Wuhan Flu update.

[schism666]

Again, I'm sorry that you are stupid. I cannot help you with that.

you spent more time responding that you don't care than actually finding your post that claims when you were infected. were you ever infected?

 

[Pookie]

i didn't expect you to back your claim.

He'd have to quote a post from one of his permabanned accounts, leading to a permabanning of his current one. So this is more about him being too lazy to set up a new alt right now.

 

[schism666]

He'd have to quote a post from one of his permabanned accounts, leading to a permabanning of his current one. So this is more about him being too lazy to set up a new alt right now.

what the fuck else does he have to do today

 

[rockcasbah]

what the fuck else does he have to do today

Did you know the Internet has other “places” people can go?

Plus, there’s the bathroom, the kitchen... busy day!

 

[schism666]

Did you know the Internet has other “places” people can go?

Plus, there’s the bathroom, the kitchen... busy day!

okie dokie! fer realz.

 

[rockcasbah]

Rent free!

 

[Rightguide]

A little background here, folks:

In Feb 2020, with 99.9% of all American Covid case clustered around three major cities with international airports (NYC, San Franscisco, and Seattle), our boy Taunto recognized the opportunity to make a political statement. He was suffering from a head cold at the time, deep in his trailer park in flyover country Missouri.

He immediately declared he had "Covid" (note: testing was not easily available back then and non-existent in Missouri ) and furthermore he "conquered" it when his head cleared up a few days later.

This gave him two important propaganda victories:
1. Covid "wasn't that bad" since he "survived" it with little more than advil and Sudafed.
2. He was made of "tuff stuff", no steenkin' virus can knock HIM down.


He continues to this day to revel in his lofty position as the first person in Missouri to be infected by Covid and survive.

But since then you've yet to produce evidence that what he said is false.

 

[rockcasbah]

But since then you've yet to produce evidence that what he said is false.

The Robs n luks don't care about trifling details like Truth.

 

[Rightguide]

Even the WaPo is coming around to what we were saying a year or so ago, that is, the Virus likely came from the Wuhan Lab:

Timeline: How the Wuhan lab-leak theory suddenly became credible

By
Glenn Kessler
The Fact Checker
May 25, 2021 at 12:00 a.m. PDT

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...han-lab-leak-theory-suddenly-became-credible/

 

[LukSkyFokker]

The Robs n luks don't care about trifling details like Truth.

Rent free!

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Even the WaPo is coming around to what we were saying a year or so ago, that is, the Virus likely came from the Wuhan Lab:

Timeline: How the Wuhan lab-leak theory suddenly became credible

By
Glenn Kessler
The Fact Checker
May 25, 2021 at 12:00 a.m. PDT

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...han-lab-leak-theory-suddenly-became-credible/

You claimed it couldn't be found in animals. You are very stupid.

 

[Conager]

Lyin' liar Fauci lied about lying about the efficacy of masks. His early public comments about about wearing masks to reduce the spread of the Wu Flu were truthful. His later backpedal saying he lied to protect supply was itself a lie.

He had no reason to lie when he emailed- “The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through the material,” on Feb 5, 2020 since that is what common sense and every study on mask efficacy has shown.

He displays his general ignorance of math when he parses it with "drugstore masks" since there is no significant difference in the size of the holes in any filtering by masks when viewed on the scale of the particles the virus travels on. He is not an industrial hygienist and no industrial hygienist would recommend anything but a closed respiration system for protection against airborne viruses.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Lyin' liar Fauci lied about lying about the efficacy of masks. His early public comments about about wearing masks to reduce the spread of the Wu Flu were truthful. His later backpedal saying he lied to protect supply was itself a lie.

He had no reason to lie when he emailed- “The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through the material,” on Feb 5, 2020 since that is what common sense and every study on mask efficacy has shown.

He displays his general ignorance of math when he parses it with "drugstore masks" since there is no significant difference in the size of the holes in any filtering by masks when viewed on the scale of the particles the virus travels on. He is not an industrial hygienist and no industrial hygienist would recommend anything but a closed respiration system for protection against airborne viruses.

Fauci was fine until 45 told you he wasn't.

 

[MartinHeidegger]

Fauci was fine until 45 told you he wasn't.

He's such a beta cuck. It's no wonder his exwife upgraded, in more ways than one.

 

[jomar]

Fauci was fine until 45 told you he wasn't.

Quit giving the guy such a hard time. His internet knowledge of immunology is vastly superior to Fauci’s real world knowledge because, you know, google.

 

[Conager]

Quit giving the guy such a hard time. His internet knowledge of immunology is vastly superior to Fauci’s real world knowledge because, you know, google.

Google does indeed tend to feed one's biases. Which is why I don't let it guide my reading. Go ahead and Google mask efficacy and post up all of the controlled studies that show that masks were shown to reduce the spread of airborne viruses.

As a fall-back, you can post correlation studies suggesting any such thing.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Google does indeed tend to feed one's biases. Which is why I don't let it guide my reading. Go ahead and Google mask efficacy and post up all of the controlled studies that show that masks were shown to reduce the spread of airborne viruses.

As a fall-back, you can post correlation studies suggesting any such thing.

Do you require that your passengers wear masks?

 

[Conager]

You know who could benefit from reading up on the subject rather than spending all of his time basking in fawning interviews?

