Major Study Finds Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection Rates <<MOD WARNING>>

Discussion in 'Coronavirus (COVID-19) News' started by Bluesguy, Nov 19, 2020.

PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening. We urge you to seek reliable alternate sources to verify information you read in this forum.

  1. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,730
    Likes Received:
    8,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's odd given your many posts earlier in this thread stating that community mask use should not be mandated or even advised because there have been no studies showing that they work and your insistence that I provide a link to a study saying that masks work even after me stating that countries like S Korea is enough anecdotal evidence that masks work.

    Here are some of your earlier posts:
    "But physical properties of masks and their obvious and evidence based ability to act as barriers to droplets and aerosols does not translate directly to reduced transmission of viruses.This study proves nothing. It is evidence we are overconfident in our reliance on masks as a mitigation practice."

    "I am advocating for research that tells us if above 0% exists. You are advocating against such research. Yes, we do need to be able to accurately predict mask efficacy in community settings. If we can’t, we may be doing more harm than good. Or wasting resources for no benefit."

    "However, from what little community use I’ve observed, it’s clear masks are not having a positive effect
    ."


    They were not hiding asymptomatic cases to hide spreaders. They were initially hiding number of cases

    So I presume that you posted in 2018/19 flu season and 2019/20 flu season that masks should be recommended or even mandated every flu season? Or is 50,000 people dying every year just from a normal Flu strain even with a vaccine against a guessed strain nothing to worry about even though no one knows what that particular novel Flu strain is capable of?
     
  2. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We’ve been through all this before, but I’m willing to explain it again. First though, I need to know where to start so I’m going to ask you to show me you know what pragmatism and individualism are. Also, if you are familiar with the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
    The place to start in determining rates of asymptomatic spread is in determining the rate of asymptomatic infections. If asymptomatic cases are unreported it’s more difficult to ascertain what asymptomatic transmission rates might be. China was downplaying the danger of C19 every way they thought they could get away with.
    Are you turning into one of those folks that thinks C19 is the same as the flu? I really didn’t expect that argument. It was very clear in February and March the C19 case fatality rate well exceeded that of influenza.

    Now, I am the only one on this forum (in the world as far as I can determine) who advocates for accurately comparing flu to C19. So in that spirit I’ll point out there are well over 100,000 deaths from influenza annually in the US. Probably 150,000. Still, even if we include all influenza deaths, C19 is at least twice as deadly as influenza.

    So no, I’ve never told anyone to wear a mask for influenza. But I’ve never told anyone to for C19 either except perhaps sarcastically.

    I’m not exactly sure what your point here is. Are you saying anyone who didn’t advocate for masks each flu season shouldn’t have anything to say on the subject of masks for C19?

    Now, get back to me on pragmatism, individualism and affirming the consequent so I’ll know where to start with your lead paragraphs.
     
  3. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    already did that in post 1371. Also,..
    YOU accused Fauci of lying that they should not be wearing masks.
    So it's actually YOU who should prove Fauci is wrong,... and not me proving Fauci is right.
    And all along, you just ranted on he lied, but did not know how not so effective masks are as research in march 2020 points out.
    You sure must feel dumb now.

    I claimed what Fauci said in his 60 minute intverview in March. And he was talking about masks people in general wear in China and South Korea on any given day.

    You're just parroting Rubio, who's the liar with his backing up Trump claiming he won the elections and bla bla bla.
    And we all know you're up in that same tree of fake news.

    WRONG. He said the opposite.
    So your claim he said that nobody should have them, is right wing fake news.
    You obviously never watched the 60 minute interview.

    I already sourced the link Rubio said Fauci lied. You're obviously parroting his fake news while never saw the inteview and checked.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2021
  4. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL. So Fauci wanted healthcare workers to have less than N95 quality masks? That is your argument.
    I didn’t accuse Fauci of lying. I’ve provided irrefutable evidence he did lie on numerous occasions over several months.

