Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Coronavirus

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
No. With use of medicines to abolish a disease there’sa minimum threshold where if you Medicate above that then the target dies out by not being able to replicate fast enough with regard to finding new hosts.

So according to the cdc, masks are three times better than the vaccines, when we thought that the vaccines were preventative.

And yet we still haven’t put a dent in this pandemic.
Are you talking about herd immunity threshold?
 
Remember when Fauxi said we only needed a hurdle rate of50% for the vaccines?

The Centre for Data Corruption or CDC claim masks are 83%. That’s three times better than what Fauxi claimed for the vaccines. (17/50).

If any of that were true this would have been over before the vaccines came along.

Ergo. Not true.

Happy to look at any data you think contradicts the WHO.
Now you are off on Vaccines. I guess you have nothing else to bring to the Mask discussion.

The WHO report of uncontrolled observational studies you cite only proves that people who don't wear lousy masks all the time in high exposure conditions during an epidemic can still get sick. There is nothing else there. If you take your blinders off you will see that. I have absolutely no doubt you would pick it apart for the exact same reasons I have if it seemed to show something other than what you imagine.

As I said before, the evidence you are demanding is unethical to obtain.

Bring actual real-world evidence that masks don't work, please. No more Bernoulli discussion that has no biology or real world factors.
 
Last edited:
Now you are off on Vaccines. I guess you have nothing else to bring to the Mask discussion.

The WHO report of uncontrolled observational studies you cite only proves that people who don't wear lousy masks all the time in high exposure conditions during an epidemic can still get sick. There is nothing else there. If you take your blinders off you will see that. I have absolutely no doubt you would pick it apart for the exact same reasons I have if it seemed to show something other than what you imagine.

As I said before, the evidence you are demanding is unethical to obtain.

Bring actual real-world evidence that masks don't work, please. No more Bernoulli discussion that has no biology or real world factors.
I was only using that as a comparator.

There’s no evidence masks work. Not in theory, not in practice.

If they worked, this would be over.

Also if the vaccines worked like they said they would, this would be over.

Turns out you can’t trust Anyone these days.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: JRP3
I was only using that as a comparator.

There’s no evidence masks work. Not in theory, not in practice.

If they worked, this would be over.

Also if the vaccines worked like they said they would, this would be over.

Turns out you can’t trust Anyone these days.
You haven't presented any evidence that they don't work. That was what you came here to say.

There is evidence they do work, but you have hardened your heart against it.


Your conclusion, that "if they worked this [covid] would be over," is bald-faced ridiculous, because the vast majority don't use them. Where does that idea come from?

"Seat belts don't work because when people don't wear them, they get injured." -- @juk
 
Roughly, but doesn’t have to be from immunity, could be isolation, barriers, prophylaxis etc.
Yeah the immunity threshold changes over time due to all sorts of factors (behavioral changes, variants, waning immunity).
Also if the vaccines worked like they said they would, this would be over.
The real word efficacy for vaccines were actually close to the trial results until the Delta variant and then they really lost effectiveness against symptomatic infection with Omicron. You probably noticed that there wasn't a massive outbreak in Australia until Omicron?
There’s no evidence masks work. Not in theory, not in practice.

If they worked, this would be over.
There was zero chance of eliminating the virus through NPIs.

Here's what Fauci said in November 2020. It's bizarre to me that he's become such a bogeyman.

“The public doesn’t understand all about vaccines … including that this disease may, even with vaccines, become endemic.”
“I doubt we are going to eradicate this. I think we need to plan that this is something we may need to maintain control over chronically. It may be something that becomes endemic, that we have to just be careful about,”

 
Yeah the immunity threshold changes over time due to all sorts of factors (behavioral changes, variants, waning immunity).

The real word efficacy for vaccines were actually close to the trial results until the Delta variant and then they really lost effectiveness against symptomatic infection with Omicron. You probably noticed that there wasn't a massive outbreak in Australia until Omicron?

