It's Time for the Scientific Community to Admit We Were Wrong About COVID and It Cost Lives

Why would the government subsidize them.

 

Saves money if people don't get ill.

 

Reliance on masks to keep one safe and prevent one from spreading the virus to high risk people will make more people ill. Masks do not protect or prevent. It is irresponsible and reckless to promote the idea that masks do protect and prevent. Subsidizing masks sends that tragically deadly message.

 

I was suggesting N100 and P100 respirators, not masks.

I would not recommend masks.

 

They don’t protect or prevent as well. Would health care professionals who treat Ebola patients rely on them?

 

No they are using medical grade respirators, not industrial grade.

 

You're misinformed.

 

In Florida, no less. Protecting healthcare workers against covid.


P100 respirators

Why would they wear these if they do no good?

 

You can buy this "industrial grade" respirator on Amazon.

 

Florida had one of the best responses to covid of any state. They protected the most vulnerable but kept the economy going.

Regulations.

And your question is another example of a logical fallacy.

 

That doesn't make it appropriate for medical use. It is probably better than an N95 respirator but I don't think it has been tested on viruses.

 

P100 respirators have been tested extensively, of course, but no matter. It also doesn't matter that hospital workers wear P100 respirators.



We have a forum filled with people who work backwards from their conclusions.

 

What were the results of those tests? Please provide links or book sources.

Are you claiming that all hospital workers in civid wards where P-100 respirators? If not what percentage are using them? What percentage of hospital workers in covid wards have been infected with covid? Please provide links?

If you cannot provide answers to these questions it is very ironic that you disparage others. It’s a logical fallacy to make a claim that these respirators protect the wearer from covid based on the fact that a certain group of hospital workers use these respirators. The only way to back up that claim is to provide data showing that 100% of aerosol particles from breathing are attenuated by the respirators and there is absolutely no leakage. This data to my knowledge does not exist. Indeed the data shows the exact opposite.

 

British Columbia pop. 5,368,000 ... covid deaths 5,218 ... 972.06 covid deaths / million
Florida pop. 22,250,000 ... covid deaths 86,850 ... 3903.37 covid deaths / million

British Columbia has about one-quarter the covid death rate with no lockdowns, all public schools open except for a few weeks in early 2020.

If Florida had done as well as British Columbia, more than 60,000 Floridians would be alive today.
DeSantis did a bang up job.

You should study up on fallacies.

https://www.fallacyfiles.org/

 

Outcome data proves nothing. Data on mask performance does. You have not provided any data on mask performance. That is another form of a logical fallacy. Correlation does not prove causation.

DeSantis did do a "bang up" job. He protected the vulnerable and kept the Florida economy open. He took the time to understand the data and what it meant unlike the blue state progressives. Florida has a dispproportionate percentage of elderly with preconditions. If those people were infected with covid they succumbed not because of Covid but because of their very serious pre conditions. DeSantis prohibited returning covid patients to nursing homes unlike the governors in other states. Your blaming DeSantis for the deaths of 60,000 Floridians by comparing to Canada is ridiculous.

https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13756-020-00779-6

 

Not a chance when there are so many.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24011377/

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22P100+respirator%22+covid&btnG=

No one on earth knows the answers to your last two questions.

Spare me the personal attack.

I made no such claim.

I made no such claim.

Exact opposite of what?

 

I don't see 100%.

If you don't know the answers you can't come to the conclusion.

Then what is your claim?

 

Being wrong on science, even if it costs lives, is not necessarily morally wrong.

What they did wrong was use their powers within government to silence us to cover up their repeated mistakes, including the worst mistake: the creation of the virus itself.

 

You know this how?

You might try an updated source that doesn't say: "Based on the scientific evidence accumulated to date, our view is that SARS-CoV-2 is not spread by the airborne route to any significant extent and the use of particulate respirators offers no advantage over medical masks as a component of personal protective equipment for the routine care of patients with COVID-19 in the health care setting."

 

Question to ChatGPT: "Please provide some research on the efficacy of P100 respirators against covid."

Answer: "There is limited research specifically on the efficacy of P100 respirators against COVID-19, but they are considered highly effective at filtering out airborne particles, including viruses.

A study published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene in 2016 found that P100 respirators provided superior protection against small particle aerosols, such as those that might be generated during medical procedures or other high-risk activities, compared to other types of respirators.

Another study published in the Journal of Hospital Infection in 2020 compared the efficacy of different types of respiratory protection for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study found that N95 respirators, which have similar filtration capabilities to P100 respirators, were highly effective at reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers when compared to surgical masks or cloth masks.

While there is no specific research on the efficacy of P100 respirators against COVID-19, their high filtration capabilities suggest that they would provide significant protection against the virus. However, it's important to note that P100 respirators can be difficult to wear correctly and may not be practical for use outside of healthcare settings. Additionally, P100 respirators are often in short supply and may be prioritized for use by healthcare workers who are at highest risk of exposure to COVID-19."

 

Data.

And more data.

 

There is no data showing that these respirators remove 100% of aerosol particles from the wearers breathing activity both inhalation and exhalation. Therefore they do not protect or prevent.

"superior protection", "reducing the risk", "suggest they would provide significant protection", ... are meaningless qualitative phrases. Your quotes show that these masks do not protect or prevent.

ChatGPT??

 

I've had enough of this thread. See ya later.

 

They don't have to remove all virus particles to be effective.

https://www.webmd.com/covid/covid-viral-load

Suggest you carefully read WebMD above.

Artificial intelligence.

https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt

 

They must remove all the aerosol particles from inhalation and exhalation to protect and prevent. How many aerosol particles containing covid virus does it take? The answer is one.

Your link is self admittedly inconclusive.