    I’ve provided a link to numerous studies in existence years before C19 that show a relative risk reduction of from the 0.2 range to the 0.7 range, translating to an absolute risk reduction of about 14%. Of course this is actual formal research, not the opinions of media and politicians that you parrot. I won’t ever have to feel dumb because I base my posts on empirical evidence instead of what media wants me to believe.
    So why was Fauci saving crappy masks for healthcare workers? You aren’t thinking about the argument you are making.
    Everything I’ve posted is Fauci’s words and verifiable evidence from scientific studies. Since Rubio isn’t using facts to back up his opinions he’s just like you. Again, I have no interest in what any politician says about science because they are all ignorant.
    I’ve quoted from it repeatedly. I’ve provided time stamps from various segments. He said: “Right now in the United States people should not be walking around with masks”. That is a bald faced lie and I’ve provided comprehensive evidence it was a lie.
    I have no interest in Rubio. I’ve been pointing out Fauci’s lies for months before your Rubio link. And everything I’ve posted is based on empirical evidence. Your posts are not. And I’m the one who quotes from the interview and provides time stamps. It’s clear you are the one who hasn’t watched the interview.
     
  5. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,730
    Likes Received:
    8,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fauci told these lies:
    " we are overconfident in our reliance on masks as a mitigation practice."

    "I am advocating for research that tells us if above 0% exists. You are advocating against such research. Yes, we do need to be able to accurately predict mask efficacy in community settings. If we can’t, we may be doing more harm than good. Or wasting resources for no benefit."

    "However, from what little community use I’ve observed, it’s clear masks are not having a positive effect.
    "

    "I think the most dangerous aspect of masks is the false sense of security they produce in certain demographics. Implicit trust in them promotes less social distancing and more needless interactions in public. I think those more negative implications outweigh their protective qualities."

    Oh wait, they were not Fauci's words. You did not explain anything, you whitewashed your words. Other than you saying that Fauci lied in February what is the difference between your words in the last three months and Fauci's words in February?

    As for flu comparison:
    US total Flu deaths 1/1/20 - 2/29/20 = 13,422
    US total Covid deaths 1/1/20 - 2/29/20 = 21

    China total Covid deaths 1/1/20 - 2/29/20 = 2870
    China total reported cases 1/1/20 - 2/29/20 = 79824
    China reported number of new cases on march 7th = 0

    South Korea total Covid deaths 1/1/20 - 2/29/20 = 17
    South Korea total reported cases 1/1/20 - 2/29/20 = 3150
    South Korea reported number of new cases on march 7th = 448 and dropping rapidly

    So yes, I would say that anyone who says that mask usage should have been advised in February ("now") for covid would be a hypocrite if not stating that mask usage should be advised against seasonal flu. Hindsight is a wonderful thing
     
  6. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is it your argument that all healthcare workers only use N95 masks?
    Explain this mask wearing healthcare worker.....
    [​IMG]

    You got nothing.

    Total nonsense. Covid has a certain degree of infecting people. The one mutated in the UK is more infectious. The average mask (not the N95) is all but 100% safe. How well a normal mask works and what % of the reduction obviously depends on how infectious the virus is. Research pre corona is therefor irrelevant.

    You keep acknowledge that there is a shortage of billions. But you KEEP being utterly dishonest by leave out that Fauci used that as a reason that the general public should not have masks, in order to cook up that Fauci lied.

    Only one of us is parroting Rubio's opinion that's not based on facts,... and we both know it's you.

    You keep acknowledge that there is a shortage of billions. But you KEEP being utterly dishonest by leave out that Fauci used that as a reason that the general public should not have masks, in order to cook up that Fauci lied.

    I sourced that you parrot his opinion.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2021
  7. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Since you failed to provide any evidence you are familiar with the concepts of pragmatism and individualism, let’s start there. I believe individuals have the right and responsibility to make their own decisions on whether mask usage is right for them. To make good decisions, individuals need as much relevant information as possible. Unfortunately, most politicians and media are ideologues with an agenda, so only disseminate information that is politically advantageous. In fact, it’s been quite common for media to disseminate blatantly false information on C19. My posts here on C19 are meant to provide information and make people think so they can make decisions best for themselves and their families.

    Now, not only do I tend to fall on the individualist side of the spectrum, I’m more of a pragmatist/realist than an ideologue. In fact, it’s my individualism that allows me to take a realistic approach to C19 and masks specifically. My individualism has allowed me to be in a position where my risk from this pandemic is minuscule. The inherent risk of injury and death from my day to day work is orders of magnitude greater than my risk from C19. Because of this, I’m able to be unemotional about C19 and masks. I don’t “need” masks to be “safe” or feel “safe”. Neither do I need masks to appear effective or infective to make a political point or fit in with a “tribe”.

    Finally, I don’t fall for the fallacy most do about inherent protective properties of masks translating directly to societal or even individual benefit. Because I’m not emotionally attached to masks or no masks I can conclude masks have physical properties that when used correctly, all else being equal, protect the wearer and others. Because I’m not emotionally attached to masks or no masks I can correctly conclude based on empirical evidence there are situations where inherent protective properties of masks are negated by improper usage or behavioral changes by the wearers.

    So, I am certain masks can protect wearers and those whom infected wearers come into contact with. The evidence is clear. I’m also certain in many cases false security or over estimation of masks efficacy is leading to negation of possible benefit. The evidence is quite clear on this as well. But I still suggest the individual consider mask usage because the individual can still benefit even if society as a whole does not. And I point out the failings of masks in an attempt to get people to re-think how they use masks.

    Remember, I’m the only member who doesn’t recommended AGAINST mask usage where it could do the most good. I don’t point out we are not using masks where they would do the most good for the benefit of society because I know people like you are as anti mask as the die hard Trumper. Your opinions on masks are based on emotion and appeal to authority, not on empirical evidence. Yet I want other individuals to know how to protect themselves and their loved ones even though I know you won’t and I know “experts” aren’t likely to be any more honest in the future than in the past. I don’t want people to die as a result of lack of knowledge, so I inform people how they can best protect themselves and the ones they love.

    So the quotes you’ve provided above of me in the past are all based on empirical evidence that is irrefutable. I’ve provided the evidence, but of course you don’t quote any of that. What’s even more interesting is my point in the quotes you provided above about negative consequences of masks were specifically pointed out by Fauci in the March 8 60 Minutes interview we’ve been discussing. You accepted the idea from him when he recommended AGAINST masks, but now say I’m lying for pointing out the same thing when I’ve never said there’s no reason to wear a mask.
    LOL.

    Accepted CFR of influenza (incorrect, but what Fauci and other experts use)=0.1%
    CFR of C19 China (your numbers) 2-29-20= 3.595%
    CFR of C19 South Korea 2-29-20=0.54%
    CFR of C19 US 2-29-20 unknown at the time. There was one confirmed death known on that date.
    Thank God you aren’t a public health epidemiologist!

    Now, are all the doctors and epidemiologist in China and South Korea who implemented mask usage for C19 but not influenza hypocrites? Here’s what George Gao, director-general of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention said around the third week of March, previous to the US recommending masks.
    Why are Asian experts so much more effective than US “experts”? Why did they make correct conclusions and recommend masks while ours recommended against masks for months even after the example set by Asian countries?
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2021
  8. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’ve repeatedly referenced astm level 3 masks for healthcare workers so you should not have to ask that.

    You keep talking about 3M masks (3M makes dozens of different masks) and masks in pictures from South Korea but never specify exactly what type of mask you mean. You’ve claimed the ones seen in South Korea aren’t the type Fauci was trying to save for US healthcare, but as of February 2020 the most common mask worn in South Korea was the KF 94, which is the Korean equivalent to the N95.
    Just word for word false statements made by Fauci. LOL.
    If pre Corona research is irrelevant, why did the CDC and Fauci start recommending masks on April 3? There was no published formal study on masks for C19 then. Nor was there in July when masks were all the rage in the US. If pre Corona research is irrelevant why did Chinese and South Korean experts recommend masks based on pre Corona evidence?

    What on earth does this mean? What masks are “dangerous”?
    “The average mask (not the N95) is all but 100% safe.”
    It doesn’t matter why he lied. A lie is a lie. His lie is responsible for thousands of deaths. A lame excuse doesn’t change that.
    My posts are based on verifiable facts. And I’ve been presenting these facts for months before your Rubio nonsense. I’ve linked to posts of mine pre-dating Rubio’s comments. It’s impossible for me to be parroting his opinion. :)
    A lie is intentional deception. That’s what Fauci did. He lied. Not only is his excuse for lying irrelevant, it’s in direct conflict with the science of epidemiology.
    No. I’ve linked to posts where I’ve pointed out Fauci’s lies months before your Rubio silliness. Do you know what the term parroting means? Here’s a definition:
    “to repeat exactly what someone else says, without understanding it or thinking about its meaning: ..”

    If I make a statement supported by empirical evidence, and someone else says something similar without supporting evidence months later, it’s not I who parrots.

    You are actually parroting your PolitiFact link!
     
  9. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,730
    Likes Received:
    8,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL at the wall of waffling white washing of your statements which I'm going to mostly ignore except for the following extracts:

    "My posts here on C19 are meant to provide information and make people think so they can make decisions best for themselves and their families."
    LOL. Make people think after you writing "it’s clear masks are not having a positive effect." and " I think those more negative implications outweigh their protective qualities." and "we may be doing more harm than good" by wearing masks? Make people think! What, all 10 of us who may read these posts and anyone who accepts your words will conclude best to not wear a mask LOL.

    "
    I know people like you are as anti mask as the die hard Trumper." You are an anti-masker as proven by your many statements.
    Indeed in the first half of this thread you were posting endless anti-mask posts

    "There was one confirmed death known on that date.Thank God you aren’t a public health epidemiologist!"
    Learn to read! I did not use the word 'reported' in those figures for the US. They were obtained from https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Weekly-Counts-of-Deaths-by-State-and-Select-Causes/muzy-jte6 so as to give a comparison with Flu figures. You know, using honesty when posting comparison figures. And hilariously your one death gives support to my argument which makes your argument even worse!

    And as for the words of George Gao, he used the word 'opinion' which is exactly what I said in a previous post stating that Fauci's gave an 'opinion' which is not a lie

    Fauci gave a justified opinion at the time, he did not lie. Only one person was reported to have died which you admitted. Unlike you, Fauci knew that advising general mask wear on February 17th when there were practically zero cases would be justifiably attacked by people like you. Fauci knew that advising people to wear masks when they have never worn a mask before could be a problem with little benefits but detrimental to Health Care Workers

    South Korea were close to running out of mask for their health care staff because half of their population in February purchased all the K94 masks, Luckily their stocks were proportionally bigger than the US reserves ( Trump admin negligence) and they persuaded their population to purchase the cloth masks that they started to be mass produce (only 10% wore cloth masks in February). Fauci knew that the Trump admin had cocked up on PPE and knew that if he advised community mask wear, US stocks for HCW would not be available
     
  10. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, if you selectively quote me as you continue to do you can color my position pretty much any way you like. I’m quite confident my posts encourage thought in demographics that are into critical thought. :)
    LOL. You can not quote me encouraging anyone to not wear a mask. My posts were not anti mask in this thread. They were an explanation for people like you that don’t know what statistical significance and confidence intervals mean. You and Fauci have discouraged mask usage. Again, you do not post quotes of me recommending masks, which I have done. And I’ve been lambasted by anti maskers like you for doing so. :)
    I corrected your error. On 2-29-20 we did not know of more than one confirmed C19 death up to that point in the US. After that date it was confirmed there had been more than one. But at the time you claim we knew of 21 we did not. One death confirmed in the US at that time is irrelevant. We knew from other countries the CFR of Covid was much higher than influenza. Your own data that I used in calculations of CFR confirms that.
    Ok. So Fauci is incompetent in your opinion. I’ve said numerous times Fauci is either a liar or incompetent. I think he’s a liar. You think he’s just incompetent. The thing is I’ve given plenty of evidence Fauci isn’t incompetent. Fauci is every bit as intelligent and educated as Gao. Yet he waited months to implement mitigation he watched Gao and others use successfully.
    Again, I didn’t “admit” anything. I pointed out the error of your claim.

