NE_Pilot

Words suddenly mean things now, why the change of heart?

Flyfalcons

You see the part about requiring masks like I did or do you not pay attention to specifics?

All Bizniz

Yes, I did see it.

You missed the hyperbole related to him saying POTUS requiring mask be worn. There's a reason why he had (gasp) in his post.

You underestimate POTUS's bully pulpit.

Seneca Pilot

And I will repeat it so it sinks in. It was a ban on foreign nationals. It would be illegal for any President to attempt to stop a US citizen or permanent resident from entering their home country. No reasonable person would expect any different. It WAS a BAN on the people who were subject to it.

Merle Haggard

https://mediahub.ku.edu/media/Masks/...virus-briefing

I know this is exactly what you don't want, but data collected in a VERY red state comparing apples to apples and using data gathered by VERY red authorities comprised from people who don't know they're part of the study is the best you're gonna get. And the results aren't even close enough to be attributed to bias, error, or anything other than being what they are.

AntiPeter

The study took a closer look at Johnson and Sedgwick counties and found that cases started decreasing in Johnson County 14 days after the mandate and case rates are not increasing over time. Counties without mask mandates now have much higher case rates than Johnson County.

“Sedgwick County was kind of an interesting case because the city of Wichita had a mask mandate, but the county did not until much later,” Ginther said.

https://sedgwickcounty.maps.arcgis.c...15d52450acfe0d

https://www.kansas.com/news/coronavi...246779817.html

Seems like the study is flawed. Cases have doubled in the last few weeks and Sedgwick County is almost out of hospital beds. Was the study a failure or did they purposely lie?

Johnson County had their highest COVID weekly deaths the week of October 25th. They are thinking about closing schools again because COVID is going up:

https://www.kctv5.com/school_authori...37fb64f2c.html

It’s probably time to retract that COVID “study”.

Mesabah

They lied, I was laughing while watching that video because the main outbreaks in rural areas that she cherry-picked data from, were connected to the meatpacking super-spreader events.(they were wearing masks btw) Talk about deceiving your audience with fake statistics.

Speed Select

My guess is less virulent.

As of today, there are about 8 million diagnosed cases in the US. Georgia Tech researches estimate (and I believe this is a common estimate), that the actual number of US cases is 10x the diagnosed cases. Considering wide-spread testing started this summer, my spitball math makes me think 50% of the US has already had CV-19 (remember the “new strain of flu” that doesn’t show up on flu tests last winter, described as an early type B flu: https://www.hackensackmeridianhealth...is-type-b-flu/)

Since everyone is eventually going to get CV, I think we’ll see this virus disappear in about a year, after the other 50% of Americans get (and largely recover from) CV.

I’m pretty sure I had it in Feb, and possibly a much milder second infection a few weeks ago. This virus can definitely hit “healthy” people hard. I’ve read a receptor mutation that’s present in about 20% of humans makes them more susceptible to harsh symptoms (plus viral load, etc).

While the upcoming “vaccine” will get credit for burning out CV, I think concurrent herd immunity over the next 12 months will be the real reason CV becomes a non-thing.

Frankly, CV swept through and killed a large percentage of the susceptible population up front. The death rate will continue to decline. I predict that by the inauguration (real data and the political factor), we’ll really begin to see a light at the end of the CV tunnel.

No more lockdowns!

block30

Another simpleton argument.

At least the "anti vaxxers" are consistent. They take care of their health (low co morbidity) and trust their immune system. So far with a 99% survival rate, and higher for low co morbidity, really? Thats where you want to go? Science deniers? Anti maksers? Anti vaxxers? With a 99% survival rate?

I cant believe we have more " I'm with science" defenders coming on here defending the *in*consistencies of Fauci, Surgeon General, and Multiple Politicians disregarding their own policies and it is all...

.....ON VIDEOGRAPHIC RECORD.

So let me be consistent with your garbage logic;

You dont belive in the science of video technology nor that dad fangled internetz. Must be voodo!!! I can play that game too.

1. Whats the dem reaction to the covid vaccine now
and
2. How'd vioxx work out?

skywatch

Yep, sorry no, you are correct, Merle, this is exactly what I did not want. I don't want some correlation study. Let's say that in the same counties we mandated people had to walk around with a mask on AND sing "happy birthday" at all times.

Let's assume the graphs looked the same. Would that prove the medicinal value of singing "happy birthday"?

I would like to see an actual scientific study, not a statistical one, that examines the actual impact of the cloth face mask (just the face mask) using real laboratory conditions or real science. I have seen plenty of scientists that point out everything we thought we understood about viral transmission should indicate masks don't work; I would like to understand why we are re-thinking all that now, and I would hope it has more behind it then the magic brick in my house that prevents elephant attacks (haven't even seen an elephant since I got that brick) .