By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
"It's what people know about themselves inside that makes them afraid" - "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act" - "The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it"
-3
Origins of Covid-19 on 12:45 - Apr 27 with 1193 views
It looks as if many forms of indoor gathering are doomed forever in that case.
It says whether you sit 6ft away or 60ft it has little effect. It says that the virus hangs around in the air and is best dealt with by ventilation and wearing a mask while indoors. It also states that wearing masks outside is ludicrous...remember the restrictions on sitting outside a pub, on kids sport, on adult sport ...ALL a total waste of time, you are not at risk outdoors.
REMEMBER CNN AND THE DEMOCRATS CLAIMING TRUMP RALLYS WERE PUTTING PEOPLE’s LIVES IN DANGER? ALL BOLLOCKS!
The study originates from MIT, I’m sure our Prof knows better though.
It says whether you sit 6ft away or 60ft it has little effect. It says that the virus hangs around in the air and is best dealt with by ventilation and wearing a mask while indoors. It also states that wearing masks outside is ludicrous...remember the restrictions on sitting outside a pub, on kids sport, on adult sport ...ALL a total waste of time, you are not at risk outdoors.
REMEMBER CNN AND THE DEMOCRATS CLAIMING TRUMP RALLYS WERE PUTTING PEOPLE’s LIVES IN DANGER? ALL BOLLOCKS!
The study originates from MIT, I’m sure our Prof knows better though.
Unless you are within 2 metres wearing a mask outdoors is pointless. I don’t..
Unfortunately there was not distancing at these rallies nor on transport. Hence several documented superspreader events. Most notably the event for the Supreme Court nomination at the Whitehouse.
This is also a theoretical model and I certainly would err on the side of caution
0
Origins of Covid-19 on 13:31 - Apr 27 with 1162 views
It says whether you sit 6ft away or 60ft it has little effect. It says that the virus hangs around in the air and is best dealt with by ventilation and wearing a mask while indoors. It also states that wearing masks outside is ludicrous...remember the restrictions on sitting outside a pub, on kids sport, on adult sport ...ALL a total waste of time, you are not at risk outdoors.
REMEMBER CNN AND THE DEMOCRATS CLAIMING TRUMP RALLYS WERE PUTTING PEOPLE’s LIVES IN DANGER? ALL BOLLOCKS!
The study originates from MIT, I’m sure our Prof knows better though.
It actually does not say that at all. If you read the actual paper in PNAS. It is very good. It says indoor transmission including transport is the main driver (known all along- hence little restriction to outdoor individual activity). But their findings are based on aerosol transmission only. In fact they recommend the six foot/ 2 metre rule to avoid larger droplet transmission. Their subsequent recommendations are to reduce aerosol transmission indoors, where 6 feet or 60 feet make no real difference. Here they make some good suggestions on ventilation and retaining masks.
Nowhere does it say standing cheek-by-jowl outdoors is not a risk. Within 2 metres droplet, rather than aerosol, is a risk without a mask.
[Post edited 27 Apr 2021 13:37]
0
Origins of Covid-19 on 13:44 - Apr 27 with 1148 views
Origins of Covid-19 on 13:31 - Apr 27 by Professor
It actually does not say that at all. If you read the actual paper in PNAS. It is very good. It says indoor transmission including transport is the main driver (known all along- hence little restriction to outdoor individual activity). But their findings are based on aerosol transmission only. In fact they recommend the six foot/ 2 metre rule to avoid larger droplet transmission. Their subsequent recommendations are to reduce aerosol transmission indoors, where 6 feet or 60 feet make no real difference. Here they make some good suggestions on ventilation and retaining masks.
Nowhere does it say standing cheek-by-jowl outdoors is not a risk. Within 2 metres droplet, rather than aerosol, is a risk without a mask.
[Post edited 27 Apr 2021 13:37]
Looking at the cretins who abound and refuse to wear a mask-full stop- me and wifey will be wearing one whenever we think they may be a risk of tw@ttism . We have been jabbed .
As for rules dictating social distancing outdoors, Bazant said they are "kind of crazy," CNBC reported. The infected air "would be swept away," Bezant said, making the rule irrelevant.
Unless the space outdoors is crowded, Bazant said, he would feel comfortable being as close as 3 feet even without masks.
Origins of Covid-19 on 13:31 - Apr 27 by Professor
It actually does not say that at all. If you read the actual paper in PNAS. It is very good. It says indoor transmission including transport is the main driver (known all along- hence little restriction to outdoor individual activity). But their findings are based on aerosol transmission only. In fact they recommend the six foot/ 2 metre rule to avoid larger droplet transmission. Their subsequent recommendations are to reduce aerosol transmission indoors, where 6 feet or 60 feet make no real difference. Here they make some good suggestions on ventilation and retaining masks.
Nowhere does it say standing cheek-by-jowl outdoors is not a risk. Within 2 metres droplet, rather than aerosol, is a risk without a mask.
[Post edited 27 Apr 2021 13:37]
What they appear to neglect in their calculations is "Viral Load" which I thought was supposed to be very important regarding how ill you got. I was one of the first on here to report that the virus was airborne based on the information provided by the leader of the South Korean Pandemic team a year ago and that just "washing your hands" was not enough to protect you.
Even outdoors you could be following someone shedding heavily with the breeze continually blowing it in your direction to build up the viral load you are walking through. There are no simple single answers, each situation is different. The SKs also established that at the beginning of their pandemic some people caught COVID by sitting on the same pew seat the day after someone heavily shedding had sat on it.
-1
Origins of Covid-19 on 13:59 - Apr 27 with 1144 views
As for rules dictating social distancing outdoors, Bazant said they are "kind of crazy," CNBC reported. The infected air "would be swept away," Bezant said, making the rule irrelevant.
Unless the space outdoors is crowded, Bazant said, he would feel comfortable being as close as 3 feet even without masks.
Read the paper.
1
Origins of Covid-19 on 14:05 - