Wearing a Mask

[lightseeker]

Technically, the asymptomatic population was the primary argument for lowering the mortality rate. Without this unknown group, at face value, the death rate is about 6%. So it is interesting to see so many from the group promoting that this is no different than the flu also saying that asymptomatic cases are a fabrication. Yet another contradiction from this crowd.

it is also interesting to see how sheep is defined in this situation because I see a whole lot of people who seem unable to do research themselves and are instead dependent on the research of others that often contradicts with other pieces. When there are contradictions, there seems to be no independent process for smoothing these out, but this is supposed to be good information to share with a group?

Mexico and Brazil are both going up rapidly and they both shrugged off anything to do with lockdowns. While Spain, France, and Italy seem to be making a case that the quarantine approach was effective in bringing down the number of cases.

personally, I prefer masks if I had a choice and they also seem effective. Personally I think most of this will start to blow over by the end of summer except for places like Brazil. Everything is in the process of reopening right now and most locations include masks as part of reopening, which seem like they work.

the biggest problem is that there is so much bad information about infection control, especially here, it seems that there is real potential for something worse to come down the line and a whole lot of people will be sitting and trying to wave their flags with what they think they learned about infection control from this experience.

a mask is a method of sanitation and infection control, not to be confused with images of people covering one eye or wearing baphomet costumes. It is not something that was ever considered a component of a ritual. It would be good for people to find their way back to a reality that includes not believing so many contradictory statements about basic things.

Read some of the books written by the elites themselves then where they tell you their plans for the future. Start with the ones 100 years ago, see how history followed their words, and then some of the recent ones. Why is it that this event fulfilled so many of their criteria for what they had planned for civilization. And no it’s not tinfoil conspiracy, these are the words of the elites themselves. I’d summarize some for you but this vid does a good job

i am against all medical mandates because if you allow a government to have that power over your body, it will be abused. Masks might not seem like a big deal but that’s how the public is prepped, because by this winter the American military is “warp speeding” a vaccine into the American public. And the logic behind doing this and mandating masks is the same. You might say, but masks are harmless to you. Yeah well vaccines are supposed to be harmless too and I don’t want one.

The arrogance of the medical establishment blaming Brazil and Mexico for their outbreaks because they “didn’t lockdown” is really telling. How do you know a lockdown wouldn’t be a death sentence for people living in these countries? From where do you think they get their daily bread? And it was a death sentence for many people here too, as we now see overdoses spike beyond anything conceived as addicts go without their meetings, alcoholics relapsing, a literal crisis of domestic and child abuse, state mandated agoraphobia, tens of millions out of work. And you might think that this will be over by the summer, but the news is already prepping us for DA SEGUND WABVE. This virus will end but th social changes will not hence the talk of “the new normal”.

So the central things I’m claiming here are that social changes are not organic and ad hoc but are what the elites of thisnworld had planned anyways. For reference see the last “invisible enemy”, terrorism. Another problem like viruses that can never be defeated and you are the one that needs to sacrifice your rights, freedoms, and comforts to combat it. And meanwhile social elites carry out what they want in the process, a lose-win. So we live in a world where there’s new viruses that emerge and the threat of them all the time. Is this the new protocol for that?

 

[A.J.]

Lots to unpack here. Let’s regroup.
1. Im not anti mask - look at my avatar. 2. I’m not worried about the amount of cases here. That’s not my obsession.

The rest of your comments need context.
You are generalizing about infection control, covering an eye, baphomet.....?

Lets backup, from April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million) of (H1N1)pdm09 virus in the US alone. There was no vaccine for this particular strain. There was no panic. Let that be your foundation. Now reset. You are establishing random straw men. Refocus your argument.

Are cases of influenza ever asymptomatic?

