The People’s Convoy, a group of truckers and others who circled the Capital Beltway twice on Sunday, hit the road again Monday but didn’t cause major disruptions on the Beltway.
The group has been cagey about its plans, although organizers have told various media outlets that they plan to continue their convoy throughout the week.
They’re protesting COVID-19 mandates, despite the fact that many restrictions are no longer in place, along with myriad other issues under the banner of “let freedom roll.”
There is a delicious irony in that the very same people who were calling for brutal crackdowns on the Black Lives Matter protests, you know, people who were protesting against police wantonly beating and killing minorities, now are cheering on protesters who are whining about having had to wear masks to limit the spread of a deadly infectious disease. It points to the utter vacuity of the Trumpanzees.
Meanwhile, from the We Hate Science State:
Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo said Monday that the state will formally recommend against COVID-19 vaccinations for healthy children.
Anybody who follow the pseudomedical advice of Ron DeathSentence's puppet doctor is dumber than they look. It's probably a miracle that Floriduh hasn't gone full-on "don't vaccinate your kids for anything" because healthy kids don't get measles, mumps, rubella or pertussis. Or so they think.
Remember, this is coming from the same side of the political spectrum that, to some extent, still admires the Butcher of Ukraine. It's probably a safe bet that a fair number of those drucks driving aimlessly around the Capitol Beltway are being driven by Putin apologistas.
Drucks, lol. I was calling it the Cuck Convoy but whatever; of note in the "reporting" are there are more jacked-up, de-engineered, suburban assault vehicles with tires the size of Volkswagons and a hood ornament the perfect rendition of a human female's reproductive system ... than "trucks"
ReplyDeleteThat was a typo, but I'll leave it up.
ReplyDeleteWhat a bunch of clowns, really. The kind that think that everyone is with them, admires them (and is going to pay for their diesel, in your dreams). Mmmm-mmm, big fail on the Dunning-Kruger test.
ReplyDeleteLike 1/6, but with clown trucks (not cars)...soon they will go home and those with an IQ greater than the temp outdoors will try to pretend they were never there. Not me, no sir, I didn't go, I'm too smart to do something like that. The hole in our money....oh, that I gave to Trump.
Masks don't work. We know that even if you don't believe it. And they are protesting forced vaccinations (Take the Jab or don't work) you lie about the reasons for the protest...which tell me all we need to know about your veracity.
ReplyDeleteThe "People's Convoy" isn't burning and looting like the BLM folks, nor are they protesting what was, effectively, lies about the number of black people killed by cops.
Easy way to not get killed by police (banning police is not one of then): Don't commit crimes..and when arrested, don't fight. It works for every other race....
Right. Masks don't work. Which is why they wear masks in every fucking operating room.
ReplyDeleteThat's some pretty strong Kool-aid, there. Quaff away....
Masks don't work? Wow. Another way not to get arrested, then killed by a cop: don't be black.
ReplyDeleteQuack Ladapo is a real piece of work, and just perfect as a spokesman for the fucked-in-the-head suicidal right wing in this country.
ReplyDeleteJacob Wohl and Jack Burkman tried to co-opt the Free Dumb Convoy and it didn't go well for them.
The California version only made it to Las Vegas with five trucks, and promptly disbanded and cancelled the funding rallies.
Oh,and B, can we compare the economic damage done by the Canadian truck protest and all of the BLM protests ever? The trucks did more damage in a week than millions in the streets did in five years.
-Doug in Sugar Pine
I've still only seen the study to which I linked here before showing masks prevent Covid spread in the community by 16%. Not TO 16&. BY 16%. And that was months ago.
ReplyDeleteThe operating room masks aren't even trying to prevent Covid spread. They are a part of trying to minimize all OR disease spread, but they work much better for bacteria and water droplets.
We have data available showing little difference between states with and without mandates. We have data showing little difference between nations with and without mask mandates. Masks don't correlate with reductions.
If there was science supporting the masks, it would be published. Instead we just get assertions.
Missed this one? It’s from the CDC, which probably will be dismissed out of hand by some people.
ReplyDeleteLink goes 404.
ReplyDeleteShit. I’ll fix it when I get home. My apologies.
ReplyDeleteThree people who used masks during the last 2+ years, and had no COVID cases, even with relatives and other associates getting it. Nope, masks sure don’t work…
ReplyDeleteCDC study on mask effectiveness.
ReplyDeleteHave you actually read the study you posted?
ReplyDeleteIt pretty much says that maybe, it night be that, if you ignore all the other variables, and if the people we asked told us the truth about their wearing a mask that they might, maybe be slightly effective.
