- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/23/24 at 10:31 am to TigerDoc
quote:
They're not as powerful at reducing the spread of COVID as they for reducing spread of droplet-bourne infections like flu because COVID is transmitted by aerosol, so more COVID gets past a mask than flu, but whether you get infected or not is a factor of the amount of transmitted virus that you receive and masks will reduce the amount of viral particulates you breathe in
Baloney! And very few doctors understand Bernoulli's equations enough to make the claim above about quantity of virus transmitted by a masked covidian. Ask a Mechanical or Chemical Engineer who does flare and vent boom dispersion analyses for a living. They will likely tell you that most of the masks direct jets of particles upwards thereby increasing the plume.
Properly fitted N95 masks are different, but that’s not what folks were wearing.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 10:33 am to Penrod
Ok, but at the beginning of the pandemic they suuuuper-slow at catching on that it was transmitted by aerosol (remember, they were thinking it was droplets, like SARS-1). All of the "six foot distancing" circles at the drug stores (some of which are still there 
) attest to that. Plus, there was the question of messaging about good-enough available protection measures. They were freaked enough about causing run on any medical masks, much less N-95's which were rare as hen's teeth at the beginning of the pandemic.
) attest to that. Plus, there was the question of messaging about good-enough available protection measures. They were freaked enough about causing run on any medical masks, much less N-95's which were rare as hen's teeth at the beginning of the pandemic. This post was edited on 3/23/24 at 10:43 am
Posted on 3/23/24 at 10:34 am to Whiznot
quote:
The more vaccination the more death. We are number one
That’s false. Generally, the more vaccination the less deaths. If you could tease out the data by demographic groups I think it would show that your statement is false overall, false for elderly and sick people, false for folks from 60 to 70 and true for everyone else. That’s a guess though.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 10:36 am to Night Vision
quote:
In October of 2021, the FDA authorized emergency use of Covid vaccines to “prevent Covid” in children aged 5-11. Unfortunately, the vaccines turned out to be ineffective at preventing Covid, and carry risk of significant side effects.
On June 18, 2022, the CDC approved Covid vaccinations for babies and children aged 6 months and over.
Covid risk in those age brackets was zero for normally healthy children.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 10:45 am to Auburn1968
That's definitely a tougher call than for older age groups, but there were a number of docs who essentially wanted kids infected for natural immunity purposes at the time and that was definitely riskier than getting vaccinated.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 10:54 am to Night Vision
quote:
US child deaths on the rise, partly blamed on ‘immune overreaction’
Very sad. God bless their souls and their mothers.
I do wonder if the uptick in actual bad drug use could be a factor. With/out the CV shot.
Bad thing for people that took the vaxx is that anything that pops up they will always have it in the back of their head if the shot could have contributed to it.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 11:31 am to Penrod
The numbers speak for themselves.
The authors took two data sets from 36 nations - Infant mortality rates and the number of vaccine doses recommended.
The correlation is meaningful. Of all the nations, the US schedules the most doses and has the highest infant mortality.
United States infant mortality is 2.5 times higher than that of the nation with the fewest scheduled doses.
The authors took two data sets from 36 nations - Infant mortality rates and the number of vaccine doses recommended.
The correlation is meaningful. Of all the nations, the US schedules the most doses and has the highest infant mortality.
United States infant mortality is 2.5 times higher than that of the nation with the fewest scheduled doses.
This post was edited on 3/23/24 at 11:34 am
Posted on 3/23/24 at 12:04 pm to TigerDoc
quote:Problem is the propaganda was so very extreme on one side. For example, this clinical trial was performed by Yale in 2020 to determine which type of persuasion would work best for vaccine uptake.
So be careful about what belief you propagandize yourself into.
LINK
Posted on 3/23/24 at 12:13 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
They're not as powerful at reducing the spread of COVID as they for reducing spread of droplet-bourne infections like flu
What’s the literature say about masks and reducing the spread of influenza?
Posted on 3/23/24 at 12:16 pm to Penrod
quote:
Almost every vaccine has some casualties, and in order to justify it, it must do a lot of good. In the case of children the good is almost zero. It was the height of foolishness for children to be vaccinated and nearly criminal that our medical establishment pushed that.
This can't be stated often enough. How does the medical profession continue to condone Covid vaccination for healthy children?Posted on 3/23/24 at 1:57 pm to idsrdum
yep
Posted on 3/23/24 at 3:44 pm to the808bass
That it's not generally worth it except in infected folks because there's a lot of community immunity and not much pre-symptomatic transmission.
But that's boring stuff for you. I'd rather hear your takes on the institutional ideology of how the medical elites are attempting to crush the common man.
But that's boring stuff for you. I'd rather hear your takes on the institutional ideology of how the medical elites are attempting to crush the common man.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 3:46 pm to idsrdum
That's just standard health messaging research. What message gets x population do more of y healthful thing.
It's nefarious if you think the intervention is dangerous or nefarious, of course. That should be the real debate.
It's nefarious if you think the intervention is dangerous or nefarious, of course. That should be the real debate.
This post was edited on 3/23/24 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 3/23/24 at 3:51 pm to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
What's your beef with Sharyl Attkisson?
Shes a woman, and MisplacedCuckguy doesnt like them. He prefers to be in the trench only with grunts. When he was in the military and they called him a flamer, it wasnt because of the weapon he was backpacking
Posted on 3/23/24 at 4:01 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
This sounds typical of your responses in both the issues being argued.
Basically, I’m wrong but I think I sound correct
Basically, I’m wrong but I think I sound correct
Posted on 3/23/24 at 4:19 pm to TigerDoc
Unfortunately our profession did tremendous damage to its reputation during covid in the way it was so quick to accept “data” or studies supporting its stance on issues such as vaccine effectiveness and masking yet was equally as quick in labeling alternative therapies as ineffective or “misinformation”. Never before has there been such an aggressive attack on info that didn’t agree with the federal medical position. “Trust the science” was equivalent to “Trust only us” even though their public statements were proven incorrect on multiple occasions.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 4:30 pm to minister of truth
Authorities and institutions of all kinds have been facing that from angry publics as the cost of amplifying information has plummeted. The performance of the institutions was mixed. A lot of the messaging was terrible (both in strategy and tactics), they were slow to understand the transmission dynamics and that set the table for policy problems, but even if they had that right the testing ramp-up was atrocious. But they didn't do everything poorly. Less than a year from identifying a new disease to mass-producing a vaccine was tremendous (even so good Trump can't help but keep taking credit for it).
This post was edited on 3/23/24 at 4:34 pm
Posted on 3/23/24 at 4:57 pm to TigerDoc
What seemed to be different was the manner in which the public was “informed” about the “novel” virus. Way too quick in strongly advocating the promoted therapies/preventative measures and way too aggressively attacking/squashing alternative therapies and their proponents even though it was way too early to effectively analyze the data on either. By far the most politically motivated stance in medicine in my lifetime.
Posted on 3/23/24 at 5:06 pm to minister of truth
quote:
By far the most politically motivated stance in medicine in my lifetime.
That's where the medical community shot its credibility in the face. It wasn't that they tried, made a good faith effort and got some things wrong, it was the naked politicization of their message and response.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News