U.S. to close..

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

And we don't "help out family" when our compatriots are of a different race? That's crazy. That is sure as hell not how I was raised. And I think it's not like that. Although we have some troglodyte racists in our midst, I think most Americans are just as likely to treat their neighbors of a different race, as family, as the Swedes are.

So even more do I consider this some kind of bizarre racist mythology.

You can train it out of people to some degree but it's certainly not an advantage.

If you are talking a close neighbor that you know well, yes, that can overcome the diversity but once you start talking about random strangers, you can complain that it's racist but it's also reality.

Of course, if it takes a lot of training and reinforcement...that by definition is harder than in a homogenous society where they don't have to train and reinforce.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by UFO

So have you actually read the Great Barrington Declaration?

https://gbdeclaration.org/

I suppose the 11,930 Scientists, 34,426 Medical practitioners and a shed load of normal people are all ignorant and that what they believe about lock downs is a total Fallacy, yet the few advisors (and yourself) in positions of power pushing the lock downs are all correct.

Ha ha. It's funny how you go on about how people blindly trust governments and corporations, but have unshakeable faith in the Great Barrington propaganda. (which i have read)

Perhaps you need to have a more open mind about the politics and $ involved which make this not such a simple black and white case and there are Definitely other viable ways of approaching this virus than the simple lock it all down approach, which has so many massively negative side effects.

I don't want to see more lockdowns But if people aren't voluntarily following sensible measures (or even being given these measures to follow), and our healthcare systems are once again in peril...

btw for everyone concerned about the mental health effects of lockdowns, be advised that getting and recovering from COVID-19 seems to carry a 20% probability of later mental illness.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by UFO

...I suppose the 11,930 Scientists, 34,426 Medical practitioners and a shed load of normal people are all ignorant and that what they believe about lock downs is a total Fallacy, yet the few advisors (and yourself) in positions of power pushing the lock downs are all correct...

No dog in this fight, but there are over 9,200,000 doctors and over 7,000,000 scientists. People are going to have different perspectives.

If .003% of a population of specialists holds a particular position, I'm first wondering what the .004% of contrarians who don't like about what the .003% of people are going on about.

But I also recognize that, no matter what crazy thought I have...there's always .001% of people out there who will agree with me, even if we're all wrong. So it's important to not just seek out people whose ideas agree with mine and call it a day, because sooner or later such fringe groups pass out kool aid or funny smelling heavy vests with wires or some such.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by UFO

The Devil is in the detail... Although they tested the vaccine on over 40,000 people that actual 90% came from a sample of only 94 People - Why only 94 you have to ask - Maybe they did not have the facilities to test any more

There is billions, probably trillions at stake over the years to come from this, so I would not necessarily believe the manipulated figures that are being thrown around as for either $ or Political reasons they may be skewed.

This is a different question from the one being discussed.

The point was IF 90% is true what happens...and that is a quick end to the virus as soon as enough doses are distributed.

Now if you want to question if the 90% is true, we can discuss that but if you think they only tested 94, you really have no clue how these things work, so it's hard to have a meaningful discussion. Even if they did manipulate it...it would have to be a major twisting of the facts, I can't see a major company playing that fast and loose when it's obvious it will come out in the near future.

[clockwork orange]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

Unfortunately the little people aren't given the facts, they need hope. It's not hard to see past the BS if you aren't clinging to every morsel of political posturing. The effects of lifestyle on the spread of Covid determines the rate os spread for the most part. Its foolish to think a mask not designed to stop a virus will stop a virus but some have swallowed it hook line and sinker. They are the same ones inflating their tires.

Nothing foolish about it, the purpose of wearing a mask, just about any well fitting mask will do, is to limit the spread of respiratory droplets which seem to be the most efficient way of spreading the virus. I wear mine to protect those around me and hopefully they will do the same for me. If we all do our part we would be out of this and on with our lives but unfortunately too many people only think of themselves and are not interested in protecting others. Other countries that have had success don't have some majic bullet, they have leaders that put the safety of the public ahead of their election prospects, a population who trust them and are willing to do their part and they pretty much do the same things that all our health experts have been pushing from the start only to be undermined by the domestic terrorists/politicians who have cost us tens of thousands of lives uneccessarily. Its disgusting.

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by clockwork orange

Nothing foolish about it, the purpose of wearing a mask, just about any well fitting mask will do, is to limit the spread of respiratory droplets which seem to be the most efficient way of spreading the virus. I wear mine to protect those around me and hopefully they will do the same for me. If we all do our part we would be out of this and on with our lives but unfortunately too many people only think of themselves and are not interested in protecting others. Other countries that have had success don't have some majic bullet, they have leaders that put the safety of the public ahead of their election prospects, a population who trust them and are willing to do their part and they pretty much do the same things that all our health experts have been pushing from the start only to be undermined by the domestic terrorists/politicians who have cost us tens of thousands of lives uneccessarily. Its disgusting.

The non N95 masks are only marginally effective. If we inflate our tires will we reduce green house gas emissions enough to stop global warming?

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

The non N95 masks are only marginally effective. If we inflate our tires will we reduce green house gas emissions enough to stop global warming?

Seatbelts are only marginally effective. They had to pass laws requiring seatbelt use because the little people are bad with logic and statistics. So do you wear one when you drive? If so, because of the mandatory law, or because you understand that it's a good idea?

[clockwork orange]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

The non N95 masks are only marginally effective. If we inflate our tires will we reduce green house gas emissions enough to stop global warming?

Nonsense, while I have not personally tested this myself I have watched the videos showing the guy attempting to blow out the candle with various masks, most masks will stop you from spraying someone 6ft away with your droplets. I used to wear 3m N95 masks nearly daily for dust, nothing special, if you cough in a N95 mask that does not have the vent your breath will escape around the perimeter just like the decent homegrown ones but they all still prevent it from travelling far. No idea what you are talking about re tire inflation.

[Mike OReilly]

Effectiveness of Cloth Masks for Protection Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

Abstract

Cloth masks have been used in healthcare and community settings to protect the wearer from respiratory infections. The use of cloth masks during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is under debate. The filtration effectiveness of cloth masks is generally lower than that of medical masks and respirators; however, cloth masks may provide some protection if well designed and used correctly. Multilayer cloth masks, designed to fit around the face and made of water-resistant fabric with a high number of threads and finer weave, may provide reasonable protection. Until a cloth mask design is proven to be equally effective as a medical or N95 mask, wearing cloth masks should not be mandated for healthcare workers. In community settings, however, cloth masks may be used to prevent community spread of infections by sick or asymptomatically infected persons, and the public should be educated about their correct use.

A non-N95 mask is used to protect others, not the wearer. That is why they are being promoted; to reduce the spread of the disease. It's really quite simple, and has been well studied by this point.

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Effectiveness of Cloth Masks for Protection Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2


A non-N95 mask is used to protect others, not the wearer. That is why they are being promoted; to reduce the spread of the disease. It's really quite simple, and has been well studied by this point.

Abstract
Cloth masks have been used in healthcare and community settings to protect the wearer from respiratory infections. The use of cloth masks during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is under debate. The filtration effectiveness of cloth masks is generally lower than that of medical masks and respirators; however, cloth masks may provide some protection if well designed and used correctly. Multilayer cloth masks, designed to fit around the face and made of water-resistant fabric with a high number of threads and finer weave, may provide reasonable protection. Until a cloth mask design is proven to be equally effective as a medical or N95 mask, wearing cloth masks should not be mandated for healthcare workers. In community settings, however, cloth masks may be used to prevent community spread of infections by sick or asymptomatically infected persons, and the public should be educated about their correct use.

Marginally effective for short.

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Seatbelts are only marginally effective. They had to pass laws requiring seatbelt use because the little people are bad with logic and statistics. So do you wear one when you drive? If so, because of the mandatory law, or because you understand that it's a good idea?

Actually they are very effective. I do wear one because of that, not because of government over reach.

[kmacdonald]

Gentlemen, stopping the spread of Covid is not as simplistic are some seem the think. It's not a binary issue------mask or no mask. I would have thought that most would realize how complex it is by now.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

Abstract
Cloth masks have been used in healthcare and community settings to protect the wearer from respiratory infections. The use of cloth masks during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is under debate. The filtration effectiveness of cloth masks is generally lower than that of medical masks and respirators; however, cloth masks may provide some protection if well designed and used correctly. Multilayer cloth masks, designed to fit around the face and made of water-resistant fabric with a high number of threads and finer weave, may provide reasonable protection. Until a cloth mask design is proven to be equally effective as a medical or N95 mask, wearing cloth masks should not be mandated for healthcare workers. In community settings, however, cloth masks may be used to prevent community spread of infections by sick or asymptomatically infected persons, and the public should be educated about their correct use.

Marginally effective for short.

You really don't know what you're talking about, yet seem some combination of unaware or unashamed to continue making proclamations about science and such.

The healthcare setting are ordinarily assumed to be critically high risk environments, such that, specifically in that environment, N95s are minimally acceptable.

