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: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!  (Read 98456 times)

Mistwell

  • Smarter than Arduin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4723
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1545 on: May 15, 2022, 10:10:49 PM »
I wonder how this guy is doing:
Man in Germany gets 90 COVID-19 shots to sell forged passes

I will say this, "He is lucky to be alive." almost 2% DIE, another 6% are permanently disabled, the rest don't know how or why they have "Brain fog" or suddenly catch "Auto-immune" diseases, why the autism rate is now 1-in-6 and headed to 1-in-2, skin lesions, food allergies, learning disabilities...

how much of this stuff DID NOT EXIST prior to 1980?  ... The answer is, almost all of it.

WTF are you going onn about?

jeff37923

  • Knight of Common Sense
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17772
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1546 on: May 16, 2022, 12:33:19 AM »
I wonder how this guy is doing:
Man in Germany gets 90 COVID-19 shots to sell forged passes

I will say this, "He is lucky to be alive." almost 2% DIE, another 6% are permanently disabled, the rest don't know how or why they have "Brain fog" or suddenly catch "Auto-immune" diseases, why the autism rate is now 1-in-6 and headed to 1-in-2, skin lesions, food allergies, learning disabilities...

how much of this stuff DID NOT EXIST prior to 1980?  ... The answer is, almost all of it.

WTF are you going onn about?

Apparently the COVID-19 vaccines can travel back in time to create causality errors that evidence themselves as health problems.
"I do not want to create a story, I want to create a stage. The player characters will perform on that stage and interact with the setting. When the players talk to their friends about what their characters did, then there will be a story."

Mistwell

  • Smarter than Arduin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4723
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1547 on: May 17, 2022, 12:02:47 AM »
I wonder how this guy is doing:
Man in Germany gets 90 COVID-19 shots to sell forged passes

I will say this, "He is lucky to be alive." almost 2% DIE, another 6% are permanently disabled, the rest don't know how or why they have "Brain fog" or suddenly catch "Auto-immune" diseases, why the autism rate is now 1-in-6 and headed to 1-in-2, skin lesions, food allergies, learning disabilities...

how much of this stuff DID NOT EXIST prior to 1980?  ... The answer is, almost all of it.

WTF are you going onn about?

Apparently the COVID-19 vaccines can travel back in time to create causality errors that evidence themselves as health problems.

Proof the Matrix is real! Wait...

dkabq

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1548 on: June 10, 2022, 12:06:20 PM »
Revisiting the Bangladesh Mask RCT
https://www.argmin.net/2021/11/23/mask-rct-revisited/

tl:dr
"In the Bangladesh Mask RCT, there were nC=163,861 individuals from 300 villages in the control group. There were nT=178,322 individuals from 300 villages in the intervention group. The main end point of the study was whether their intervention reduced the number of individuals who both reported covid-like symptoms and tested seropositive at some point during the trial. The number of such individuals appears nowhere in their paper, and one has to compute this from the data they kindly provided: There were iC=1,106 symptomatic individuals confirmed seropositive in the control group and iT=1,086 such individuals in the treatment group. The difference between the two groups was small: only 20 cases out of over 340,000 individuals over a span of 8 weeks.

I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Here is the link to his previous post:
https://www.argmin.net/2021/09/13/effect-size/

Here are the links to the aforementioned promulgations:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/masks-were-working-all-along/619989/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/09/01/masks-study-covid-bangladesh/
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/26/opinion/do-masks-work-for-covid-prevention.html

I especially like that in the 2nd to last paragraph, he points out that red cloth masks were more effective than surgical masks. I bet that is because red ones go faster.

Other posts of his related to the Bangladesh mask study:
https://www.argmin.net/2021/11/29/cluster-power/
https://www.argmin.net/2021/12/01/unblinding/


Stephen Tannhauser

  • Curmudgeonly Refugee
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 965
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1549 on: June 10, 2022, 01:30:02 PM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)
Better to keep silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. -- Mark Twain

STR 8 DEX 10 CON 10 INT 11 WIS 6 CHA 3

3catcircus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • ?
  • Posts: 469
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1550 on: June 10, 2022, 04:26:07 PM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5183
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1551 on: June 10, 2022, 05:41:33 PM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.
Yet some people were saying that wearing masks supposedly prevented them (or, as some claimed, their kids) from getting enough oxygen...molecules of which are too small to be impeded by even an N95.

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1552 on: June 10, 2022, 07:10:11 PM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.
Yet some people were saying that wearing masks supposedly prevented them (or, as some claimed, their kids) from getting enough oxygen...molecules of which are too small to be impeded by even an N95.