    Why would I attack a recommendation on the 17th of February? There is no record of me attacking mask recommendations at all. Conversely, both you and Fauci are on record opposing mask usage.
    You think you are defending Fauci but you are pushing the narrative hard that he’s an incompetent boob. If your above is accurate (I’m not aware of any mass production of cloth masks in South Korea or any data that shows prevalence of KF 94 usage decreased after February), Fauci should have recommended cloth masks in February and March, not waited till April after infection rates were exponential and thousands were dead. Please, I beg you to just try to think critically about the arguments you make.

    Just so you know, the South Korean shortage was based on much more than domestic purchases. Most inventory had been sold to China before Covid hit South Korea and some manufacturers were cutting production to inflate prices. I would like to see a per capita comparison of stockpiled masks in Korea vs. the US if you have that data.
     
  11. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm referring to what Fauci talks about. That's rather specific.

    I claimed nothing. Fauci claimed something.

    source this.

    You still got no clue what types of masks Fauci talks about in his 60 minute interview, yet you claim he lied about it.
    Obviously, you got nothing.

    Go ask Fauci

    Go ask South Korea. And around June / July they became aware of asymptomatic infections.

    You're quoting me on a word that I did not use. You're getting delusional now for sure.

    You should know by now how well your average cloth masks works and how that compares to the masks of that picture of that nurse I put up against the covid (not the type from the UK).

    Lame excuse... he said -paraphrasing- that the general public can not wear masks due to a shortage and only the sick and healthcare workers must use them.
    I am accusing you that you nit picking the words in red out of an entire interview, purposely raping it out of context in order to falsely accuse him of lying.
    And so far you've not defended against what you did.



    You're saying exactly what Rubio is saying.
    It's been fact checked...

    https://www.politifact.com/factchec...rubio-says-anthony-fauci-lied-about-masks-fa/

    Rubio said that Fauci lied about masks in March.
    This is incorrect in several ways.

    Fauci did say, "there is no reason to be walking around with a mask,"
    but to call that lying takes Fauci’s words out of context.
    The country faced a shortage of high-quality masks,
    and Fauci also said in his interviews that masks should be preserved
    for sick people and health care workers.



    Game set and match.
     
  12. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,730
    Likes Received:
    8,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL Hypocrite! You've continually used a selective quote from Faucui ignoring his caveat and context
     
  13. hawgsalot

    hawgsalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2017
    Messages:
    10,339
    Likes Received:
    9,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  14. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Provide a word for word quote.
    Provide a word for word quote.
    I thought you knew all this? Are you just parroting politifact? LOL
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/1103510/south-korea-types-face-mask-used-due-to-coronavirus/

    I know. You don’t. And you can’t provide the quote from Fauci. Why? Because it’s not in the politifact link you are parroting.
    I have word for word quotes of Fauci making statements in direct denial of science.
    Thank you for conceding your ignorance on this subject.
    Oh no. They knew about asymptomatic and presymptomatic spread long before June. China had documented cases In January with the information published in February.
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762028

    Even the WHO was admitting presymptomatic spread the first week of April and they are always late to the party.
    Now, I’m asking YOU, why did South Korea make correct conclusions and Fauci make incorrect conclusions?
    I quoted you word for word and asked for clarification on what masks are safe or dangerous. . Here is what I wrote that you edited by separating your words from my question. . Why do you need to edit my post?

    I did not attribute the word dangerous to you. I asked you what masks are dangerous as opposed to safe.
    You clearly know nothing about masks. Your nurse could be wearing anything from a astm level 1 to an astm level 3 mask. You have no idea what mask she is wearing. And there are all kinds of masks in the U.K.