Technically, the asymptomatic population was the primary argument for lowering the mortality rate. Without this unknown group, at face value, the death rate is about 6%. So it is interesting to see so many from the group promoting that this is no different than the flu also saying that asymptomatic cases are a fabrication. Yet another contradiction from this crowd.

it is also interesting to see how sheep is defined in this situation because I see a whole lot of people who seem unable to do research themselves and are instead dependent on the research of others that often contradicts with other pieces. When there are contradictions, there seems to be no independent process for smoothing these out, but this is supposed to be good information to share with a group?

Mexico and Brazil are both going up rapidly and they both shrugged off anything to do with lockdowns. While Spain, France, and Italy seem to be making a case that the quarantine approach was effective in bringing down the number of cases.

personally, I prefer masks if I had a choice and they also seem effective. Personally I think most of this will start to blow over by the end of summer except for places like Brazil. Everything is in the process of reopening right now and most locations include masks as part of reopening, which seem like they work.

the biggest problem is that there is so much bad information about infection control, especially here, it seems that there is real potential for something worse to come down the line and a whole lot of people will be sitting and trying to wave their flags with what they think they learned about infection control from this experience.

a mask is a method of sanitation and infection control, not to be confused with images of people covering one eye or wearing baphomet costumes. It is not something that was ever considered a component of a ritual. It would be good for people to find their way back to a reality that includes not believing so many contradictory statements about basic things.

 

[A.J.]

I know you’re not talking to me, but what does the flu have to do with this? It’s a different class of viruses. There’s still a lot to learn about how something this new will affect human beings. Just because most viruses show symptoms doesn’t mean that all or new ones will. Hell you can have HIV for months before you start getting chronically sick and show signs of having it.

What is more harmful to a person? A virus without symptoms or one with severe symptoms that could lead to death? My point is the flu is probably more harmful to a wider range of people than this has been. Including otherwise healthy people as well as young people. The more people who are asymptomatic the more we should build herd immunity and let this run its course. You don’t wanna do that with influenza cause the symptoms can be pretty severe.

 

[A.J.]

From an an article in Conservitive Review:

Take a look at this chart quantifying the infection fatality rate for the Dutch population based on age bracket. The data were calculated from an antibody test of 4,000 blood donors conducted by Dutch blood bank Sanquin to see how many have been infected for the purpose of donating blood plasma to those currently suffering from the virus. The data were presented to the Dutch House of Representatives in mid-April by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM).

Based on this serology test, they were able to determine that 3% of the population (at the time) were infected and were therefore able to divide the numerator of those who died of COVID-19 by the extrapolated denominator of those who were likely infected and break out the infection fatality rate by age group.

Study this chart for a few minutes and take in all the data – from the asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic rates to the hospital and fatality rates divided by age. You have to get to the 50-59 age group just to reach a 0.1% fatality rate, the level often cited as the overall death rate for the seasonal flu. Those are all lower oddsthan an individual has of dying in a giving year of any cause and in the case of an average 50-year-old, five times lower.

They didn’t test kids under 20, but their fatality rate is likely near zero.

While the Netherlands is an entirely different country, it has actually experienced a 30% higher death rate per capita than America. So the numbers are likely not any higher here for those under 70, especially because the macro serology tests showing a 0.2% fatality rate (but grossly distorted by the death rate of those over 80), as well as what we are seeing in prisons and ships in younger populations, seems to harmonize with this data. A brand-new study from France also shows very similar estimates of fatality rates, at least for those under 60.

If anything, those who are sicker tend to stay away from blood donation, so it could be that infection rate was even higher than this sample suggests, thereby driving down the fatality rate even lower.

Moreover, several weeks later, another research group in the Netherlands did a second serology test that broke down even more groups and came up with almost identical results:

As you can see, the death rate doesn’t even climb above .1% until you reach over 70, with a steep and dangerous growth of risk over 75 and 80. However, it’s important to remember that even those death rates might need to be cut in half for those outside nursing homes, given that half the deaths in most countries are in senior care facilities.

Remember in 2009 when 50 million people had H1N1 and the stock market crashed, everyone panicked and we blamed Obama for not acting quickly enough?



