too dumb for words
MAGAtards won't wear masks
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
Even if you go back to February 2020, the GOP counties and states have higher death rates since mid-2020. Once you get past the initial deadly breakout in a few northern and west coast states -- this pandemic has been far more deadly in GOP states and counties -- which generally failed to follow proper public health practices. Of course this trend of Covid crushing red states and counties only accelerated throughout 2021. Sadly his trend was entirely avoidable, the vaccine was available throughout 2021 -- yet the red counties and states not only failed to put proper public health measures but had the lowest vaccination rates. The disastrous results in red states and counties are obvious.
See this article from March of 2021...
Covid case and death rates were higher in GOP-led states in second half of 2020, study finds
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/10/politics/covid-cases-deaths-red-blue-states-late-2020/index.html
Last edited:
‘The case for masks became hugely stronger’: scientists admit their Covid mistakes
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ld-work-scientists-admit-their-covid-mistakes
Prof Susan Michie, director of the centre for behaviour change at University College London, changed her mind on the usefulness of masks
Early on, my reading was that the evidence on the effectiveness of face masks in community settings was equivocal. The emphasis on droplet transmission raised a concern that infected people may touch their face masks and then touch surfaces, thus providing a transmission route. The possibility of people behaving less cautiously as result of wearing face masks was also raised. Two things changed. When evidence showed that the major route for transmission was via aerosol rather than droplet, the case for masks became hugely stronger. There was also persuasive evidence from real-world studies, including one from German towns and one on cruise ships. This changed my mind from sitting on the fence to being strongly in favour of masks. I was asked on a TV programme how long we’ll be wearing masks. I said “for ever, to some extent”, and was cut off before I could elaborate that this would depend on the context and risk of infection. I had months of being trolled and attacked for saying this. But science continues to generate good evidence that masks reduce infection for Covid-19, an airborne virus.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ld-work-scientists-admit-their-covid-mistakes
Prof Susan Michie, director of the centre for behaviour change at University College London, changed her mind on the usefulness of masks
Early on, my reading was that the evidence on the effectiveness of face masks in community settings was equivocal. The emphasis on droplet transmission raised a concern that infected people may touch their face masks and then touch surfaces, thus providing a transmission route. The possibility of people behaving less cautiously as result of wearing face masks was also raised. Two things changed. When evidence showed that the major route for transmission was via aerosol rather than droplet, the case for masks became hugely stronger. There was also persuasive evidence from real-world studies, including one from German towns and one on cruise ships. This changed my mind from sitting on the fence to being strongly in favour of masks. I was asked on a TV programme how long we’ll be wearing masks. I said “for ever, to some extent”, and was cut off before I could elaborate that this would depend on the context and risk of infection. I had months of being trolled and attacked for saying this. But science continues to generate good evidence that masks reduce infection for Covid-19, an airborne virus.
Have her findings and conclusions been peer reviewed?
You know, as you asked about the report out of Johns Hopkins.
This is merely her opinion in the article.
You are aware that the non-peer reviewed, pre-print study out of a think-tank housed as John Hopkins University has been blasted by scientists as being complete cherry-picked nonsense. Also John Hopkins University made it clear the ""study" has no association with the university and is not supported by them.
I see.
She provides comments, conclusions, and statements as the article introduces her as
Prof Susan Michie, director of the centre for behaviour change at University College London, changed her mind on the usefulness of masks.
So, then answer is "no her statements and conclusions have not been peer reviewed."
Is that correct?
Do you understand the difference between a study and an opinion from an expert?
Yes. I do.
How do did you conclude it was just her opinion. Oh, I see. because I asked if it was based on anything that peer reviewed and apparently it is no, or at least you do not know so you covered her arse by giving a for her. Looked to me like she was speaking authoritatively and linking herself to the institute but her comments were not based on any study.
That' all bro. You were berated us for not relying on peer-reviewed information and studies and I was just probing some of the shiite you post by the same standards. Looks like it has required a lot of crabwalking sideways on your part just to respond.
Never a good look.