Mask or No Mask?

Wearing A Mask After Monday

  • Yes will wear A mask?

    Votes: 66 38.2%
  • Will Not Wear A Mask?

    Votes: 41 23.7%
  • Might Wear A Mask In Crowed Places?

    Votes: 37 21.4%
  • Waiting For Next Lockdown?

    Votes: 6 3.5%
  • Boris Has It Under Control?

    Votes: 1 0.6%
  • Will Wear A Mask In Crowded Places

    Votes: 22 12.7%

  • Total voters
    173
  • Poll closed .

If it can get through your pants and trousers in farts what good is a mask on your face?

I read the free joe version of this article, I think they mean naked farting which if you're doing somewhere public then covid is probably the least of your problems.
 
No they're not.

Tested positive for Covid in Hospital and not died of, 1 Mar 20 - 22 Jul 21.
0-19 - 46
20-39 - 642
40-59 - 6393
60-79 - 33714
80 + - 47349

And of course you know the 'vaccine' doesn't prevent transmission or infection - it wasn't part of the EUA and is actually a prophylactic treatment, hence the 40% of hospitalisations of double jabbed.
So realistically there's only 10% in it before it becomes a coin toss.

But its all the fault of the unvaccinated, who do actually need to be infected in order to pass it on and could have immunity due to previous infection or cross immunity due to similar infections in the past.
FDA licensed a T -Cell immunity test back in Feb 21 yet we don't hear much about that do we?

1 Jul 1916 19240 young men died for 'spurious freedoms' after all what would have been wrong with life under the German Empire?

Are you still promoting ivermectin as the magic cure-all for COVID-19 or have you shifted to promoting a new quack remedy after it was shown that the ivermectin was completely fraudulent?
 


The number of deaths registered was 3% below the five-year average in the week ending 17 July (week 29), the figures show. In that week the number of deaths attributed to Covid-19 dropped to 295 – the lowest death toll reported for 17 weeks. Experts say this could be due to “displaced mortality”.

You of course know that your using the Gruniade to prove something.
Not sure what.
And that you've chosen a Gauardinade article that's from June 2020 for whatever point you think your making about the latest ONS figures.

I'd go back to the cartoons 'proving' that a surgical mask has an N95 rated level of protection or maybe offer your services to the Grenfell enquiry. Every tower block in the land could be equipped with an emergency box of surgical masks in case of fire.
Are you still promoting ivermectin as the magic cure-all for COVID-19 or have you shifted to promoting a new quack remedy after it was shown that the ivermectin was completely fraudulent

Has it really.
You better let these folk know that they're wrong and your right.

and

As usual just shout 'Its not true'.

If I could be bothered I'd list more but you really aren't worth anymore of my attention.
 
Shops:- yes, convinced they are a superspreader
Public Transport:- yes see above
Cinema:- nope, our cinema has spacious reclining seats only 16 to a row
Public outdoor spaces:- nope
Nightclub:- :grin:
Bank:- you bet, love seeing the panicked look on a teller’s face when you walk in with a face mask and pick-handle
 

lextalionis

War Hero
I've always thought that the reopening on 17th May was the most significant of all after those strange weeks eating/drinking outdoors. None of the steps has brought anything disastrous or, indeed, above the levels of mortality we would expect at this time of year. The vaccines have prevented another January-like spike.

And if all those dirty unvaccinated students in nightclubs cannot manage to pass on the evil virus, what can?
 
I'm currently sat in an Asda carpark

The wife is inside,wearing a mask

Personally I can't be arrsed wearing a mask, shopping or mixing with the oiks within
 
Shops:- yes, convinced they are a superspreader
Public Transport:- yes see above
Cinema:- nope, our cinema has spacious reclining seats only 16 to a row
Public outdoor spaces:- nope
Nightclub:- :grin:
Bank:- you bet, love seeing the panicked look on a teller’s face when you walk in with a face mask and pick-handle
I was in a bank last year to sign some papers. I was asked to show photo ID. I asked if she wanted me to take my mask off so she could see if I matched the ID. I was told no, that wasn't necessary.
 
You of course know that your using the Gruniade to prove something.
Not sure what.
And that you've chosen a Gauardinade article that's from June 2020 for whatever point you think your making about the latest ONS figures.

I'd go back to the cartoons 'proving' that a surgical mask has an N95 rated level of protection or maybe offer your services to the Grenfell enquiry. Every tower block in the land could be equipped with an emergency box of surgical masks in case of fire.


Has it really.
You better let these folk know that they're wrong and your right.

and

As usual just shout 'Its not true'.

