Follow the science....

[steelepulse]

14 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The latest on face masks:

 

"Later on Tuesday, Professor Angela McLean, the deputy chief scientific adviser, said SAGE had recommended that there is 'weak evidence of a small effect' that wearing a face mask can prevent an infected person spreading the disease.  

She told the daily Downing Street press conference: 'The answer is clear that the evidence is weak and the effect is small, and we have passed that on to our colleagues in Government with which to make a decision.' "

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8274841/Boris-Johnson-says-Britons-wear-facemasks-lockdown.html

Seems the whole world has gone crazy.  When I see the news and every image and video shows everyone wearing masks, even in places that have no covid, it just boggles my mind.

[Logosone]

3 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

Coming from the country, government that has the highest per capita deaths and infection rates. By all means I want to follow their recommendations - NOT

 

At prime minister’s questions on Wednesday, Keir Starmer said he had added up a total of 27,241 coronavirus deaths so far, leaving the UK “possibly on track to have the worst death rate in Europe”.

I don't think that affects the UK's reputation of excellence in medical research and their ability to interpret scientific data.

 

Yes, of course Neil Ferguson, PHE and other people made mistakes in the UK, but having looked at the studies on face masks, SAGE's interpretation of the evidence is exactly right. There is contradictory, weak, evidence and any effect is very small, either way.

 

 

[rabas]

56 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The latest on face masks:

 

"Later on Tuesday, Professor Angela McLean, the deputy chief scientific adviser, said SAGE had recommended that there is 'weak evidence of a small effect' that wearing a face mask can prevent an infected person spreading the disease.  

She told the daily Downing Street press conference: 'The answer is clear that the evidence is weak and the effect is small, and we have passed that on to our colleagues in Government with which to make a decision.' "

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8274841/Boris-Johnson-says-Britons-wear-facemasks-lockdown.html

Ah, again the masks.

 

Whether masks work and even how well they work is known and each type of mask is rated.  N95/N99 masks block almost all viral particles entering your airways. The problem is not 'experts' but the media who can't fathom whether an expert means with or without eye protection, or even where they are needed, etc.  My wife and I went to our local hospital OPD on March 31. On April 6 they announced that 8 doctors and nurses had tested positive and 69 others were placed in quarantine. Glad we wore masks.

 

But this thread is about following science. If you want to know if  your mask works...

 

"it was found that tobacco smoke as it comes from a cigarette is an extremely concentrated aerosol with a relatively stable distribution of sizes ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 micron, peaked between 0.2 and 0.25 micron."

 

Perfect distribution to test if worst case viral particles can penetrate that mask you keep rewearing. A small battery fan, plastic tube and laser pointer to illuminate particles is all you need.  

 

 

Edited May 1, 2020 by rabas

[Logosone]

13 minutes ago, rabas said:

Ah, again the masks.

 

Whether masks work and even how well they work is known and each type of mask is rated.  N95/N99 masks block almost all viral particles entering your airways. The problem is not 'experts' but the media who can't fathom whether an expert means with or without eye protection, or even where they are needed, etc.  My wife and I went to our local hospital OPD on March 31. On April 6 they announced that 8 doctors and nurses had tested positive and 69 others were placed in quarantine. Glad we wore masks.

 

But this thread is about following science. If you want to know if  your mask works...

 

"it was found that tobacco smoke as it comes from a cigarette is an extremely concentrated aerosol with a relatively stable distribution of sizes ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 micron, peaked between 0.2 and 0.25 micron."

 

Perfect distribution to test if viral particles can penetrate that mask you keep rewearing. A small battery fan, plastic tube and laser pointer to illuminate particles is all you need.  

 

 

It's a bit more complicated than that, it's not just about the size of particles. In order to determine if masks work there are some scientific studies that literally test if wearing masks makes any difference to transmission of a virus. That's the key issue. As you probably know those studies are contradictory and many have not found that there is a large effect either way in wearing a mask. 

 

So the advice from the UK's SAGE committee of experts, as relayed by the deputy chief medical advisor, that masks make very little difference and that the evidence is weak looks absolutely correct.

 

 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Logosone

[frantick]

18 minutes ago, rabas said:

Ah, again the masks.

