This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Here's your Mask Protocol  (Read 71466 times)

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5337
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #555 on: July 25, 2021, 02:53:07 AM »
Much of the
Here is a very small smattering of the very many studies which go the other way, none of which happened to be on that page by some "mysterious" reason:

Thanks for posting that, it's actually important to be familiar with both sides of these arguments. I've seen some criticism of many of the studies here which leads me to not have confidence in their results.

For example, most of these are not controlled studies. Wang et al, is one of the stronger studies demonstrating compelling results for mask-wearing. However its focus is on individuals who wear masks in their own home -- Most people do not do this. Are the "~80%" protective effects stated actually a result of mask wearing, or is it because we have a self-selected group of people with abnormal personal & social habits (or other confounding factors)?

FWIW I have no personal objection to wearing masks if masks are actually effective. I just don't think we have strong evidence that they are effective, or that the positive effects of mask wearing are worth sacrificing personal liberty or other negative health impacts that result from mask mandates. For example, when I see people freaking out or police officers assaulting people who aren't wearing masks -- At what threshold of effectiveness are we okay with inflicting physical violence on people who don't wear masks?

    Seems like a my body my choice sort of thing.   If a person is so worried about getting sick the sight of an unmasked person drives them to feel the force of law needs to be applied, perhaps they just need to stay shut in.
There can be ripple effects that extend well beyond your own body. Worst case scenario, your sickness (and those of others) can contribute to backing up the EMs and ED systems once inpatient (including ICU) beds are filled. Thankfully, this hasn't happened in the US recently or for any prolonged period, but it's among the worst case scenarios that has to be considered. Vaccination is an easy preventative step by reducing both the numbers that get sick and their resulting severity of illness. Of course the usual dipshits here will argue that because it hasn't happened yet, it's proof it can't happen, but that's nonsense.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #556 on: July 25, 2021, 03:02:08 AM »
    Seems like a my body my choice sort of thing.   If a person is so worried about getting sick the sight of an unmasked person drives them to feel the force of law needs to be applied, perhaps they just need to stay shut in.
There can be ripple effects that extend well beyond your own body. Worst case scenario, your sickness (and those of others) can contribute to backing up the EMs and ED systems once inpatient (including ICU) beds are filled. Thankfully, this hasn't happened in the US recently or for any prolonged period, but it's among the worst case scenarios that has to be considered. Vaccination is an easy preventative step by reducing both the numbers that get sick and their resulting severity of illness. Of course the usual dipshits here will argue that because it hasn't happened yet, it's proof it can't happen, but that's nonsense.
Literally anything can be justified using that logic.

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2989
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #557 on: July 25, 2021, 09:20:47 AM »
Can you post a link to the released data please, or we'll have to presume you're talking shit. All Public Health England documents are available on-site, so it should be easy for you to find a link... 🤷‍♂️

Table 5 in this report is the one the scum media seem to be desperately trying to spin at the moment. Claiming there's no problem with the majority of those dying being fully vaccinated.

Interesting that the ONS are refusing to answer a Freedom of Information request for the number of people who died within 24 hours of being vaccinated. If it were a small number, I'm sure it would have been readily produced.

There can be ripple effects that extend well beyond your own body. Worst case scenario, your sickness (and those of others) can contribute to backing up the EMs and ED systems once inpatient (including ICU) beds are filled. Thankfully, this hasn't happened in the US recently or for any prolonged period, but it's among the worst case scenarios that has to be considered. Vaccination is an easy preventative step by reducing both the numbers that get sick and their resulting severity of illness. Of course the usual dipshits here will argue that because it hasn't happened yet, it's proof it can't happen, but that's nonsense.

That's only true when the "vaccine" in question actually works. Funny, people were vaccinated against measles, for the most part measles disappeared. Because that's a real vaccine.

Not the case with flu or covid, because those aren't real vaccines.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2021, 12:07:25 PM by Kiero »
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

oggsmash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #558 on: July 25, 2021, 11:56:02 AM »
Much of the
Here is a very small smattering of the very many studies which go the other way, none of which happened to be on that page by some "mysterious" reason:

Thanks for posting that, it's actually important to be familiar with both sides of these arguments. I've seen some criticism of many of the studies here which leads me to not have confidence in their results.