A community setting simply does not have the same concentration of contagion present. Accordingly, lower levels of protection, all else equal, is reasonable. Regardless, historical experience/common sense, and contemporary anecdotal evidence, finds cloth masks to convey "marginal benefit that counts" if this makes things easier for you to understand.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6928e2.htm
Absence of Apparent Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from Two Stylists After Exposure at a Hair Salon with a Universal Face Covering Policy — Springfield, Missouri, May 2020
Weekly / July 17, 2020 / 69(28);930-932

...A total of 139 clients were directly serviced by stylists A and B from the time they developed symptoms until they took leave from work...During all interactions with clients at salon A, stylist A wore a double-layered cotton face covering, and stylist B wore a double-layered cotton face covering or a surgical mask...After public health contact tracings and 2 weeks of follow-up, no COVID-19 symptoms were identified among the 139 exposed clients or their secondary contacts...Among the 104 interviewed clients, 102 (98.1%) reported wearing face coverings for their entire appointment...Six close contacts of stylists A and B outside of salon A were identified: four of stylist A and two of stylist B. All four of stylist A’s contacts later developed symptoms and had positive PCR test results for SARS-CoV-2. These contacts were stylist A’s cohabitating husband and her daughter, son-in-law, and their roommate, all of whom lived together in another household. None of stylist B’s contacts became symptomatic...
...in countries that did not recommend face masks and respirators, the per-capita coronavirus-related mortality increased each week by 54.3% after the index case, compared with 8.0% in those countries with masking policies...
------------------------------------------
But none of this is what you said, hinted to, or suggested.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

This is a different question from the one being discussed.

The point was IF 90% is true what happens...and that is a quick end to the virus as soon as enough doses are distributed.

Now if you want to question if the 90% is true, we can discuss that but if you think they only tested 94, you really have no clue how these things work, so it's hard to have a meaningful discussion. Even if they did manipulate it...it would have to be a major twisting of the facts, I can't see a major company playing that fast and loose when it's obvious it will come out in the near future.

Jeeze Perhaps you should do some research and stop putting others down.



Its unbelievable how naive a large % of the world's population is - The world is not all flowers, roses, peace and harmony - Its full of a bunch of corrupt tossers that do anything to get ahead and push up their bottom lines and agendas.



Anyway.....



"The analysis evaluated 94 confirmed Covid-19 infections among the trial’s 43,538 participants"


So they have only actually looked at 94 who contracted covid - How many could have gone on to contract it and be asymptomatic? - Like in the normal populace there is a HUGE amount of such cases which may be present in their 43,538 participants, so stating 90% from only 94 is a bit of a sleight of hand.



https://www.livescience.com/pfizer-c...-efficacy.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...ine-effective/


FYI their shares jumped 8% on the news

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Singularity

This is how I interpret what you are saying about cultural homogeneity and race:
-That homogeneity doesn't convey much influence.
-Those who contend that homogeneity conveys a problem are racists, because people holding this opinion believe that people from, say, a dark-skinned background cause problems. And only a racist would say this.

In any event, the melting pot concept was a fantasy from ?1950s. It's long been replaced by the stew or salad bowl conceptualization, where stuff like the narcissism of small differences is recognized to be one of the myriad negative influences effecting forced interaction of any two different sub-cultures.
So...that you hear/interpret "heterogeneity is bad because it means dark-skinned people make things worse"...sort of suggests that you either aren't familiar with more modern understanding of sociology, political science, etc, or even worse your first presumption is that it's dark-skinned people would be the bad people.

Anyhow, Mike was right on in the first place, as with Valhalla. First-second generation Americans in the past often had a hunger to adopt a new persona...but over time, simple clustering of subcultures creates rifts (Canada still young there). Homogeneity is perhaps the most important factor involved in getting any policy accomplished, any study conducted, etc. This works for sorting M&Ms, mixing paint, dividing and conquering (or not) a population, etc ad nauseum.

I was skeptical about the "melting pot" myth already when I first heard it in grade school. The fact that what we have is manifestly not a melting pot, but rather obviously a salad bowl, does not take away from my thesis.

Why do people need to look and talk the same, in order to form a community? Why? I see counterexamples of this every day.

And why in the world would "homogeneity [be] perhaps the most important factor in getting any policy accomplished"? Why? Why would it be even any factor at all, much less the "most important" one? No reason or explanation has been stated by you or Valhalla or anyone else -- it's a naked assertion.

People have common interests, irrespective of their ethnic background. People are manifestly capable of forming strong communities with diverse ethnic backgrounds, not "melting potting" away their differences, but based on consciousness of their common interests. Racism and prejudice can interfere with this, and racism is pervasive and insidious (and yes -- systemic), but not to such an extent that it makes policy making impossible.

Our political system is in a bad state, but this has nothing to do with diversity. I have still not heard even a single argument of why our diversity is a weakness. I have heard nothing to dissuade me from considering this a pathetic racist excuse for our failures.