Yeah, me neither.

COVID-19 vs. H1N1-09: What a difference a decade can make

To reflect on what happened in 2009 regarding the H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic, it is difficult to understand how the government response isn't an overreaction by comparison. A review of the data reveals some vital distinctions: Not a...

www.americanthinker.com

Globalists are using COVID-19 to ram through creepy 'development goals'

COVID-19 appears to be triggering various global planning initiatives and recommendations seemingly ripe for immediate implementation. Here's a review of just a few of the proposals that could radically alter life as we know it, starti...

www.americanthinker.com

 

[rainerann]

Lots to unpack here. Let’s regroup.
1. Im not anti mask - look at my avatar. 2. I’m not worried about the amount of cases here. That’s not my obsession.

The rest of your comments need context.
You are generalizing about infection control, covering an eye, baphomet.....?

Lets backup, from April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million) of (H1N1)pdm09 virus in the US alone. There was no vaccine for this particular strain. There was no panic. Let that be your foundation. Now reset. You are establishing random straw men. Refocus your argument.

Are cases of influenza ever asymptomatic?

I’m not talking about you specifically, but you do keep comparing this to the flu. The asymptomatic argument has been the primary argument that opposes masks and quarantine because with asymptomatic cases, the death rate becomes lower. Without them, it becomes higher, so you can’t argue that this is comparable to the flu while also asserting speculation of the legitimacy of asymptomatic cases.

and the reference to baphomet costumes was just meant to serve as comparison. One exists as something hidden where we speculate the meaning behind this. The other represents years of honest work trying to help people and progress in our ability to treat sickness. There is a purity to the history of a mask within the real world that is filled with honest people that is being muddled by paranoia and speculation. The comparison was only meant to demonstrate how a mask is represents something that is entirely separate from anything nefarious.

people who have worn masks throughout history has helped people in their most vulnerable moments. The mask becomes a distraction for people who seem to lose touch with reality a little bit in a sort of fervor to know and be able to describe something hidden with some degree of certainty because not being able to do this creates a sort of powerlessness. The claims I see people making about masks are almost more of a crutch.

 

[rainerann]

Read some of the books written by the elites themselves then where they tell you their plans for the future. Start with the ones 100 years ago, see how history followed their words, and then some of the recent ones. Why is it that this event fulfilled so many of their criteria for what they had planned for civilization. And no it’s not tinfoil conspiracy, these are the words of the elites themselves. I’d summarize some for you but this vid does a good job

i am against all medical mandates because if you allow a government to have that power over your body, it will be abused. Masks might not seem like a big deal but that’s how the public is prepped, because by this winter the American military is “warp speeding” a vaccine into the American public. And the logic behind doing this and mandating masks is the same. You might say, but masks are harmless to you. Yeah well vaccines are supposed to be harmless too and I don’t want one.

The arrogance of the medical establishment blaming Brazil and Mexico for their outbreaks because they “didn’t lockdown” is really telling. How do you know a lockdown wouldn’t be a death sentence for people living in these countries? From where do you think they get their daily bread? And it was a death sentence for many people here too, as we now see overdoses spike beyond anything conceived as addicts go without their meetings, alcoholics relapsing, a literal crisis of domestic and child abuse, state mandated agoraphobia, tens of millions out of work. And you might think that this will be over by the summer, but the news is already prepping us for DA SEGUND WABVE. This virus will end but th social changes will not hence the talk of “the new normal”.

So the central things I’m claiming here are that social changes are not organic and ad hoc but are what the elites of thisnworld had planned anyways. For reference see the last “invisible enemy”, terrorism. Another problem like viruses that can never be defeated and you are the one that needs to sacrifice your rights, freedoms, and comforts to combat it. And meanwhile social elites carry out what they want in the process, a lose-win. So we live in a world where there’s new viruses that emerge and the threat of them all the time. Is this the new protocol for that?