For example, most of these are not controlled studies. Wang et al, is one of the stronger studies demonstrating compelling results for mask-wearing. However its focus is on individuals who wear masks in their own home -- Most people do not do this. Are the "~80%" protective effects stated actually a result of mask wearing, or is it because we have a self-selected group of people with abnormal personal & social habits (or other confounding factors)?

FWIW I have no personal objection to wearing masks if masks are actually effective. I just don't think we have strong evidence that they are effective, or that the positive effects of mask wearing are worth sacrificing personal liberty or other negative health impacts that result from mask mandates. For example, when I see people freaking out or police officers assaulting people who aren't wearing masks -- At what threshold of effectiveness are we okay with inflicting physical violence on people who don't wear masks?

    Seems like a my body my choice sort of thing.   If a person is so worried about getting sick the sight of an unmasked person drives them to feel the force of law needs to be applied, perhaps they just need to stay shut in.
There can be ripple effects that extend well beyond your own body. Worst case scenario, your sickness (and those of others) can contribute to backing up the EMs and ED systems once inpatient (including ICU) beds are filled. Thankfully, this hasn't happened in the US recently or for any prolonged period, but it's among the worst case scenarios that has to be considered. Vaccination is an easy preventative step by reducing both the numbers that get sick and their resulting severity of illness. Of course the usual dipshits here will argue that because it hasn't happened yet, it's proof it can't happen, but that's nonsense.

   Walking out of your door, and getting into your car and getting on the highway can cause a 100 car pile up and kill a score of people.  If someone is that worried about catching a virus, get a respirator or gas mask, not a dab of clothe with no hard numbers supporting its effectiveness.  If you are wearing a gas mask or respirator, you do not have to worry about catching a virus for the most part.  Vaccinations are wonderful, I prefer the finished product.  If people want to take the global clinical trial, have at it.

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5337
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #559 on: July 25, 2021, 12:33:21 PM »
Much of the
Here is a very small smattering of the very many studies which go the other way, none of which happened to be on that page by some "mysterious" reason:

Thanks for posting that, it's actually important to be familiar with both sides of these arguments. I've seen some criticism of many of the studies here which leads me to not have confidence in their results.

For example, most of these are not controlled studies. Wang et al, is one of the stronger studies demonstrating compelling results for mask-wearing. However its focus is on individuals who wear masks in their own home -- Most people do not do this. Are the "~80%" protective effects stated actually a result of mask wearing, or is it because we have a self-selected group of people with abnormal personal & social habits (or other confounding factors)?

FWIW I have no personal objection to wearing masks if masks are actually effective. I just don't think we have strong evidence that they are effective, or that the positive effects of mask wearing are worth sacrificing personal liberty or other negative health impacts that result from mask mandates. For example, when I see people freaking out or police officers assaulting people who aren't wearing masks -- At what threshold of effectiveness are we okay with inflicting physical violence on people who don't wear masks?

    Seems like a my body my choice sort of thing.   If a person is so worried about getting sick the sight of an unmasked person drives them to feel the force of law needs to be applied, perhaps they just need to stay shut in.
There can be ripple effects that extend well beyond your own body. Worst case scenario, your sickness (and those of others) can contribute to backing up the EMs and ED systems once inpatient (including ICU) beds are filled. Thankfully, this hasn't happened in the US recently or for any prolonged period, but it's among the worst case scenarios that has to be considered. Vaccination is an easy preventative step by reducing both the numbers that get sick and their resulting severity of illness. Of course the usual dipshits here will argue that because it hasn't happened yet, it's proof it can't happen, but that's nonsense.

   Walking out of your door, and getting into your car and getting on the highway can cause a 100 car pile up and kill a score of people.  If someone is that worried about catching a virus, get a respirator or gas mask, not a dab of clothe with no hard numbers supporting its effectiveness.  If you are wearing a gas mask or respirator, you do not have to worry about catching a virus for the most part.  Vaccinations are wonderful, I prefer the finished product.  If people want to take the global clinical trial, have at it.
There are laws and messages pushing the wearing of seatbelts to reduce the incidence and sensor injuries in motor vehicle collisios. Some people argue that those too are an affront to their freedom, but sensible people just buckle up, while idiots ride motorcycles and just hope for the best.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #560 on: July 25, 2021, 01:05:05 PM »
There are laws and messages pushing the wearing of seatbelts to reduce the incidence and sensor injuries in motor vehicle collisios. Some people argue that those too are an affront to their freedom, but sensible people just buckle up, while idiots ride motorcycles and just hope for the best.
It is sensible to wear a seat belt. It's also true that seat belt laws are an affront to freedom, and the former does not justify the latter.