 

Whether masks work and even how well they work is known and each type of mask is rated.  N95/N99 masks block almost all viral particles entering your airways. The problem is not 'experts' but the media who can't fathom whether an expert means with or without eye protection, or even where they are needed, etc.  My wife and I went to our local hospital OPD on March 31. On April 6 they announced that 8 doctors and nurses had tested positive and 69 others were placed in quarantine. Glad we wore masks.

 

But this thread is about following science. If you want to know if  your mask works...

 

"it was found that tobacco smoke as it comes from a cigarette is an extremely concentrated aerosol with a relatively stable distribution of sizes ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 micron, peaked between 0.2 and 0.25 micron."

 

Perfect distribution to test if worst case viral particles can penetrate that mask you keep rewearing. A small battery fan, plastic tube and laser pointer to illuminate particles is all you need.  

 

 

And there's your proof right there that masks don't work. Because all those healthcare workers caught the virus and they wear the most stringent protective gear.

[KhaoNiaw]

1 minute ago, frantick said:

And there's your proof right there that masks don't work. Because all those healthcare workers caught the virus and they wear the most stringent protective gear.

Well that would be interesting to know in the UK, where full PPE has not been available to all medical staff at all times. One doctor who sent a plea to the government to supply them with enough protective equipment died of the virus a few weeks later. That is something that will need investigating.  

[rabas]

19 minutes ago, Logosone said:

It's a bit more complicated than that, it's not just about the size of particles. In order to determine if masks work there are some scientific studies that literally test if wearing masks makes any difference to transmission of a virus. That's the key issue. As you probably know those studies are contradictory and many have not found that there is a large effect either way in wearing a mask. 

 

So the advice from the UK's SAGE committee of experts, as relayed by the deputy chief medical advisor, that masks make very little difference and that the evidence is weak looks absolutely correct.

That was precisely my point. I'm talking mask physics. It's known.  (see my previous post)

 

Many of the studies you posted in the past (yes I read them all) did not support what you claimed they did. N95/N99 masks are shown to work as well as claimed when used correctly.

[rabas]

23 minutes ago, frantick said:

And there's your proof right there that masks don't work. Because all those healthcare workers caught the virus and they wear the most stringent protective gear.

Science thread! How many would have caught the virus without? Which mask type did they wear? Did they wear it correctly? What percentage did get the virus? How many hours did they work, weeks?  Did they catch the virus through the mask, or did they do other things wrong?

[gamb00ler]

On 4/25/2020 at 8:31 PM, sucit said:

Go check the stats from the great depression. Did death numbers just flat line through that time? 

 

Again, we KNOW economies shutting down and people going jobless kills people. If you need stats simply look them up yourself. 

 

On 4/25/2020 at 8:32 PM, Skallywag said:

The great depression lasted 10 years, we are just 40 days of restriction so far, big difference

Is it any fun to have a duel with an unarmed opponent?  I've given up and become merely a voyeur.

 

Best assessment comes from:

On 4/25/2020 at 4:25 PM, BeltAndRoad said:

It's easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled. - Mark Twain

 

[Logosone]

6 minutes ago, rabas said:

That was precisely my point. I'm talking mask physics. It's known.  (see my previous post)

 

Many of the studies you posted in the past (yes I read them all) did not support what you claimed they did. N95/N99 masks are shown to work as well as claimed when used correctly.

And if the evidence is so clear in favour of masks then why did the UK's top committee of scientists, SAGE, as reported by the UK deputy chief medical adviser, report that the evidence is weak and shows masks make little difference?

 

Why would they hold this view if "masks are shown to work as well as claimed"?

 

Please explain this.

 

 

[rabas]

4 minutes ago, Logosone said:

And if the evidence is so clear in favour of masks then why did the UK's top committee of scientists, SAGE, as reported by the UK deputy chief medical adviser, report that the evidence is weak and shows masks make little difference?

 

Why would they hold this view if "masks are shown to work as well as claimed"?

 

Please explain this.

You seem to ignore the subject of my post.

 

1. N95/N99 masks will block the vast majority of virus particles from your airways when worn correctly.

2. A big reduction in viral load (exposure) significantly reduces your chance of infection.

 

Your choice, which one you want to disprove first. If you do post links, please explain fully in your post.