    What does “all but 100% safe” mean? Are you claiming a the average mask offers 100% protection to the wearer, to those around the wearer, or something else? Your statements on masks are so ambiguous as to be meaningless.
    No paraphrasing please. Direct quotes from Fauci.
    His statement (that I quoted word for word) was a lie. You are now editing his statement to fit your narrative. I have done nothing but provide direct quotes of Fauci and provide empirical evidence they are in direct denial of known science at the time.


    Fact checked by epidemiologists, virologists, and biologists or by political journalists?

    Funny how there is nothing in PolitiFact about all the published research on mask efficacy that existed prior to Fauci’s lies. Odd how there is no mention of the asymptomatic transmissions observed in China pre-dating Fauci’s lie. No mention of experts like Gao from China who implemented mask usage months before Fauci lied and saved thousands of Chinese lives by doing so. Interesting how PolitiFact doesn’t point out all the information we had on presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission of respiratory viruses before Fauci failed to recommend masks. Also lacking is any mention of the fact we couldn’t tell who was infected and who wasn’t in some states because of a shortage of testing in those states. And no mention that masks are one of the best ways to mitigate spread from untested individuals whether symptomatic or asymptomatic.

    Also lacking from PolitiFact’s synopsis is a discussion of blatant logical and scientific inconsistency in Fauci’s comments including “When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is”. Thus is clearly inconsistent with the claim healthcare workers needed the masks. Unless of course healthcare workers need to “feel a little bit better” instead of being protected.

    Curiously, PolitiFact does not address this blatant false statement. “ Exactly, that’s the point. It could lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it.“

    Did the approximately 10,000 people who died of C19 between Fauci’s lie and April 3 “really need” masks? I think they most certainly did. Yet PolitiFact dismisses 10,000 American deaths to excuse Fauci’s lies.

    In short PolitiFact is more ignorant of epidemiology than Trump and that’s a very low bar.

    Now, to demonstrate I’m parroting Rubio you must provide quotes dated before October of Rubio saying anything contained in the preceding five paragraphs. Otherwise you are offering your complete concession in this matter.
     
  15. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No. I’ve repeatedly criticized the context as well I’ve never ignored it. The context makes what he said much worse. Your argument would benefit from ignoring the context. The context buttresses my position nicely.
     
  16. Tahuyaman

    Tahuyaman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2014
    Messages:
    12,909
    Likes Received:
    1,524
    Trophy Points:
    113
    More and more research is telling us that masks don't work, but we already knew that.

    In the begging even Fauci said that. Now he's advising people to wear two masks. The guy is a clown.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  17. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,730
    Likes Received:
    8,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A recent report has just been released:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w#change-history

    No new symptomatic cases and 300 asymptomatic cases (detection rate 0.303/10,000, 95% CI 0.270–0.339/10,000) were identified. There were no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts of asymptomatic cases. 107 of 34,424 previously recovered COVID-19 patients tested positive again (re-positive rate 0.31%, 95% CI 0.423–0.574%). The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan was therefore very low five to eight weeks after the end of lockdown.

    As for me, I'm not convinced that asymptomatic transmission is much of a threat but presymptomatic transmission is a big threat and IMO the driver in this pandemic.
     
  18. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm with you on this one. The key word is "can" rather than "does" The toilet seat can spread the virus, but there is little evidence that it does. We really need to put numbers with some of these claims.
     
    557 likes this.
  19. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree presymptomatic transmission is likely responsible for more infections. But don’t forget the information I’ve provided on asymptomatic transmission of influenza. Even for the same strains, asymptomatic transmission rates vary widely depending on variables we can’t identify. So assuming asymptomatic transmission of C19 is rare based on one study is not a wise assumption when lives are at stake.
     
  20. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, good point about fomite spread supposedly being very rare.
     
  21. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,730
    Likes Received:
    8,773
    Trophy Points:
    113
    True, but it was based on 10 million people in the study and surprisingly few positive cases and the 107 re-infected people were asymptomatic. I haven't fully read the study yet. It would be interesting to know which strain these positive people had (which might be in the study)
     
  22. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I remember someone posting this when it came out. I just looked it up and it was in this thread. Here’s my thoughts on Nov. 24 that I reconfirm after reading it again today.