Seriously, even an attorney couldn't write a less prevaricating statement. A high schooler could do a better planned and implemented study. Read beyond the headlines.
Remember the CDC told us the shots were 90% effective because "CNN said that and we just went with it" even though they knew better. The CDC has become more political than science.
And, again, remember that the protests aren't about masking, they are about being forced to take the Jab or lose your job.
Funny how your side is all in favor of private businesses being able to set their own rules, unless it gets to the point where the rules they set are ones that you don’t agree with.
ReplyDeleteDiscriminate against somebody for being gay or transgendered? Conservatives think that’s just peachy. Discriminate against somebody for refusing to be vaccinated against the communica disease? Oh no, we can’t have that!
Pretty clear what the conclusion of the report is, B:
ReplyDeleteWhat is added by this report?
Consistent use of a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings was associated with lower odds of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result (adjusted odds ratio = 0.44). Use of respirators with higher filtration capacity was associated with the most protection, compared with no mask use.
………………..
These findings are consistent with existing research demonstrating that face masks or respirators effectively filter viruses in laboratory settings and with ecological studies showing reductions in SARS-CoV-2 incidence associated with community-level masking requirements (6,7). While this study evaluated the protective effects of mask or respirator use in reducing the risk the wearer acquires SARS-CoV-2 infection, a previous evaluation estimated the additional benefits of masking for source control, and found that wearing face masks or respirators in the context of exposure to a person with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with similar reductions in risk for infection (8). Strengths of the current study include use of a clinical endpoint of SARS-CoV-2 test result, and applicability to a general population sample.
That’s far from your description of it, B. Am I surprised? Not at all.
It pretty much says that maybe, it night be that, if you ignore all the other variables, and if the people we asked told us the truth about their wearing a mask that they might, maybe be slightly effective.
Why would masks work when used during medical procedures but not otherwise, outside such situations? Your hypothesis is neither supported by the data nor our understanding of how infections work, viral and otherwise.
DA: I guess if you are uneducated enough that you cannot parse the plain wording, then you might believe that the words mean what you think they do.
ReplyDeleteNotice that their data includes masks AND respirators. Paper masks don't work, respirators do. Notice also that the data was collected and "self reported" and that there was a large margin for error ("some of the time or most of the time") and that there was little auditing of that reporting.
Believe what you want. Anyone with a decent 8th grade education can see through the report for what it is. I'm sorry you can't.
Ms Misfit. Large difference between a private business requiring the (ineffective and possibly dangerous) jab and the government doing so. Especially as we learn hat even the CDC was aware that the shots were not terribly effective but they lied and told us that that they were 90%. Lied. Lied. Lied. What else did they lie about? The CDC is no longer science but propaganda and politics.
Remember that the Feds promised that there would never be a mandate.
The lies came first and foremost from your team, B. Quack treatments. Decisions based on ideology, inspired by propaganda from Russian troll farms. ICUs full of dying people who believed your side’s bullshit about vaccinations. Day after day, dying Trumpers who were moaning “I should have gotten my shots.”
ReplyDeleteWell, bless their hearts. And yours.
The efficacy rates for the various vaccines (90+% for the Pfizer and Moderna versions and approximately 75% for the J+J version) were determined by the multiple levels of testing in preparation for, first, emergency approval, and then general approval by the FDA (not the CDC). The CDC's only role was to promote the vaccines as a way to limit the spread of Covid.
ReplyDeleteSo B, did you mean to say that the FDA lied to us? If so, please explain.
Pete
Ms Misfit:
ReplyDeleteWhich "lies" from "my team"? the ineffectiveness of the Covid shots? (True) (the CDC knew that they would be about 60%, but once they heard CNN say 95% they lied and said 95%
THe actual effectiveness of Ivermectin (True). It works, it was suppressed by the FDA. They knew it worked. Why else would they make it illegal for a doctor to prescribe(to the point of telling doctors that if they prescribed it the doctors would lose their license) when it was a safe, known drug that was designed for humans and is used all over the world on humans. Worst case it would not work, best case it saved lives. It works. Safe for Humans. Also used on animals. Your side lied when they said it didn't work and was, in fact, unsafe for humans. Then your side derided Ivermectin as "HorsePaste" that was unsafe and ineffective. That was a lie and you know it.
THe lies that masking works to prevent the transmission of covid by filtering viruses? Are you really that stupid? Put a mask on, light a smoke or burn some incense...if you can smell the smoke (about 40 times larger particle than an airborne virus) then your mask is useless to filter viruses. Try it.
Look up all I stated above on Goggle...don't believe me.