If I could be bothered I'd list more but you really aren't worth anymore of my attention.
My bad on the Grauniad source, I didn't check the date!

Turns out that the data is no longer correct as the death rate in the UK is now trending above average.


Not, of course, anywhere near as bad as last year

In 2020, there were over 695 thousand deaths in the United Kingdom, making that year the deadliest since 1918, at the height of the Spanish influenza pandemic. While no country was able to fully escape the devastation of COVID-19, the UK looks set to be one of the worst-affected countries. Compared to the rest of Europe, the United Kingdom has the fourth-worst death rate, at 180.92 deaths per million population, and, as of March 14, 2021 has by far the highest number of deaths at over 125 thousand.


 
Yes that's the same argument gaijin tried and failed, unless of course each of the cited studies are faked by them and cannot be found on the publications stated?
Of course that would make you some sort of Conspiraloon as a lot of them have been there for decades so thats a pretty long game they're playing.

How about this list from a far right anti abortion group who admittedly don't have the 47 studies claimed as some are only articles, about 42 and they've even been fact checked and banned from faceache/youtube and suspended by twatter (on that basis alone means they're telling the truth).

What lengths these cunning swine have gone to to fully infiltrate the US National Library of Medicine and fabricated articles as far back as at least 1956.

But here have this to make you feel better.

'The evidence suggests that wearing a face covering does not protect you'
'It is important to know that the evidence of the benefit of using a face covering to protect others is weak'
 
The denialists that I've been reading about were denying they had COVID-19 through to their dying breath.
5830DB91-D3B7-4D86-8E21-D7A6D3934A95.jpeg
66046392-F7A5-4BDC-B9B6-7C64D55BB532.jpeg
 

If it can get through your pants and trousers in farts what good is a mask on your face?
This has been done before - a surgeon wondered if farts in the operating room could infect patients.

The study said no. And I’m not going to try to find the source for that one.
 
Has it really.
You better let these folk know that they're wrong and your right.

and
It’s really annoying when the major work that your source cites has been withdrawn due to fraud.

Perhaps you should choose a little more carefully next time, or keep up with the subject (yes it is the Guardian - but feel free to refute what they are saying).

 
And of course you know the 'vaccine' doesn't prevent transmission or infection - it wasn't part of the EUA and is actually a prophylactic treatment, hence the 40% of hospitalisations of double jabbed.


Yes it is a vaccine. It fulfils the definition (which one are you talking about btw?)

It massively reduces infection (both asymptomatic and symptomatic) and massively reduces transmission (Impact and effectiveness of mRNA etc, Eric J Haas et al, Lancet, 5 May 2021)- plus where infection occurs the viral load is massively reduced so even in the infected it reduces transmission. Furthermore outcomes are better in the fully vaccinated.

All vaccines are prophylactic treatments.

EUA refers to the US not here - and the vaccines in the US are part of an EUA.

How can you be this wrong on so many levels?
 
Yes that's the same argument gaijin tried and failed, unless of course each of the cited studies are faked by them and cannot be found on the publications stated?
Oddly enough, the first study cited provides showing that there is in fact considerable evidence in favour of mask wearing, with or without additional prophylactic measures.

1627382329168.png


Still, nobody actually reads these things before making up their mind. It's all about confirmation bias doing your own research.
 

Yes that's the same argument gaijin tried and failed, unless of course each of the cited studies are faked by them and cannot be found on the publications stated?
Of course that would make you some sort of Conspiraloon as a lot of them have been there for decades so thats a pretty long game they're playing.

How about this list from a far right anti abortion group who admittedly don't have the 47 studies claimed as some are only articles, about 42 and they've even been fact checked and banned from faceache/youtube and suspended by twatter (on that basis alone means they're telling the truth).
Being banned by facebook et al is not an indicator of veracity

What lengths these cunning swine have gone to to fully infiltrate the US National Library of Medicine and fabricated articles as far back as at least 1956.

I haven’t gone through all of them but a lot refer to settings that are not relevant to the discussion. Some have no relevence at all to transmission rates. Furthermore they often quote that the face masks do not prevent expulsion of nano sized particles of equivalent to viruses. So what? It is shown that the transmission of Covid is largely due to macro-sized droplets containing the virus. As long as these are mostly stopped this is the key - as part of the Swiss cheese model in use.
But here have this to make you feel better.

'The evidence suggests that wearing a face covering does not protect you'
'It is important to know that the evidence of the benefit of using a face covering to protect others is weak'
That article does not support your assertion and cherry picking a few sentences does not change its conclusions when read as a whole.
 

Latest Threads

Top