It's the same in medicine, except it's called "informed consent".

oggsmash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #561 on: July 25, 2021, 03:05:57 PM »
Much of the
Here is a very small smattering of the very many studies which go the other way, none of which happened to be on that page by some "mysterious" reason:

Thanks for posting that, it's actually important to be familiar with both sides of these arguments. I've seen some criticism of many of the studies here which leads me to not have confidence in their results.

For example, most of these are not controlled studies. Wang et al, is one of the stronger studies demonstrating compelling results for mask-wearing. However its focus is on individuals who wear masks in their own home -- Most people do not do this. Are the "~80%" protective effects stated actually a result of mask wearing, or is it because we have a self-selected group of people with abnormal personal & social habits (or other confounding factors)?

FWIW I have no personal objection to wearing masks if masks are actually effective. I just don't think we have strong evidence that they are effective, or that the positive effects of mask wearing are worth sacrificing personal liberty or other negative health impacts that result from mask mandates. For example, when I see people freaking out or police officers assaulting people who aren't wearing masks -- At what threshold of effectiveness are we okay with inflicting physical violence on people who don't wear masks?

    Seems like a my body my choice sort of thing.   If a person is so worried about getting sick the sight of an unmasked person drives them to feel the force of law needs to be applied, perhaps they just need to stay shut in.
There can be ripple effects that extend well beyond your own body. Worst case scenario, your sickness (and those of others) can contribute to backing up the EMs and ED systems once inpatient (including ICU) beds are filled. Thankfully, this hasn't happened in the US recently or for any prolonged period, but it's among the worst case scenarios that has to be considered. Vaccination is an easy preventative step by reducing both the numbers that get sick and their resulting severity of illness. Of course the usual dipshits here will argue that because it hasn't happened yet, it's proof it can't happen, but that's nonsense.

   Walking out of your door, and getting into your car and getting on the highway can cause a 100 car pile up and kill a score of people.  If someone is that worried about catching a virus, get a respirator or gas mask, not a dab of clothe with no hard numbers supporting its effectiveness.  If you are wearing a gas mask or respirator, you do not have to worry about catching a virus for the most part.  Vaccinations are wonderful, I prefer the finished product.  If people want to take the global clinical trial, have at it.
There are laws and messages pushing the wearing of seatbelts to reduce the incidence and sensor injuries in motor vehicle collisios. Some people argue that those too are an affront to their freedom, but sensible people just buckle up, while idiots ride motorcycles and just hope for the best.

  You realize trying to point out a law and at the same time mentioning motorcycles, which are legal to ride shows the very contradiction in what is legal and accepted?  It is also a pretty massive contradiction regarding an activity you must be tested and licensed for (driving) versus simply moving freely about the world.   If you fear death or injury from some activity, do not partake in it.  If this includes going out in public, again try a respirator or gas mask.

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2989
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #562 on: July 25, 2021, 04:09:21 PM »
There are laws and messages pushing the wearing of seatbelts to reduce the incidence and sensor injuries in motor vehicle collisios. Some people argue that those too are an affront to their freedom, but sensible people just buckle up, while idiots ride motorcycles and just hope for the best.

Seatbelts provide actual protection. These "vaccines" do not.
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5337
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #563 on: July 25, 2021, 04:43:32 PM »
There are laws and messages pushing the wearing of seatbelts to reduce the incidence and sensor injuries in motor vehicle collisios. Some people argue that those too are an affront to their freedom, but sensible people just buckle up, while idiots ride motorcycles and just hope for the best.

Seatbelts provide actual protection. These "vaccines" do not.
Keep on lying to people.

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2989
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #564 on: July 25, 2021, 04:52:06 PM »
Keep on lying to people.

That's what you're doing, pushing a therapeutic that doesn't even provide immunity.
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #565 on: July 25, 2021, 04:54:02 PM »
Table 5 in this report is the one the scum media seem to be desperately trying to spin at the moment. Claiming there's no problem with the majority of those dying being fully vaccinated.