Thats why Happydaze wears three masks - just to make sure.
Who da Drow?  U da drow! - hedgehobbit

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

dkabq

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1553 on: June 10, 2022, 08:47:06 PM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.
Yet some people were saying that wearing masks supposedly prevented them (or, as some claimed, their kids) from getting enough oxygen...molecules of which are too small to be impeded by even an N95.

The pressure drop across the mask would result in an increase in the work of breathing needed to intake the same amount of air, or a reduction in respiration volume (and hence oxygen) for the same work of breathing. Also, the mask would result in an increase in CO2 re-breathing which can make your breathing feel labored. My first job out of graduate school was working in a physiology department lab investigating the impact of design modifications on work of breathing and CO2 re-breathing for deep water diving helmets.


HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5183
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1554 on: June 10, 2022, 10:48:08 PM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.
Yet some people were saying that wearing masks supposedly prevented them (or, as some claimed, their kids) from getting enough oxygen...molecules of which are too small to be impeded by even an N95.

The pressure drop across the mask would result in an increase in the work of breathing needed to intake the same amount of air, or a reduction in respiration volume (and hence oxygen) for the same work of breathing. Also, the mask would result in an increase in CO2 re-breathing which can make your breathing feel labored. My first job out of graduate school was working in a physiology department lab investigating the impact of design modifications on work of breathing and CO2 re-breathing for deep water diving helmets.
How much does.wearing a simple surgical/procedural mask or even a cloth mask impact work of breathing or CO2 rebreathing? I doubt they are anything like the deep water diving helmet you were working on.

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4891
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1555 on: June 11, 2022, 12:02:27 AM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.
Yet some people were saying that wearing masks supposedly prevented them (or, as some claimed, their kids) from getting enough oxygen...molecules of which are too small to be impeded by even an N95.

The pressure drop across the mask would result in an increase in the work of breathing needed to intake the same amount of air, or a reduction in respiration volume (and hence oxygen) for the same work of breathing. Also, the mask would result in an increase in CO2 re-breathing which can make your breathing feel labored. My first job out of graduate school was working in a physiology department lab investigating the impact of design modifications on work of breathing and CO2 re-breathing for deep water diving helmets.
How much does.wearing a simple surgical/procedural mask or even a cloth mask impact work of breathing or CO2 rebreathing? I doubt they are anything like the deep water diving helmet you were working on.

Aaaaaand happyderp, being a disingenuous twat, chooses all the masks that are proven NOT TO WORK in preventing virus transmission.
Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

dkabq

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1556 on: June 11, 2022, 07:22:42 AM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.
Yet some people were saying that wearing masks supposedly prevented them (or, as some claimed, their kids) from getting enough oxygen...molecules of which are too small to be impeded by even an N95.

The pressure drop across the mask would result in an increase in the work of breathing needed to intake the same amount of air, or a reduction in respiration volume (and hence oxygen) for the same work of breathing. Also, the mask would result in an increase in CO2 re-breathing which can make your breathing feel labored. My first job out of graduate school was working in a physiology department lab investigating the impact of design modifications on work of breathing and CO2 re-breathing for deep water diving helmets.
How much does.wearing a simple surgical/procedural mask or even a cloth mask impact work of breathing or CO2 rebreathing? I doubt they are anything like the deep water diving helmet you were working on.

You are correct that the effect magnitudes between a cloth or surgical mask are very different from those of a deep water diving helmet. But the physics are the same. The question then becomes at what point does an increase in the work of breathing and CO2 rebreathing have a material negative impact. I do not have an answer to that question.

Here's one study that concluded:
"According to the literature, these [measured] concentrations [of CO2] have no toxicological effect. However, concentrations in the detected range can cause undesirable symptoms, such as fatigue, headache, and loss of concentration."
https://clinicalnews.org/2021/08/23/effect-of-wearing-face-masks-on-the-carbon-dioxide-concentration-in-the-breathing-zone/

But it is just one study.

Of course, the question that is begged at this point is why put masks on kids in the first place? If you aren't making them wear properly fitted/properly worn N95s (good luck with that) you are just playing fuck-around (even the Communist News Network chief medical propagandist says cloth masks are nothing more than "facial decorations".

I specially love it when the maskubators make kids wear masks while outside -- gotta love the SCIENCE!(tm).


HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5183
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1557 on: June 11, 2022, 08:50:14 AM »
"I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that “masks work” that was promulgated by the media or the authors after this preprint appeared."

Yeah, I have to admit my thoughts on that matter have always been, "If masks really worked*, you wouldn't need studies to see that they worked."

