Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on October 02, 2020, 06:12:05 AM
One is that Boston officials are now targetting small gatherings are sources of "outbreaks". Apparently, large gatherings aren't the problem, but the small ones are. think about that.
The second, the peoples republic of cambridge is now requiring masks in public at all times. Even outside, even if there is no one within 100yds of you, you must wear a mask. Oh, btw, it's ok to not wear a mask while dining. think about that too.
Post by: Lucifer on October 02, 2020, 06:45:04 AM
NONE of this has any basis in science. NONE.
It's all about tyranny.
Post by: Rush on October 02, 2020, 09:48:11 AM
https://sebastianrushworth.com/2020/08/04/how-bad-is-covid-really-a-swedish-doctors-perspective/
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on October 02, 2020, 10:34:24 AM
Post by: Rush on October 02, 2020, 11:17:18 AM
But Sweden is seeing a huge uptick in the number of cases. How can you say it's under control?
What was I thinking? I need to listen to MSM, not an actual doctor working actual cases in actual Sweden. Thanks for setting me straight.
Post by: Lucifer on October 04, 2020, 06:14:32 AM
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-bQve-xvNnXBpyASzTfSKW4SLzYHz1_p/view
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 04, 2020, 08:20:18 AM
Even the WHO doesn't buy into the bullshit of mask.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-bQve-xvNnXBpyASzTfSKW4SLzYHz1_p/view
From their executive summary:
Quote
We found that there is a limited evidence base on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical community mitigation measures. There are a number of high-quality randomized controlled trials demonstrating that personal measures (e.g. hand hygiene and face masks) have at best a small effect on transmission, with the caveat that higher compliance in a severe pandemic might improve efficacy. However, there are few randomized trials for other NPIs, and much of the evidence base is from observational studies and computer simulations. School closures can reduce transmission, but would need to be carefully timed to achieve mitigation objectives, while there may be ethical issues to consider. Travel-related measures are unlikely to be successful in most locations because current screening tools such as thermal scanners cannot identify presymptomatic and asymptomatic infections, and travel restrictions and travel bans are likely to have prohibitive economic consequences.
Post by: Number7 on October 04, 2020, 08:26:41 AM
From their executive summary:
If this was POA you'd be banned and the thread erased by now.
HOW DARE You question your betters!
Post by: Ron22 on October 04, 2020, 08:47:31 AM
Even the WHO doesn't buy into the bullshit of mask.That is for influenza not COVID. We all know COVID is way more deadly and contagious then Influenza.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-bQve-xvNnXBpyASzTfSKW4SLzYHz1_p/view
Post by: Lucifer on October 04, 2020, 09:11:10 AM
That is for influenza not COVID. We all know COVID is way more deadly and contagious then Influenza.
Covid is an “intelligent” virus. It knows the difference between a “peaceful protest” and a gathering for a church service.
It also recognizes bars and attacks the patrons, but if that bar is in a restaurant it will leave patrons alone.
It also convinces some governors to allow infected individuals into nursing and care facilities, well, because.
It also knows to avoid funerals of liberal icons while attacking anyone else attending a family funeral.
One smart virus.
Post by: Lucifer on October 04, 2020, 12:23:17 PM