I have read many books going back a hundred years on the subject. Masks are a genuine way to protect yourself, so the fact that this is being blurred in order to appear defiant towards the elite, suggests that people are losing touch with reality a little bit.

I don’t support losing freedoms or privacy because of a virus, but it would be nice to see people saying something about this when an example of this is actually presentWearing a mask temporarily is not going to threaten your freedom. There is nothing technological about it. Like I said, it is practically an folk remedy.

The people who started wearing these to work with patients were literally helping them bathe and change clothes and help them go to the bathroom. If you could see how these were used in their most basic form, I just don’t see how you would make a comparison between wearing a mask and some sort of technological invasion of privacy. There is a purity to the history and function of a mask that is not damaged by the fact that they are being used in the year 2020.

it is also interesting to notice the comments from people who have experience in healthcare for this blog post. I have yet to see someone who has experience using masks in a healthcare setting saying that a mask is some demonstration of a loss of freedom. I’m not saying there aren’t examples of threats to freedom. A mask is not going to be one of them. It just isn’t.

 

[rainerann]

It just seems logical that if something as simple as a mask is able to contain a virus, then the risk of losing actual freedoms is reduced. But people are fighting against a shadow with the mask thing trying to say that wearing a mask is a hinderance to their freedom which has potentially prolonged this whole process to the point of increasing the risk of this actually happening.

maybe that is why they said masks weren’t useful in the beginning, because they knew it had potential benefits since it is literally like drinking tea with lemon and honey for a sore throat.

 

[rainerann]

This is a good article documenting the history of masks. This stuff about masks being a hinderance to freedom is doublethink. It is like saying peace is war.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31207-1/fulltext?fbclid=IwAR2pCxm392VI0fZZDtUd3hsiusHa6jjGtVKi7BKHF3zcs8lH8ikAKjop6ZQ

 

[justjess]

I kinda wonder if people realize we already do contact tracing for hiv and other stds?

I’m stuck between a rock and a hard place here... I do not want endless lockdowns or technological contact tracing which further turns our cell phones into big brother devices. I’m also not willing to let a disease run rampant through the population until it kills everyone susceptible to it. But the basic low tech least restrictive options that have been proposed - masks and human contact tracers - are being met with so much scorn idk how on earth this can play out without devastation of either life or liberty.

 

[rainerann]

Just something to think about. Apparently a vaccine developer is saying that it might be difficult to develop a vaccine if the infection rate drops. So if wearing a mask lowers the infection rate, there might not be a vaccine at all.

maybe that is why the media is creating skepticism towards something practically free and readily available that would be useful in bringing down the infection rate. Kind of reminds me of a lot of the other free and readily available remedies that are badmouthed as having questionable effectiveness.

“
The Oxford University team in charge of developing a coronavirus vaccine said a decline in the infection rate will make it increasingly difficult to prove whether it’s been successful, the Telegraph reported.

“It’s a race against the virus disappearing, and against time,” Professor Adrian Hill, director of the university’s Jenner Institute, told the newspaper. “We said earlier in the year that there was an 80% chance of developing an effective vaccine by September. But at the moment, there’s a 50% chance that we get no result at all.”

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

 

[Hon33]

Faith is involved. They have Faith their experiments will prove their Hypothesis.

Meanwhile those scientists are putting their lives on the line for numpties who would rather look after themselves than anyone else.
Scientists like Marie Curie, Valery Legasov and many, many more have always put their own lives at risk for the benefit of others.
They knew that science was more than just a leap of faith!

 

[Hon33]

Great new VC article. https://vigilantcitizen.com/

This is an unprecedented response, for healthy people without symptoms to wear masks...

Common question
Is there asymptomatic transmission of the coronavirus disease?

An asymptomatic laboratory-confirmed case is a person infected with COVID-19 who does not develop symptoms. Asymptomatic transmission refers to transmission of the virus from a person, who does not develop symptoms.