[rumak]

1 hour ago, Skallywag said:

Let us say a thai lady or man come up to us while we are walking or sitting on the beach and infect us by coughing, spitting, or touching. 

THEN what recourse do we have? 

Who stops Thai people or even other tourists from "getting in your face" to ask us something, scam us, or sell us something?  

Even if against a law, we all know many behaviors will not change here

 

 

It is all about choices.... and chance .     If you go for a drive in daylight hours,  less chance of an accident or drunk driver.   If you live in a "tourist area",  you have access to Farang amenities/food/ massage ....... but you will deal with thais that will get in your face. Still,

by being aware you can avoid a lot,  but not all.

here is where i went to the beach last month.   NOBODY  got in my face.   

 

[rumak]

2 hours ago, Logosone said:

Professor Angela McLean, the deputy chief scientific adviser

OK.   I have not told anyone on TV  this because ...well, you all know how I hate the  BP 

( Boaster Posters).     So please do not take this the wrong way.  I just feel that with a certain

group here ridiculing anyone who is quoted that does not have a mass following or at least

8 framed certificates of honors ,       I must now spit it out ( mask on ) :

My real title is   Professor Rumak,  deputy chief scientific advisor , Esq.  

please show a little respect   ????

[cornishcarlos]

The answer I'd like to know, which I think we never will know, is how many of the 230,000 died with Covid 19 as opposed to died of Covid 19 ??

Seems to me, some countries might be under reporting their numbers (Thailand), for some reason.

Equally so, some countries might be over reporting their numbers (US), for some reason.

 

IMO, the number who died of Covid is a lot less than we have been led to believe.

Edited May 1, 2020 by cornishcarlos

[Logosone]

48 minutes ago, rabas said:

You seem to ignore the subject of my post.

 

1. N95/N99 masks will block the vast majority of virus particles from your airways when worn correctly.

2. A big reduction in viral load (exposure) significantly reduces your chance of infection.

 

Your choice, which one you want to disprove first. If you do post links, please explain fully in your post.

You seem to be ignoring my question.

 

I had asked if the evidence on masks is as clear cut as you seem to think it is, why would the UK's top committee of scientists SAGE find that the evidence on masks is weak and their effect "small"?

 

"Later on Tuesday, Professor Angela McLean, the deputy chief scientific adviser, said SAGE had recommended that there is 'weak evidence of a small effect' that wearing a face mask can prevent an infected person spreading the disease.  

She told the daily Downing Street press conference: 'The answer is clear that the evidence is weak and the effect is small, and we have passed that on to our colleagues in Government with which to make a decision.' "

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8274841/Boris-Johnson-says-Britons-wear-facemasks-lockdown.html

[vermin on arrival]

On 4/26/2020 at 11:47 AM, rumak said:

nobody's way of thinking going to get changed .... 

sorry to repeat myself.     but everyone else keeps doing it    lol

 

I dunno I think they can if people can put aside their egos. I was all happy for the hope and change of Obama. Then in year 5, I realized I had been duped. I got a chuckle when Trump beat Hillary even though I supported neither. Now looking at his poor performance handling this crisis, I think maybe I shouldn't have been laughing.

Even over the course of this pandemic, my take is constantly evolving. At first I thought no big deal. After two weeks of observation, I was like holy <deleted> 3-5% cfr. Now I am like they used bad data; there are tons of asymptomatic cases- a huge iceberg effect although I still think a very bad disease during which the old and ill must be especially protected as they cared for us when we were young. I supported the lockdown vigorously at first, but now think beyond 2- 3 months, it will become extremely detrimental in light of new data, and we need to find a way to live with it and slowly reopen. However, kudos to the societies who squashed it early such as Aus, NZ and Taiwan.

One must strive to be open minded and find the points of merit in the arguments of both sides. I see valid points being offered be people with conflicting views. People with differing opinions must be shown mutual respect or how will there be any change or true exchange of ideas.

[vermin on arrival]

On 4/26/2020 at 12:45 PM, Peter Denis said:

That statement is notably incorrect.

