The science of face masks

@humy said
I am sure that there is much corruption in China and I would guess probably even more so than the huge corruption that exists in many other countries including in the US when Trump was president and that's saying a lot, but, "They laugh at the high numbers of deaths in the USA and Europe"? That's just unintelligent worthless BS anti-China propaganda. If you imply that masks made ...[text shortened]... ge not nearly as good as masks made elsewhere, show us a weblink explaining the evidence for that...

I'm not much into link sharing dude. I never read the ones people send me so why would I send them out. But I can tell you that in fact they do laugh and gloat. Brag about how great China is because of all the deaths in other countries. I've read the forum posts and seen the stories. The reason the China Virus is all over the world is because China allowed it out. No need for me to give links. What is wrong with anti-China propaganda? You don't think they have anti-American/Western propaganda? Well they do.

@JinxDawson
So some researcher finds a mosquito strain very deadly and they take off and start infecting millions of people, and it was originally in Thailand say.
So does that make the Thai government culpable for those attacking mosquitos?
You are making assertions with no basis in fact.

The ability of genetics researches anywhere on the planet, ANYONE, cannot BEGIN to engineer the C19 virus, it is WAY to specific for humans to make. Something like one in a few hundred TRILLION chance it came out of a manufacturing lab.
But that won't reach you either since you are way out on the ultrarighwingnut monkey tree limb.

@jinxdawson said
I've read the forum posts and seen the stories. . No need for me to give links.

So you have seen some posts, I presume biased right-wing extremest layperson ones every bit as bad and lying as the biased communist extremest layperson ones like some I have also sometimes seen over the net, and 'seen the stories', I presume some wild right-wing extremist conspiracy ones every bit as bad and lying as the biased communist extremest layperson ones like some I have also seen over the net, and you have NO scientific links or any other type of link as a credible source of information, only politically motivated 'stories', code-word for baseless hearsay, and some crazed layperson posts. Its obvious from this your beliefs on this matter are delusional and baseless and you have chosen to believe whatever nonsense you want to believe. Most of the rest of us demand evidence and fact checking, which normally requires some links, so there IS a need for you to give links if you are ever to be taken seriously by us.

@metal-brain said
I told you the Netherlands was 15th several times. You know fully well they are nowhere close to #1.

If mandating masks was effective they would be in the top 5 and they are not even in the top 10. It appears face masks cause more harm than good based on that.

You say masks don't work.

Then what happened to the flu this year? We are experiencing the mildest flu season on record.

https://apnews.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-us-pandemic-2145d999319b53d8a32a829a324f398d

@soothfast said
You say masks don't work.

Then what happened to the flu this year? We are experiencing the mildest flu season on record.

https://apnews.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-us-pandemic-2145d999319b53d8a32a829a324f398d

I recently heard that all those standard flu deaths have simply been relabeled as Covid deaths. Very smart and clever, if you ask me.

@soothfast said
You say masks don't work.

Then what happened to the flu this year? We are experiencing the mildest flu season on record.

https://apnews.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-us-pandemic-2145d999319b53d8a32a829a324f398d

Here is an excerpt from the link below:

"Another possible explanation: The coronavirus has essentially muscled aside flu and other bugs that are more common in the fall and winter. Scientists don’t fully understand the mechanism behind that, but it would be consistent with patterns seen when certain flu strains predominate over others, said Dr. Arnold Monto, a flu expert at the University of Michigan."

https://nypost.com/2021/02/25/amid-covid-19-pandemic-flu-has-disappeared-in-the-us/

Another possibility is Bunny is right. I once created a thread about it and posted an article claiming the test is positive for any coronavirus and not just SARS2. The inventor of the PCR test said once that it was not meant to be used for testing. He also had no respect for Fauci and pointed out he lies a lot.

@bunnyknight said
I recently heard that all those standard flu deaths have simply been relabeled as Covid deaths. Very smart and clever, if you ask me.

I found an article that makes detailed claims that support your assertion.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/scientists-show-covid-tests-are-useless-are-based-on-flawed-science

@Metal-Brain
Give us a short version. Why is it flawed?

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
Give us a short version. Why is it flawed?

Look at the report from the link below and look where it says:

5. Positive and negative controls to confirm/refute specific virus detection.

https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

@metal-brain said
Look at the report from the link below and look where it says:

5. Positive and negative controls to confirm/refute specific virus detection.

https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

It seems specificity is certainly an issue. However, the broad specificity for multiple coronavirus strains is mostly irrelevant, as there are not large numbers of circulating virus in humans from other strains (e.g. MERS and SARS). Therefore, it is unlikely to see a false positive from this test due to an incidental MERS infection, especially in the US.

@wildgrass said
It seems specificity is certainly an issue. However, the broad specificity for multiple coronavirus strains is mostly irrelevant, as there are not large numbers of circulating virus in humans from other strains (e.g. MERS and SARS). Therefore, it is unlikely to see a false positive from this test due to an incidental MERS infection, especially in the US.

You forgot these:

229E (alpha coronavirus)
NL63 (alpha coronavirus)
OC43 (beta coronavirus)
HKU1 (beta coronavirus)

@metal-brain said
You forgot these:

229E (alpha coronavirus)
NL63 (alpha coronavirus)
OC43 (beta coronavirus)
HKU1 (beta coronavirus)

What's your point?

@wildgrass said
What's your point?

The common cold are partly coronaviruses, not only rhinoviruses.

@metal-brain said
The common cold are partly coronaviruses, not only rhinoviruses.

Sure they are. But the article you posted doesn't have any evidence of cross reactivity in this sense. In fact, evidence suggests the PCR primers do not amplify the common cold viruses.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-swab/fact-check-a-swab-test-is-highly-unlikely-to-misdiagnose-flu-or-common-cold-as-covid-19-idUSKBN26R3DH

@wildgrass said
Sure they are. But the article you posted doesn't have any evidence of cross reactivity in this sense. In fact, evidence suggests the PCR primers do not amplify the common cold viruses.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-swab/fact-check-a-swab-test-is-highly-unlikely-to-misdiagnose-flu-or-common-cold-as-covid-19-idUSKBN26R3DH

Try reading your own article. It doesn't say it is false, just partly false and reuters has done fake fact checking before. How much is unlikely? Why no percentage stated? Is "unlikely" relative to opinion?

Your own article says it used PCR tests. I refer you to my source that says they can falsely test positive from other coronaviruses. What is that? Partly true?

The reuters article simply quotes the opinion of someone. That is not evidence. That is one person talking crap.

Here is an excerpt from the study I posted:

"Consequently, in nearly all test procedures worldwide, merely 2 primer matches were used instead of all three. This oversight renders the entire test-protocol useless with regards to delivering accurate test-results of real significance in an ongoing pandemic."

Were all 3 primer patches used? If not, the reuters article is false based on the fact that 2 is common practice. Why are they only using 2? Are they trying to get inaccurate results? That is what it seems like.