without a widespread outbreak

you see I did science. I saw the study and said hey this is interesting.It has some very pro and some anti mask stuff. Here’s what we should test next

you did religion. You said oh this study is perfect and it’s a gold standard! And by the way I’m just going to ignore the parts I don’t like such as about cloth masks! And then I’m going to ignore the Texas study that comes out near the next day!

and yet you are there clothing yourself in the shield of science.In your own small way you are an essential part of the problem of the misery going on these two years and have contributed to a lot of human suffering for the sake of your own hypochondria. May I remind you: n95s in markets, once weekly takeout, don’t go to school or work with a cough (even if you know what it is and it lasts a year).
 
Grace T. said:
Sigh. The religion again. Still at it.

you can look at the record. I know it’s the tendency of religious people to look at apostates harshly but I did say against the prime “masks help a little” at least on a micro view basis. You’ve never understood the distinction of the micro and macro basis which is why you assumed people would just mask in their houses.

then you grasp onto a rct like the other religious heads that was deeply flawed in both directions. First you keep clinging to the cloth masks even though the study showed no statistical impact. Then you cling to the surgical masks even though the study only showed a statistical impact on the old. Then you ignore the other problems with the study such as that it has distance coupled in there, enforcement was coupled in there (and it reverted back once removed) and with the compliance it had it showed a very small change and that it was mostly the pre delta wave without a widespread outbreak

you see I did science. I saw the study and said hey this is interesting.It has some very pro and some anti mask stuff. Here’s what we should test next

you did religion. You said oh this study is perfect and it’s a gold standard! And by the way I’m just going to ignore the parts I don’t like such as about cloth masks! And then I’m going to ignore the Texas study that comes out near the next day!

and yet you are there clothing yourself in the shield of science.In your own small way you are an essential part of the problem of the misery going on these two years and have contributed to a lot of human suffering for the sake of your own hypochondria. May I remind you: n95s in markets, once weekly takeout, don’t go to school or work with a cough (even if you know what it is and it lasts a year).
Click to expand...
Ps if you look at the record you’ll see that y’all were coming down harshly on me for telling you masks only help a little and were not enough to break or bend curves while y’all were claiming masks could control the pandemic, make it go away or that masks were better than vaccines. You all have moved to my way of thinking (no outdoor masks, better masks, most transmissions in the home, masks help best for short term exposures, no masks on kids and the handicapped) more than I have to you.
 
Grace T. said:
Sigh. The religion again. Still at it.
you did religion. You said oh this study is perfect and it’s a gold standard! And by the way I’m just going to ignore the parts I don’t like such as about cloth masks! And then I’m going to ignore the Texas study that comes out near the next day!
Click to expand...
Excellent insight on the religion analogy Grace T. Dad, Espola, Husker, Golden Golden Gate, NoCal Dad, EOTL, the Long Game fella, Messy and others are freaking brainwashed and 100% in a cult. I'm starting a side gig as a Professional Cult Deprogrammer & Holistic Healer. These people really need help Grace. I would love to chat with you and Bruddah IZ offline to talk about a way to get my idea off the ground. I care for all people and I know you do. Espola & EOTL is the David Karesh/Jim Jones cult leader of this sect of a group and I dont see any hope for them. They are drunk on political kool aide. I actually want to save Dad first. Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top