The video from those 2 doctors (who talk a lot of sense i.m.o.) is available on YouTube, as well as hundreds of other other videos that challenge the main-stream views and opinions.

In fact, videos that are not 'approved' and are taken of YouTube (or never make it there), use the label 'Censored by YouTube' as a badge of honor to boost their number of viewers on other channels.

Let me be 100% clear > I am allergic to the Dark Conspiracy Theories. 

And so I have some mixed feelings after watching this Video.  In the first 45 minutes of the video those 2 doctors talked a lot of sense and it is more than worthwhile listening to their arguments based on their experience in the field.  But in the last 10 minutes when they didn't stick to their practical medical expertise anymore, the creepy conspiracy beliefs raised its ugly head again.  I also looked at part-2 of that interview.  It's only 12 minutes and yes sir the dark agenda of the Deep State was there again...

For sure I will find myself between a rock and a hard place with this opinion.

The 'regular' science guys will dismiss me embracing the common sense medical approach those 2 doctors advocated, and the conspiracy guys will challenge my naivety for not buying the dark conspiracy narrative.

So be it.

 

interestingly enough the video is gone now...so something not good is going on

[rumak]

18 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

IMO, the number who died with Covid is a lot less than we have been led to believe.

Carlos.....  did you mean        the number that have died with Covid being the main factor , is a lot less than we have been led to believe ?  

 

in other words,  the deaths were to people that were dying from another factor  ( heart disease, aids, flu , diabetes,  cancer,  pneumonia,  heart attack,   etc  etc )   .    but testing positive for Covid  they were listed as dying from it.   It is reported that hospitals received a much larger

amount of money for a "covid"  death !

[cornishcarlos]

3 minutes ago, rumak said:

Carlos.....  did you mean        the number that have died with Covid being the main factor , is a lot less than we have been led to believe ?  

 

Exactly that.. I've edited my post, thank you...

[Peter Denis]

10 minutes ago, vermin on arrival said:

interestingly enough the video is gone now...so something not good is going on

You will find many sites on the Internet where it has not been taken down.

Just Google > dr Erickson covid-19 briefing

E.g. the FULL video (including part 2) available on

> https://www.bitchute.com/video/pSZekTwJeIWX/

[rumak]

Just now, Peter Denis said:

You will find many sites on the Internet where it has not been taken down.

Just Google > dr Erickson covid-19 briefing

E.g. the FULL video (including part 2) available on

> https://www.bitchute.com/video/pSZekTwJeIWX/

as you mentioned....  i thought the first part was informative.    then it did get a little strange near the end.      

[Bkk Brian]

21 minutes ago, vermin on arrival said:

interestingly enough the video is gone now...so something not good is going on

It may have been taken down from Youtube because of this which gives a very different view on those doctors:

 

ACEP-AAEM Joint Statement on Physician Misinformation

Joint Statement issued on April 27, 2020:

The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) jointly and emphatically condemn the recent opinions released by Dr. Daniel Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi. These reckless and untested musings do not speak for medical societies and are inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19. As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health.

COVID-19 misinformation is widespread and dangerous. Members of ACEP and AAEM are first-hand witnesses to the human toll that COVID-19 is taking on our communities. ACEP and AAEM strongly advise against using any statements of Drs. Erickson and Massihi as a basis for policy and decision making. 

 

https://www.acep.org/corona/COVID-19/covid-19-articles/acep-aaem-joint-statement-on-physician-misinformation/

 

 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Bkk Brian

[Peter Denis]

18 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

It may have been taken down from Youtube because of this which gives a very different view on those doctors:

https://www.acep.org/corona/COVID-19/covid-19-articles/acep-aaem-joint-statement-on-physician-misinformation/

Thanks!

In the additional info on the link ACEP also states:

... < Some corrections on statements made by the 2 doctors > followed by:

This is not to say that individuals should not have their own opinions, or that their opinions will not turn out to be true. Emergency physicians should speak those opinions in controversies such as this. However, in doing so, we must be careful not to overstate our qualifications, particularly when we are in domains outside of medicine.

Would be interesting to know whether the video was taken down because of their medical opinions (part-1) or because of their thinly veiled political opinions (part-2) or because of both.