There are few reports of laboratory-confirmed cases who are truly asymptomatic, and to date, there has been no documented asymptomatic transmission. This does not exclude the possibility that it may occur. Asymptomatic cases have been reported as part of contact tracing efforts in some countries. WHO regularly monitors all emerging evidence about this critical topic and will provide an upda te as more information becomes available.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200402-sitrep-73-covid-19.pdf?sfvrsn=5ae25bc7_2

There is a wealth of information about asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission of the virus.

 

[Hon33]

Is there? Are is that what you've been programmed to believe?

How would you know what's in the flu vaccine, much less its efficacy? How would you know for certain that the flu vaccine wasn't actually CAUSING the flu (or worse, depending upon what poisons are in the vaccine, and in what amounts)?

Do you work in the medical profession?

 

[Hon33]

Says who? Who controls science? who controls data? who renders the results as true or false?...The "authorities" ? This has nothing to do with conspiracy theory-but EVERYTHING to do with critical thinking. We already KNOW that history has been taught wrong-and our textbooks have been manipulated-just as our news media and journalism...why would you think than....that our science has not been?

Have you heard of peer evaluation and how it is used to corroborate evidence? Do you know why it is so important that experiments can be repeated, corroborated, evaluated and expanded by peers?
Of course, they’re probably all going to be in on the lie. I just can’t seem to figure out how they manage to maintain 100% compliance, 100% of the time?

 

[Hon33]

I have read many books going back a hundred years on the subject. Masks are a genuine way to protect yourself, so the fact that this is being blurred in order to appear defiant towards the elite, suggests that people are losing touch with reality a little bit.

I don’t support losing freedoms or privacy because of a virus, but it would be nice to see people saying something about this when an example of this is actually presentWearing a mask temporarily is not going to threaten your freedom. There is nothing technological about it. Like I said, it is practically an folk remedy.

The people who started wearing these to work with patients were literally helping them bathe and change clothes and help them go to the bathroom. If you could see how these were used in their most basic form, I just don’t see how you would make a comparison between wearing a mask and some sort of technological invasion of privacy. There is a purity to the history and function of a mask that is not damaged by the fact that they are being used in the year 2020.

it is also interesting to notice the comments from people who have experience in healthcare for this blog post. I have yet to see someone who has experience using masks in a healthcare setting saying that a mask is some demonstration of a loss of freedom. I’m not saying there aren’t examples of threats to freedom. A mask is not going to be one of them. It just isn’t.

Personally, I’m happy to lose some freedom or privacy. It’s a small price to pay when people around me are losing their lives.
My elderly mum fell and broke her hip a week ago tomorrow. She’s been in hospital in severe pain, going through surgery. We have had little contact with staff and have been worried about her due to underlying health conditions. It’s been really tough for her with no visitors and it’s been horrible for my elderly dad and us, as well. He waved goodbye, as the ambulance took her to hospital, not knowing when or even if he’d see her again.
However to protect her, other patients and staff, that’s how it has to be right now. Thankfully, my mum has done much better than we could have hoped. Other people aren’t so lucky. Other people are losing people. It’s the least we can do!

 

[A.J.]

Why do we have to contain a virus that predominantly affects people over 70 and half the death rates are in nursing homes (where governors allowed + cases back into the nursing homes).

Why didn’t we attempt to contain the swine flu the same way in 09?

The vulnerable should lay low the best they can but I don’t think the government should be tracking and drugging everyone. Care facilities and their workers should continue to take extra precautions while the healthy build immunity.

 

[A.J.]

Here’s Rand Paul cutting through the manipulation and fear mongering to talk about COVID immunity....

 

[A.J.]