There was zero chance of eliminating the virus through NPIs.

Here's what Fauci said in November 2020. It's bizarre to me that he's become such a bogeyman.

“The public doesn’t understand all about vaccines … including that this disease may, even with vaccines, become endemic.”
“I doubt we are going to eradicate this. I think we need to plan that this is something we may need to maintain control over chronically. It may be something that becomes endemic, that we have to just be careful about,”

Another way to look at the data is that Australia beat the virus out of the community multiples times (and we did) until they mandated vaccines and got steamrolled.
 
Down the rabbit hole, Alice!
Here we have the Red Queen Plight! But circular.....

"Well, in our country," said Alice, still panting a little, "you'd generally get to somewhere else—if you run very fast for a long time, as we've been doing."

"A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!" [1]
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrGriz
You haven't presented any evidence that they don't work. That was what you came here to say.

There is evidence they do work, but you have hardened your heart against it.


Your conclusion, that "if they worked this [covid] would be over," is bald-faced ridiculous, because the vast majority don't use them. Where does that idea come from?

"Seat belts don't work because when people don't wear them, they get injured." -- @juk
Overall, direct evidence of the efficacy of mask use is supportive, but inconclusive. Since there are no RCTs, only one observational trial, and unclear evidence from other respiratory illnesses, we will need to look at a wider body of evidence.”

Lols, don’t try that on a forum:
“The lack of direct causal identifiability requires a more integrative systems view of efficacy. We need to consider first principles—transmission properties of the disease, controlled biophysical characterizations—alongside observational data, partially informative RCTs (primarily with respect to PPE), natural experiments (26), and policy implementation considerations—a discursive synthesis of interdisciplinary lines of evidence which are disparate by necessity (9, 27).”

And they still can’t get it to work in hong Kong :
“A study of COVID-19 incidence in Hong Kong noted that face mask compliance was very high, at 95.7 to 97.2% across regions studied, and that COVID-19 clusters in recreational ‘mask-off’ settings were significantly more common than in workplace “mask-on” settings (35).”

So with no real world evidence we get to modelling, the last refuge of the lack of evidence.

What a joke.
 
Overall, direct evidence of the efficacy of mask use is supportive, but inconclusive. Since there are no RCTs, only one observational trial, and unclear evidence from other respiratory illnesses, we will need to look at a wider body of evidence
Lols, don’t try that on a forum:
“The lack of direct causal identifiability requires a more integrative systems view of efficacy. We need to consider first principles—transmission properties of the disease, controlled biophysical characterizations—alongside observational data, partially informative RCTs (primarily with respect to PPE), natural experiments (26), and policy implementation considerations—a discursive synthesis of interdisciplinary lines of evidence which are disparate by necessity (9, 27).”

And they still can’t get it to work in hong Kong :
“A study of COVID-19 incidence in Hong Kong noted that face mask compliance was very high, at 95.7 to 97.2% across regions studied, and that COVID-19 clusters in recreational ‘mask-off’ settings were significantly more common than in workplace “mask-on” settings (35).”

So with no real world evidence we get to modelling, the last refuge of the lack of evidence.

What a joke.
The joke is, you demand RCT level evidence when a study doesn't support your conclusions but accept uncontrolled surveys as evidence when you imagine they support you.

"COVID-19 clusters in recreational ‘mask-off’ settings were significantly more common than in workplace “mask-on” settings." That means masks work. Did you understand that when you quoted it?

From the article I linked, and to reiterate what I have said now several times:

Cochrane (7) and the World Health Organization (8) both point out that, for population health measures, we should not generally expect to be able to find controlled trials, due to logistical and ethical reasons
 
Another way to look at the data is that Australia beat the virus out of the community multiples times (and we did) until they mandated vaccines and got steamrolled.
Steamrolled? Aussie deaths per million is 1/5th of the US level.

Honest question, if you need surgery will you tell the surgeons and nurses to avoid masking? Communication and focus would improve, presumably leading to a better outcome.