Fauci.

https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2021/06/02/too-long-to-read-fauci-dismissed-scientists-warning-that-china-was-lying-about-covid-19-deaths-n390071

"Too long to read." -Anthony Fauci

 

[LukSkyFokker]

You know who could benefit from reading up on the subject rather than spending all of his time basking in fawning interviews?

Fauci.

https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2021/06/02/too-long-to-read-fauci-dismissed-scientists-warning-that-china-was-lying-about-covid-19-deaths-n390071

"Too long to read." -Anthony Fauci

Your "friends" caught the disease because they didn't listen to Fauci. This is lost in you because you're very stupid.

 

[jomar]

Google does indeed tend to feed one's biases. Which is why I don't let it guide my reading. Go ahead and Google mask efficacy and post up all of the controlled studies that show that masks were shown to reduce the spread of airborne viruses.

As a fall-back, you can post correlation studies suggesting any such thing.

I actually did post a university study that concluded masks work pretty well under reasonable circumstances. Broke it down into some work better than others but something was better than nothing, even the gators, if memory serves. But my post history only goes back to mid-April so you’ll have to trust me on it.

But I get you wanting to get into the weeds to prove a narrow point.

 

[Conager]

I actually did post a university study that concluded masks work pretty well under reasonable circumstances. Broke it down into some work better than others but something was better than nothing, even the gators, if memory serves. But my post history only goes back to mid-April so you’ll have to trust me on it.

But I get you wanting to get into the weeds to prove a narrow point.

There is nothing "narrow" about the size of the holes in mask material versus the size of particulate matter. It is cut and dried, because math is a actual, quantifiable thing.

Kabuki theater for the mask cultists is not "down in the weeds."

You don't need your post history to find any viable study that says a mask that does not filter out drywall dust completely somehow catches any significant amount of particulates that carry microscopic viruses.

You just wrongly accused me of googling for confirmation bias and can't type "mask efficacy study" into Google.

I, like most people, assumed (as you still do) that the actual surgical mask that my actual surgeon brother wears during actual surgery is worn because it is a meaningful control measure to protect the patient and/or a meaningful PPE measure to protect the surgeon. So, I read up on it to determine the best sort of mask. What I read was study after study saying it does nothing as PPE. And is only useful as control for infected patients in that it catches flegm from sneezes and coughs.

Once a virus is airborne, there is no protection possible in an environment where humans have to breathe. That is the very thing that real epidemiologists (not ones that play the role on TV) fear about airborne pathogens. They are virulently contagious because all the hand washing and lysol spraying of surfaces in the world has no effect. Breathing is exposure.

You are less obnoxious about that most here but all any of you have offered in rebuttal for well over a year is "YOU'RE not a DOCTOR!" "The 'experts' say" (with no actual support about subjects they are no more qualified than I on) or "I work in HEALTHCARE!"

None of which is valid rhetorical argumemt.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

There is nothing "narrow" about the size of the holes in mask material versus the size of particulate matter. It is cut and dried, because math is a actual, quantifiable thing.

Kabuki theater for the mask cultists is not "down in the weeds."

You don't need your post history to find any viable study that says a mask that does not filter out drywall dust completely somehow catches any significant amount of particulates that carry microscopic viruses.

You just wrongly accused me of googling for confirmation bias and can't type "mask efficacy study" into Google.

I, like most people, assumed (as you still do) that the actual surgical mask that my actual surgeon brother wears during actual surgery is worn because it is a meaningful control measure to protect the patient and/or a meaningful PPE measure to protect the surgeon. So, I read up on it to determine the best sort of mask. What I read was study after study saying it does nothing as PPE. And is only useful as control for infected patients in that it catches flegm from sneezes and coughs.

Once a virus is airborne, there is no protection possible in an environment where humans have to breathe. That is the very thing that real epidemiologists (not ones that play the role on TV) fear about airborne pathogens. They are virulently contagious because all the hand washing and lysol spraying of surfaces in the world has no effect. Breathing is exposure.

Do you require your surgeon to wear a mask?

 

[Conager]

Do you require your surgeon to wear a mask?

Points ^ and laughs at Kato's weak-sauce attempt at debate.

"But, but SURGEONS wear them!!"

Already addressed that, but for the especially slow:

All of my surgeons have worn one out of what I can only assume is hospital policy based on a sense of ritual and tradition. Some may actually believe it makes some sort of difference. I carried no infectious diseases at the time of any of my surgeries, so they needed no protection from me.

I require my surgeons to be free from any infectious disease while operating on me, so none of my surgeons needed to wear one for my protection. I don't need a healthy person to wear a mask around me at any time. . .even if we want to pretend they stop diseases.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Points ^ and laughs at Kato's weak-sauce attempt at debate.

"But, but SURGEONS wear them!!"

Already addressed that, but for the especially slow:

All of my surgeons have worn one out of what I can only assume is hospital policy based on a sense of ritual and tradition. Some may actually believe it makes some sort of difference. I carried no infectious diseases at the time of any of my surgeries, so they needed no protection from me.

I require my surgeons to be free from any infectious disease while operating on me, so none of my surgeons needed to wear one for my protection. I don't need a healthy person to wear a mask around me at any time. . .even if we want to pretend they stop diseases.

Your friends caught the disease because they didn't wear a mask.
Luk never caught the disease.

Do you require that your passengers wear a mask?

 

[Conager]

Points and laughs.

"But, but, Luk wore a mask and it 'protected' Luk"

So all the hospitalizations and deaths were of non-cultists?