Deaths are heavily concentrated in the >=50 age group without regard to vaccines or COVID-19; that's pretty unsurprising. It seems the rate of vaccination among that age group exceeds 90%, according to the Office for National Statistics. So why would you not expect deaths among the vaccinated to be a higher count?

Perhaps you should wonder why the number of deaths is not nine or more times higher for that age group.

In all the other categories, unvaccinated account for more than half of the totals under "All cases"; perhaps you should wonder why that is so in a country with greater than 50% vaccination rate in general.

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2989
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #566 on: July 25, 2021, 04:59:20 PM »
Deaths are heavily concentrated in the >=50 age group without regard to vaccines or COVID-19; that's pretty unsurprising. It seems the rate of vaccination among that age group exceeds 90%, according to the Office for National Statistics. So why would you not expect deaths among the vaccinated to be a higher count?

Perhaps you should wonder why the number of deaths is not nine or more times higher for that age group.

In all the other categories, unvaccinated account for more than half of the totals under "All cases"; perhaps you should wonder why that is so in a country with greater than 50% vaccination rate in general.

The tortorous "logic" you have to engage in is hilarious. These "vaccines" were sold as reducing the likelihood of hospitalisation or death. They're not doing anything of the sort.

Magical thinking about "it could have been higher" is as risible as the people claiming that they would be dead if they hadn't been vaccinated, whilst suffering from covid again.
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #567 on: July 25, 2021, 05:00:37 PM »
There can be ripple effects that extend well beyond your own body. Worst case scenario, your sickness (and those of others) can contribute to backing up the EMs and ED systems once inpatient (including ICU) beds are filled. Thankfully, this hasn't happened in the US recently or for any prolonged period, but it's among the worst case scenarios that has to be considered. Vaccination is an easy preventative step by reducing both the numbers that get sick and their resulting severity of illness. Of course the usual dipshits here will argue that because it hasn't happened yet, it's proof it can't happen, but that's nonsense.

I will have to add that one to your list of conspiracy theories like Trump becoming President again in August.

Its nice to have an Alex Jones wanna be on the forums.
Who da Drow?  U da drow! - hedgehobbit

There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #568 on: July 25, 2021, 05:15:48 PM »
^ You do realize the number of vaccine-related deaths reported to VAERS is over 11,000? And for most vaccines, the estimate is VAERS only captures 1 in 100 deaths? 45,000 is a conservative estimate.

That does not seem correct.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
Quote
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 339 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 19, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 6,207 reports of death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.

So you're exaggerating the number of reports of death (unless there was a sudden 4000+ reports in the last few days before your post) and suggesting that there are tens of thousands of deaths after vaccination that were either unnoticed by every healthcare provider or where the healthcare providers blew off the FDA requirement.

You could easily find fact checks that rebut your claims, if you were actually motivated by an interest in facts.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #569 on: July 25, 2021, 05:50:10 PM »
^ You do realize the number of vaccine-related deaths reported to VAERS is over 11,000? And for most vaccines, the estimate is VAERS only captures 1 in 100 deaths? 45,000 is a conservative estimate.

That does not seem correct.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
Quote
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 339 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 19, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 6,207 reports of death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.

So you're exaggerating the number of reports of death (unless there was a sudden 4000+ reports in the last few days before your post) and suggesting that there are tens of thousands of deaths after vaccination that were either unnoticed by every healthcare provider or where the healthcare providers blew off the FDA requirement.

You could easily find fact checks that rebut your claims, if you were actually motivated by an interest in facts.
It is correct. "11,405 COVID Vaccine Related Deaths"
https://www.openvaers.com/
This is pulled directly from the VAERS database on the HHS website, except it's much easier to use.

If you had any interest in actual facts instead of falsely projecting your failings on other people, it would have been trivial to discover that information, and trivial to figure out why it differs from the CDC's numbers (edit: I thought they were using different criteria, but now it looks like Zelen in a later post is right and they're tampering with data, see here for an archived copy of the CDC's page showing 12,313 deaths -- this is really weird). You can also review the website and see why the part you bolded is technically correct but misleading (hint: look at the graphs showing the time between getting the vaccine and death).
« Last Edit: July 25, 2021, 07:10:30 PM by Pat »