On 8/18/21 2:08 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>>> Masks are no longer required if you've had the vaccine and booster
>>> (now the CDC is recommending 3 shots for highly susceptible
>>> persons).
>>
>> That floats around, especially since the jab does not work all that
>> well (break through infections). Some are saying that the
>> unvaccinated (it is not a vaccine) are threatening the jab with
>> variants. The science shows otherwise. It is the jab'ed that the
>> primary incubators. This would not be the case if the jab was a real
>> vaccine.
>
> I said masks are no longer required - in general since there are still
> exceptions. I did not say masks were superfluous after vaccination,
> and, in fact, I mentioned that the vaccinated may have attentuated
> symptoms while being carriers. Typhoid Mary never experienced the
> symptoms of typhoid.
>
>> The CDC will not release the data.
>
> You obviously haven't looked, and are making unsubstantiated claims to
> support your position.
>
> https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/10/20-0948_article
> https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/masking-science-sars-cov2.html
> https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/15/2/pdfs/08-1167.pdf

Hmm, which one of the above shows

1) death rate from the mRNA therapy?

2) severe reactions to the mRNA therapy?

3) death rates for those with the mRNA therapy vs
those without the therapy?

4) Antibody Dependent Enhancement reactions for
those with the therapy?

5) what is the level of infections for those with
the therapy?

6) how are they testing for variants?