 

[vermin on arrival]

32 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

It may have been taken down from Youtube because of this which gives a very different view on those doctors:

 

ACEP-AAEM Joint Statement on Physician Misinformation

Joint Statement issued on April 27, 2020:

The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) jointly and emphatically condemn the recent opinions released by Dr. Daniel Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi. These reckless and untested musings do not speak for medical societies and are inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19. As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health.

COVID-19 misinformation is widespread and dangerous. Members of ACEP and AAEM are first-hand witnesses to the human toll that COVID-19 is taking on our communities. ACEP and AAEM strongly advise against using any statements of Drs. Erickson and Massihi as a basis for policy and decision making. 

 

https://www.acep.org/corona/COVID-19/covid-19-articles/acep-aaem-joint-statement-on-physician-misinformation/

 

 

And the financial interest would be to get people to not be afraid to come to their clinics for tests and health care?

[chessman]

14 minutes ago, vermin on arrival said:

And the financial interest would be to get people to not be afraid to come to their clinics for tests and health care?

Even if you disagree with their figures and their comparisons to the flu, what they are saying about people missing tests, hospitals having to cancel tests and people avoiding hospitals for other medical treatments does seem to be true. Lots of reports about this from other countries too.
 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/29/extra-18000-cancer-patients-in-england-could-die-in-next-year-study

 

quote from article with figures from the UK. “Urgent referrals by GPs for cancer tests have fallen by 76% and appointments for chemotherapy by 60% since the pandemic arrived in February despite NHS England insisting cancer treatment “should continue unaffected”. The health service hopes to resume cancer operations this week but faces a large backlog”

 

this should be something that health care systems should be looking at and trying to address immediately

Edited May 1, 2020 by chessman

[vermin on arrival]

6 minutes ago, chessman said:

Even if you disagree with their figures and their comparisons to the flu, what they are saying about people missing tests, hospitals having to cancel tests and people avoiding hospitals for other medical treatments does seem to be true. Lots of reports about this from other countries too.
 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/29/extra-18000-cancer-patients-in-england-could-die-in-next-year-study

 

this should be something that health care systems should be looking at and trying to address immediately

I agree. I am just trying to decide the reasoning behind this critique "As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health"

 

I think both my parents 85 year old mother with non hodgkins splenetic cancer and other issues, and my 93 year old father with multiple conditions who are in seclusion in their home in NJ now could become people in that situation. Hiding from deadly a potentially deadly case of covid, and then dying while in seclusion from a different illness because no one is there to help and afraid to go to a hospital.

Edited May 1, 2020 by vermin on arrival

[Logosone]

So let me get this straight, even emergency doctors on the front lines, are now not allowed to speak and give their view on the pandemic, without Youtube taking it down, and professional bodies censuring them. 

 

Did they talk about aliens, the starship coming, did I miss something?

 

Wow, and there I thought America was a free country. So now even doctors aren't allowed to speak their mind. That's very concerning.

 

That's just unbelievable, doctors speaking sensibly on a pandemic and being treated like children that just said the earth was flat.

 

Powertripping going on at Youtube and these "professional bodies".

[chessman]

15 minutes ago, vermin on arrival said:

I agree. I am just trying to decide the reasoning behind this critique "As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health"

Sorry, I quoted you in that initial post but I didn’t mean to be confrontational. I agree with you completely about their potential financial motivations, just for some issues (like people being worried to get testing done) their financial advancement does coincide with what would seem to be for the general benefit of all.

[vermin on arrival]

2 minutes ago, chessman said:

Sorry, I quoted you in that initial post but I didn’t mean to be confrontational. I agree with you completely about their potential financial motivations, just for some issues (like people being worried to get testing done) their financial advancement does coincide with what would seem to be for the general benefit of all.

No worries. Agreed.

[yuyiinthesky]

18 minutes ago, Logosone said:

So let me get this straight, even emergency doctors on the front lines, are now not allowed to speak and give their view on the pandemic, without Youtube taking it down, and professional bodies censuring them. 

Unfortunately that seems to be happening.
 

18 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Did they talk about aliens, the starship coming, did I miss something?

Zombies, body snatchers, alien parasites, these doctors must be under alien control ????