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

Pro life groups are a tiny minority who never make the news. Religion is a take it or leave it thing only 1.2% of the population attend church, we have no religious tv channels etc. Homosexuality, gender change are readily accepted. Self determination is a bit more tricky because we're not sure what it really means yet, but we will get there. Interestingly WOKE is losing traction as it became lopsided and we don't like that.
We are believers in climate change on the whole, we have our nutters, but if I asked 50 people in the street I doubt I'd find one denier.
Greta is a hero here. And as I say the UK with nearly 70 million people squeezed into a tiny Island still managed to plant enough turbines to supply over 30% renewable. 63% non carbon. And we get live updates
https://grid.iamkate.com/
Interconnectors are pretty much all Nuclear from France.

 

I just don’t see the advantage to “green energy” if it doesn’t decrease CO2 emissions overall.

 

Certainly not. Changes to production methods yes. But production of meat with ruminants on permanent rangeland is one of the most efficient land uses there is.

Grass is the second best carbon sequestration tool behind forest on a ton per acre equivalent potential. But forests (as I previously pointed out are not efficient carbon sinks at all in CA). Researchers (not just hick farmers) are figuring this out as well.

https://www.earth.com/news/trees-grass-carbon-sink/

The amount of bare ground in vineyards varies. The more bare ground, the lower the grape yields. Some varieties of grapes are managed for lower yield which improves wine quality. Other varieties are managed for high yield so more bare ground is utilized. We can find pictures showing all types of percentages of vine to cover ratios. Young vines are especially vulnerable to competition so typically have little growth between vines. But 1/3 bare ground seems to be an average.

Also, clipped or mowed “between-vine” foliage/grass does not sequester nearly the carbon of a grazed pasture system.

edit to add:

I should mention, probably the most efficient, carbon sequestering food production method known is pork production in a managed oak and chestnut silvopasture system. You have a huge sustainable carbon sink and high quality nutrient dense meat product that is much more environmentally sound than any vegetarian diet from a land use perspective.

 

Very interesting.

Haven't had a chance to dive into your electrical situation. But just to get things going, since the US consistently performs more abortions than the U.K., and all empirical evidence shows regular religious service attendance adds between 4-9 years to life expectancy, what do you think accounts for your about 2 year advantage in longevity over the US?

Oh, I just noticed which subforum we are in! Let’s move somewhere appropriate. You pick, we’ll move there. We are in violation of forum rules!

 

But it does, if they burned coal they would still be doing the other things that produce Co2 as well. Every cut in Co2 is a cut.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...differences-between-the-us-and-europe.585333/

Moved here.

 

lol. I just created one as well. Disregard my tag I’ll go to your link! Sorry!

 

Breaking news from one year ago:

No, You DO NOT Need Face Masks For Coronavirus—They Might Increase Your Infection Risk

 

This is a crock of u no what

 

Anecdotal Department: A friend of mine was told by his doctor that his constantly wearing a mask during 8 hour shifts at his job was a contributing factor to his upper respiratory infection that came on 2 months after he had the corona infection.

In many cases masks CAUSE disease.

 

Many, yes, but per centage wise...infinitesimal
.

 

So are you a science denier?

Not only do you not need them, you shouldn’t wear them, according to infection prevention specialist Eli Perencevich, MD, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at the University of Iowa’s College of Medicine.

“The average healthy person does not need to have a mask, and they shouldn’t be wearing masks,” Dr. Perencevich said. “There’s no evidence that wearing masks on healthy people will protect them. They wear them incorrectly, and they can increase the risk of infection because they’re touching their face more often.”

 

Here's one from the History Department:

People thought face coverings would protect them from the Black Death that wiped out anywhere from 30 to 90% of the population of Europe depending on where you lived, but they were wrong, too.

What they did get right was personal distancing and to a lesser degree better hygiene.

One of the best primary accounts of that time is found in Giovanni Boccaccio's The Decameron, which relates not only the devastating impact the Plague had on his native Florence (80%+ death rate) but how people fled the city to escape the pandemic and an almost certain death. It's astonishing how some people behave like we're experiencing something similar to that epic humanitarian catastrophe...

 

That's because the black death (Bubonic plague) is a bacterial infection spread by flea bites or direct contact. Not a respiratory virus spread by exhaling.

 

Perhaps, but the more likely interpretation would be that few doctors are as blunt and honest as my friend's, and in general the subject is not addressed at all by MSM. Thus nobody knows about it.

 

Actually, the Black Death consisted of three plagues - bubonic, pneumonic, and septicemic - and the pneumonic plague was a respiratory infection:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumonic_plague

I'm no expert on the leaping ability of fleas, but I presume that keeping a safe distance from others (especially those traveling on Genoese trading vessels) would have kept you from getting bit by an infected flea or inhaling plague particles, and by most if not all accounts people's instincts served them well. Unfortunately, the impromptu masks that people came up with back then weren't nearly as effective for obvious reasons.

 

It was the bubonic plague that became known as the black death. Due to the skin discolouration it caused.

The fleas did not leap from human to human in the street, they live in the bedlinen etc and come out to feed. They also fed on rats and got carried from place to place that way.
That said, staying apart is likely to stop most disease spread except perhaps water borne.
However on the original point you were completely off target.

 

It was the pandemic in general that became known as the Black Death, and the discoloration you speak of - the blackening of the extremities - is a product of the necrosis associated with septicemic plague, not bubonic plague.

As for the etymology of the term "Black Death", it probably had nothing to do with said necrosis:

While the Black Death was indeed a combination of three plagues (bubonic, pneumonic and septicemic), and the different symptoms were noted by contemporary observers, what the three share in common is the plague bacterium Yersinia pestis.

I'm not sure what you mean by my original point being completely off target. I'm not aware of anyone who has disputed the facts that 1) masks were ineffective against the Black Death and 2) distancing was an effective preventative measure against all three forms of plague and transmission.

As for the WuFlu, I think we see a similar situation where social distancing (including isolating yourself when you're sick) is by far the more effective measure against contracting the coronavirus, and that probably goes for every other contagious disease. Masks may help, but I've seen that they have not kept people wearing masks from catching the virus and masks have not kept people wearing masks from transmitting it to other people wearing masks.

 

The implication was that masks don't work now and that we learnt this way back when we had the black death. This was off target.

 

Masks don't work like the frightened think they work.

When everything the American people believe is false, we will know the success of our misinformation efforts.

 

I'm glad you asked them.

 

Since I never asserted, suggested or implied that we learned that masks don't work during the Black Death I can see why you would consider that off target.

 

You said.
People thought face coverings would protect them from the Black Death that wiped out anywhere from 30 to 90% of the population of Europe depending on where you lived, but they were wrong, too.

Don't you hate people who don't have the strength of character to stand by their words.

 

I stand by my words and they weren't an assertion or suggestion that people learned that masks don't work back when we had the Black Death. It's a statement of fact that people thought masks would protect them just as we thought masks would protest us and they were wrong just like us.

Sorry if you misinterpreted my words and I hope this helps clarify things.

 

. . . people stuffed leather coverings with flowers because they thought that the plague was caused by "noxious fumes" and that good smells would prevent it. It has nothing to do with using masks to slow the spread of respiratory diseases. Sorry if you misinterpreted reality and I hop this helps clarify things.