So which lies were from my side first?
So, Pete, where did you get your (mis)information on the effectiveness? CNN? Even the CDC and FDA no longer state 90%. You read a headline and believed it. THe claim is now 65% with no published data to show how they got that number.
ReplyDeleteI guess all these folks are in on the lie too.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2035389
https://www.science.org/content/article/absolutely-remarkable-no-one-who-got-modernas-vaccine-trial-developed-severe-covid-19
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/follow-data-phase-3-trial-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext
https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/covid-19-vaccine-comparison
There's plenty more if your willing to look.
And here's what I've learned when I've read past the headlines. The vaccine wanes over time, but only in the sense that one becomes more likely to get covid. The vaccine remains effective at preventing serious symptoms and death. Ms. Misfit had a post about this not long ago detailing that per 100,000, the unvaccinated represented a far larger portion of the folks dying and in the hospital. Even in the article you posted in the comments, this per 100,000 comparison was confirmed.
What I can't find is any current claim by the FDA, CDC or anyone that efficacy of Moderna or Pfizer is at 65% (I did see one article that showed the J&J at 66%)
Cheers to ya B,
Pete
B, why fight against the plain meaning of the text?
ReplyDeleteWhile this study evaluated the protective effects of mask or respirator use in reducing the risk the wearer acquires SARS-CoV-2 infection, a previous evaluation estimated the additional benefits of masking for source control, and found that wearing face masks or respirators in the context of exposure to a person with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with similar reductions in risk for infection (8).
That respirators are more effective than paper masks cannot lead to the conclusion that paper masks are ineffective in stopping COVID transmission.
Hope this helps!
Sorry to delay replying so long.
ReplyDeleteThe linked report is fuzzy as all get out (I'm not getting into ones from Apr 2021, ffs). Which means I still do not see why the mask mandates carried such harsh penalties.
The common cloth masks (OR style) are almost no help against covid transmission. It's not what they are designed for.
And did anyone look for the tables comparing states and nations with per capita deaths from (/ with) covid?
"She also admitted that the science, far from being “settled,” is “gray” instead of “black and white.”
ReplyDeleteTHis is the director of the CDC....Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), became the latest prominent official to contradict key aspects of the official COVID-19 narrative of the past two years.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7924773307171301256&postID=5704666788727219136
Just 'cause you "Paper of Record" won't print the news because it looks bad for the Dems doesn't mean it isn't true. You should widen your search for news beyond the DNC approved publications
If you are going to consider the CDC to be a bunch of political hacks, which you clearly do, B, it seems ironic that you would then use anything that the CDC would say to buttress your position.
ReplyDeleteDon't get vaccinated, don't wear a mask if the case numbers go up again, I really don't give a shit.
B, here’s the complete quote:
ReplyDeleteI have frequently said, ‘Science is the foundation of everything we do,’” Walensky said. “That is entirely true. But I think the public heard that as ‘Science is foolproof, science is black and white. We get the answer and then we make the decision based on the answer.’ But the truth is science is gray. And science is not always immediate. Sometimes it takes months and years to actually find out the answer, and you have to make decisions before you have that answer. We might be faulted for not making exactly the right decision, in the moment. I’m okay with that. But I don’t want to be faulted for not making a decision. Because not making a decision in and of itself is a decision.”
Here’s the source
https://medicine.wustl.edu/news/cdc-director-discusses-covid-19-pandemic-during-medical-campus-visit/
Nice try, but your paranoia about the DNC is rather risible.
Exactly. But the "science" isn't science anymore.
ReplyDeleteIt has, instead, become a political tool.
Remember: First we screened people for surface temperature coming into the country (with error bars so large that was useless, but it made the politicians be able to say they were Doing Something.
Them masks, but then they told us they didn't work, so they could keep them for the First Responders and medical personnel. THen the told us to mask up, but that cloth masks were ok. THen we needed two layers of cloth, then three. At the same time, we were all safe if we were six feet apart (and, oddly, all those signs appeared instantly to make where we should stand) but then we still needed masks, (Note that in Europe, three feet.one meter was acceptable)...all supposedly backed by "Science". Then it was 2 Weeks to Flatten the Curve" which ended up being 3-ish years....a;; still supposedly backed by "science" that was settled.
These people were guessing. What they call "Science" isn't science as most scientists were taught to practice it. But they changed a way of life and damaged an economy based on that Pseudo-science....Most of which was un-effective and a lie.
I bet you are the kind of guy who wears a poorly fitted paper mask while driving alone in his car so you feel safe because "Science".
This thread has descended into stupidity.
ReplyDeleteWe’re done, here.