This is the data that is being withheld

>
> I didn't bother citing the rest from a simple "cdc data efficacy of
> masks" Google search.
>
>> I work for a guy that was in on the development of the N95 mask. He
>> told me viruses go right though. The above is bull shit.
>
> Talk to a college graduate that is trained in air flow engineering, like
> for HVAC. A 1 micron virus doesn't travel a straight line through a 1
> micron filter. No such thing as laminar airflow unless specifically
> engineered to reduce turbulence, and filters are the antithesis to
> laminar flow. Nor would a laminar flow through a filter impact a single
> fiber in the filter, because obviously they're layered or scattered for
> their fibers. "A guy said". Don't even take my word. Go do the
> research yourself. Take courses in college on aerodynamics to get an
> idea of airflow. My father had a master license in HVAC, and he spent
> many hours designing ductwork, fans, valves, and other controls trying
> to create as laminar flow as possible (least turbulence) to reduce the
> work needed to move an air mass. None of the face masks are designed,
> nor would they be, to produce least turbulence through the filter.
>
> Folks keep reciting the diameter of viruses based on their naked size.
> Virus immediately die (their coding spills out) without a wrapper to
> encapsulate them. Even a 0.2 micron virus will likely be larger than a
> 1 micron filter, and Covid19 viruses range from 0.6 to 2 microns when
> not naked. When naked, they die nearly immediately, and filters don't
> care about the size of naked and dead viral spew.
>
> Naked virus size is irrelevant to filter efficacy. The wrapped size is
> important, but you really think a 1 micro wrapped virus is getting
> through a 1 micron filter? Well, if so, enjoy walking through a mine
> field taking a straight path.
>
>>> The premise by the CDC was something was better than nothing.
>>
>> You mean the CDC that won't release data? The one that
>> won't release studies on off label drugs that are cheap?
>
> What? You've never been told by your mother to cover your cough with
> your hand, then with your cuff, then at your sleeve's elbow, or with a
> tissue or hankie? Well, why did she tell you to do that? Yeah, to
> prevent your projectile snot and spit from spraying out to collide into
> other humans. The CDC's recommendation was nothing more than
> re-proliferating lore. You thought the old adage long before SARS-1 and
> SARS-2 (named Covid-19) of controlling your ejection was somehow defined
> by some arbitrary netiquette?
>
>> The only thing that stops them is
>> respirators (Ebola suites).
>
> Um, you think there are no filters in those, huh? By count, respirators
> are more used in construction than in hospitals. They have positive air
> pressure to deliver filtered air to the wearer and prevent entry through
> any leakage points, like by the straps, and under the chin. Every
> asbestos remedial job requires respirators, not face masks. Despite
> wearing disposable hazmat suits, having a showering station, wearing
> respirators with positive pressure with a *filtered* air supply, and
> sealing off the house off and using negative pressure to prevent blowing
> out asbestos fibers into the remainder of the home, filters are highly
> involved in pumping cleaned air into the respirators and filtered fan
> pumping out the air in the work area. Working in fine silica (concrete
> mixing, sawing, jackhammering, grinding, abrasive blasting) should
> require a respirator, as when mixing mortar or sawing/cutting brick.
>
> Respirators are just better quality face masks (by using a full face
> mask that also covers the eyes, not just the nose and mouth), and use,
> as I recall, positive air pressure inside the mask, but they still do
> use filters. How do you think the cleaned air gets delivered inside the
> full face mask? Which rating they use for a filter depends on duration
> of use, and according to their resistance to oil vapor.
>
> N-series: Not resistant to oil mist.
> R-series: Oil-resistant for up to 1 work shift.
> P-series: Oil-proof.
>
> https://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2020/08/17/respirators-construction/
>
> Yeah, I know a lot of workers don't wear respirators, and just use
> passive filtering, but then a lot of workers don't wear masks at all.
> I've seen plenty of workers jackhammering at concrete with no filter.
>
> Similarly, I've seen lots of employees working in build floor for
> mainframes that don't wear hearing protection. They lose their upper
> frequency range due to all the noise from all the fan in the computer
> components, for the HVAC fans at the exhaust vents, and the whine from
> the 3-phase generators supply power to the mainframes. I've also seen
> plenty of shooters not wearing hearing protection at the range. I wear
> both soft inserts and headset. If I have to remove the headset to
> participate in a discussion, I still have the earplugs which don't
> interfere with voice but handle the sharp bangs.
>
> Show me a respirator, even for hospitals, that doesn't have a filter.
> Oh, by the way, I think you're confusing respirators with ventilators.
> The latter uses positive pressure to help inflate the lungs of the
> patient with *filtered* air. My aunt worked at Medtronic who sells
> ventilator *filters*. They only go down to 0.3 microns, so a naked
> virus (highly unlikely it survives the distance between you and a
> sneezer) does get filtered out, again due to non-laminar air flow
> through the filter. A 0.2 micron virus isn't getting through a 0.2
> micron, or even 0.1 micron P-100 filter. But they do rate them as
> 99.999% effective, because statistically it is possible for an outlier
> to manage to wrangle through a filter without ever hitting a strand.
>
> So, what's your solution to filtering the air you breathe? Staying at
> home is not 100% safe, either. You receive postal mail, you might get
> your groceries delivered that the delivery person has touched (3 hours,
> or less, for Covid19 to die on paper bags), and the virus lasts longer
> on hard surfaces, like plastic bags (up to a week to survive), those
> canned goods that someone picked up at the store but put back on the
> shelf, or touched those veggies you bought, oh, and those vinyl gloves
> some folks were but don't remove them properly to avoid touching
> anything on them (and which increases the chance of spreading the virus
> that survives longer on them). How fast the wrapper gets broken is how
> long the virus survives, and softer more absorbent materials kill them
> faster, like those cloth masks, even the cheap ones (but you add
> moisture from your breath, and why disposable masks really should get
> disposed of).
>
>> If you look at the recommendation for all the mask nonsense, it is
>> just opinion: ass holes in white coats standing around pulling shit
>> out their learned asses. They NEVER back up what they say with
>> science as there is no actual science to back up their assertions.
>> You will notice that all the hard work you put into your letter, that
>> you could not cite a single proper scientific study to back your
>> assertions. This is clearly a propaganda narrative.
>
> Yep, you're spreading more FUD again. Is the Earth still flat?
>
>> Oh, and viruses are primarily transmitted by aerosol,
>> not droplets. Masks do nothing for aerosol.
>
> Wow, you must be Data to have an aerosol coming out your nose and mouth
> when you sneeze. Must look like a deodorant spray coming out your
> orifices.
>
>> This is my fear. If someone with a co-morbidity actually
>> trusts the propaganda narrative and thinks a useless face
>> diaper is going to protect them, they are going to get themselves
>> killed. Political correctness kills.
>
> You choose to ignore my statement that masks (not respirators or
> ventilators, but passive cloth masks) are NOT for protecting you. They
> are to protect others (by eliminating your projectiles getting past the
> mask).

Still don't work, either direction. Masks are
not semiconductors.

>
> You+mask: Protect others from your sneezing and coughing.

Prove it

> Them+mask: Protect you from their sneezing and coughing.

Prove it

>
> So, decide if you're not going to protect others,

Prove it

> like those assholes
> that don't install AVs on their computers, become zombies, so they just
> wipe and do a fresh install of the OS and apps. Or if you're only going
> to protect yourself which means don't use passive cloth masks and go
> around toting the weight of a respirator or ventilator along with all
> the periphery hardware to filter the inbound air.

Vanguard,

You sure put a lot of effort in that. Unfortunately,
ALL of the studies on masks on various types ALL
show that they DO NOT work against the spread of
viruses.

The studies that you show are on particles. That is
only a starting point. The rubber hits the road
when you test them against actual viruses and
infection rates. MASKS DO NOT WORK. Even Dr.
Flip Flop (speaking of ass holes in white coats
pulling things out their butts) in his freedom
of information release of his eMails said they
did not.

Masks are for show and nothing else.

-T