I’m not talking about you specifically, but you do keep comparing this to the flu. The asymptomatic argument has been the primary argument that opposes masks and quarantine because with asymptomatic cases, the death rate becomes lower. Without them, it becomes higher, so you can’t argue that this is comparable to the flu while also asserting speculation of the legitimacy of asymptomatic cases.

and the reference to baphomet costumes was just meant to serve as comparison. One exists as something hidden where we speculate the meaning behind this. The other represents years of honest work trying to help people and progress in our ability to treat sickness. There is a purity to the history of a mask within the real world that is filled with honest people that is being muddled by paranoia and speculation. The comparison was only meant to demonstrate how a mask is represents something that is entirely separate from anything nefarious.

people who have worn masks throughout history has helped people in their most vulnerable moments. The mask becomes a distraction for people who seem to lose touch with reality a little bit in a sort of fervor to know and be able to describe something hidden with some degree of certainty because not being able to do this creates a sort of powerlessness. The claims I see people making about masks are almost more of a crutch.

I think we should leave everything on the table. But I think masks should be optional (not mandatory) in public settings. I think we should consider who is most vulnerable. Whether we can build immunity. And question why the response to swine flu where majority of deaths were healthy and young were not met with similar precautions in 09 despite the fact that there was not a vaccine nor any effective treatments.

 

[A.J.]

Comparing COVID 19 to H1N1 09

A review of the data reveals some vital distinctions:

• Not as many elderly were at risk or affected (only 20% of H1N1 deaths over 65) by the swine flu.
• COVID-19 is seemingly being tracked much more definitively, while the swine flu appears to have been almost casually traced, considering the wide and broad data ranges produced by the CDC.
• The "confirmed" cases of swine flu reflect a much less precise mid-range average of affected cases, while it appears that every positive result associated with COVID-19 continues to be magnified without further context or margin of error.
• The percentage of youth to middle-aged cases — a generally healthy demographic — infected with the swine flu was a whopping 80%, while Italy, the country reportedly hit hardest by the COV-19, reports an average fatality age of 79 (plus another pre-existing condition at the time of death).

As per the CDC's 2009 H1N1 pandemic report:

From April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million)...

Since the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, the (H1N1)pdm09 flu virus has circulated seasonally in the U.S. causing significant illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths.

....Globally, 80 percent of (H1N1)pdm09 virus-related deaths were estimated to have occurred in people younger than 65 years of age. ... [T]he 2009 flu pandemic primarily affected children and young and middle-aged adults[.]

Also, if the Obama administration knew early on that the annual flu vaccine was not effective against this new H1N1 pandemic, why didn't it more conclusively track each and every case while shutting everything down, the way we've done in response to COVID-19?
Consider the following portion:

Since the (H1N1)pdm09 virus was very different from circulating H1N1 viruses, vaccination with seasonal flu vaccines offered little cross-protection against (H1N1)pdm09 virus infection. While a monovalent (H1N1)pdm09 vaccine was produced, it was not available in large quantities until late November—after the peak of illness during the second wave had come and gone in the United States[.]

All this despite the fact that the first known case of this new and deadly H1N1 strain was initially reported all the way back in April of 2009. Shortly after, approximately 11 days later, the Obama administration declared the outbreak a pubIic emergency, without any of the mandated precautionary measures we are currently engaged in. It wasn't until October 23 of 2009 that President Barack Obama declared the H1N1 swine flu a national emergency, again without all the heightened response and prevention measures.
So where were all the vigilance and hysteria back then? There were no mandated social distancing measures implemented resulting in widespread closures, economic devastation, and pork-laden government bailouts.
I'm not saying we shouldn't exercise caution, but let's not lose sight of this profound sentiment in times such as these:

"Of all the tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under the omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber barons cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
—C.S. Lewis

 

[Hon33]

Why do we have to contain a virus that predominantly affects people over 70 and half the death rates are in nursing homes (where governors allowed + cases back into the nursing homes).

Why didn’t we attempt to contain the swine flu the same way in 09?

The vulnerable should lay low the best they can but I don’t think the government should be tracking and drugging everyone. Care facilities and their workers should continue to take extra precautions while the healthy build immunity.

So we should just let the over-70s die then?