(For "worked", read "slowed the spread of infection well enough in actual deployment to be worth imposing as a mandate". That a specific infected person will emit fewer viral particles into his environment when masked is a given. That this makes enough difference to actual in-community transmission to be worth doing is a much dodgier question.)

It depends. For disease spread by droplets, it can make a difference. For disease spread by aerosols, not at all if it is anything less than an N95.  The physical size of aerosols is small enough to slip right through the weave on a surgical mask. Viral particles are typically between 0.05 and 0.8  micrometers in diameter. In still air, it'll take about 40 hrs for a 0.5 micrometer sized particle to settle out of suspension by about 5 feet and it'll take about the same amount of time to reach a half life in concentration of those same sized particles in turbulent air.

It's always been more about the ventilation to dilute viral particle concentration rather than wearing of masks with a weave that is larger than the size of the viral particles.
Yet some people were saying that wearing masks supposedly prevented them (or, as some claimed, their kids) from getting enough oxygen...molecules of which are too small to be impeded by even an N95.

The pressure drop across the mask would result in an increase in the work of breathing needed to intake the same amount of air, or a reduction in respiration volume (and hence oxygen) for the same work of breathing. Also, the mask would result in an increase in CO2 re-breathing which can make your breathing feel labored. My first job out of graduate school was working in a physiology department lab investigating the impact of design modifications on work of breathing and CO2 re-breathing for deep water diving helmets.
How much does.wearing a simple surgical/procedural mask or even a cloth mask impact work of breathing or CO2 rebreathing? I doubt they are anything like the deep water diving helmet you were working on.

Aaaaaand happyderp, being a disingenuous twat, chooses all the masks that are proven NOT TO WORK in preventing virus transmission.
I'm discussing the same masks that were used by those that were arguing they weren't getting sufficient oxygen through them.

I

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1558 on: June 11, 2022, 01:57:45 PM »



How much does.wearing a simple surgical/procedural mask or even a cloth mask impact work of breathing or CO2 rebreathing? I doubt they are anything like the deep water diving helmet you were working on.

It impacts breathing a lot, if you're doing physical labor.  If you're thinking of an office worker, not much difference... but try wearing one in a hot factory where you're having to lift heavy containers repeatedly for two-three hours at a stretch.  At the factory where I work, we had three people pass out from heat/lack of oxygen the first day back with the mask protocols in place.  That never happened when we didn't have the masks.  I didn't pass out, but there were times I had to just go off into a corner, take my mask off and gasp for air because I was getting light-headed.  I'm not overweight and there's nothing wrong with my breathing, either.  I eventually just took to wearing a cloth bandanna over my face, like an Old West train robber.  Didn't do jack shit to stop the spread of a virus, but it met their stupid voodoo "scientific" mask requirements and it allowed me to breathe more easily.

Pat

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!
« Reply #1559 on: June 11, 2022, 04:05:23 PM »



How much does.wearing a simple surgical/procedural mask or even a cloth mask impact work of breathing or CO2 rebreathing? I doubt they are anything like the deep water diving helmet you were working on.

It impacts breathing a lot, if you're doing physical labor.  If you're thinking of an office worker, not much difference... but try wearing one in a hot factory where you're having to lift heavy containers repeatedly for two-three hours at a stretch.  At the factory where I work, we had three people pass out from heat/lack of oxygen the first day back with the mask protocols in place.  That never happened when we didn't have the masks.  I didn't pass out, but there were times I had to just go off into a corner, take my mask off and gasp for air because I was getting light-headed.  I'm not overweight and there's nothing wrong with my breathing, either.  I eventually just took to wearing a cloth bandanna over my face, like an Old West train robber.  Didn't do jack shit to stop the spread of a virus, but it met their stupid voodoo "scientific" mask requirements and it allowed me to breathe more easily.
Toward the start of the pandemic, I remember watching a video of a doctor. He was young, as if he just got out of medical school last week. He was also skinny and fit. He measured his blood ox level. Then he put on a surgical mask, and measured it again. No change. And a second mask. No change. And a third mask, no change. And then he basically called everyone idiots for thinking masks reduced oxygen intake.

There's no excuse for that. He's a doctor, he knows better. If someone is fat, or older, or has a condition like emphysema, or is engaged in physical labor instead of sitting there in front of a computer doing nothing, their blood ox levels can drop a lot more quickly.

If the CDC was about science instead of propaganda, that's one of the many randomized controlled trials they could have run during the course of the pandemic: A test of blood ox levels for people of various ages, in various degrees of fitness, engaged in variously strenuous activities, while wearing different types of masks. But they didn't.