    EDIT:
    I see antibody testing was conducted and over half had antibodies confirming infection but showing those cases were most likely convalescent case not active asymptomatic infections.

    All cultures were negative as well. The asymptomatic cases were almost all certainly convalescent or false positives. Remember false positives are more likely when infection rates are low.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2021
  23. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I already sourced the interview, that you have not watched. Not going to transcript a thing. His advice for the general public is based on a shortage that there aren't enough masks.

    You quoted some words. I accuse you of leaving words out of that interview in order to cook up that so called lie.
    You're deliberately leaving the part out that his advice is based on the shortage.
    It's NOT part of your "word for word" claim.

    You can't quote me on conceding when I'm telling you to go ask Fauci.

    It closes with "The mechanism by which asymptomatic carriers could acquire and transmit the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 requires further study."
    So they got no clue how this goes on. You don't know the 1st thing of reading something scientific. All you're good for is cherry picking some words.

    https://www.who.int/news/item/29-06-2020-covidtimeline
    2 April 2020
    WHO reported on evidence of transmission from symptomatic, pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic people infected with COVID-19, noting that transmission from a pre-symptomatic case can occur before symptom onset.

    You can click the link:
    There are few reports of laboratory-confirmed cases who are truly asymptomatic, and to date, there has been no documented asymptomatic transmission. This does not exclude the possibility that it may occur. Asymptomatic cases have been reported as part of contact tracing efforts in some countries.

    You make it up that Fauci made an incorrect conclusion. It was Donalds task to solve the problem of a shortage in masks ranging in the billions, and HE did not do what the South Korean government did.

    You're quoting yourself again and again and claim I wrote that word, when I never did. It's all you.

    If you know how well a masks works, than you would have all these questions for me about it.

    You're no epidemiologists, virologists, and biologists or political journalists yet you claim he lied.
    I sourced it got fact checked, and it's just not.

    You're no authority to dismiss my source by your silly opinion.


    Doesn't matter. You're just saying the same thing.
    And it's just not true. I sourced it.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2021
  24. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,375
    Likes Received:
    9,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ok. So you haven’t watched the interview you are just parroting PolitiFact. I have provided word for word quotes and time stamps from the interview. You are now on record changing Fauci’s words to suit your narrative instead of quoting him directly.
    Nope. I’ve repeatedly shown how that “advice” was incorrect. I’ve not left it out, I’ve shown it to be in denial of science.
    I accept your concession.
    LOL. The “mechanism” isn’t relevant. The fact such transmission occurs is what’s relevant to recommending masks. We understand very little about how vaccines work, yet we recommend their use.
    I’ve made nothing up. Fauci recommended against mask until April. That is a fact. And even Chinese epidemiologists criticized him for not recommending masks sooner. Trump has no reason to acquire masks for the public because his top adviser said they weren’t necessary or effective.
    I put a word in quotes for emphasis. I never claimed you wrote the word. I supplied your whole quote as well. You still can’t support your claim masks (not N95) are safe. Why can’t you?
    I’m simply demonstrating you have no idea what you are talking about. Thanks for proving you don’t.
    Can you please provide evidence of your claim about me. The Fauci lie is clear based on open source information. Even the hacks at PolitiFact could figure it out. They just choose to ignore any evidence that doesn’t support their narrative.
    Your fact checkers are ignorant of facts or are ignoring the facts.
    I’ve not presented opinion. I’ve presented facts neither you or PolitiFact were aware of or are willfully ignoring. Now that I’ve educated you, you deny science. If I was incorrect you could present evidence instead of using strawman arguments about Rubio and Trump.
    Thank you for admitting you deny science. Thanks for admitting you care nothing for facts. Thank you for admitting you revere political journalists and loath the work of scientists.
     
  25. Darthcervantes

    Darthcervantes Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    16,903
    Likes Received:
    17,130
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not a scientist but if someone coughs in your face and both people aren't wearing masks...and then if that happens with both people that ARE wearing masks...i think the people in the first scenario are gonna be at more risk
     

Share This Page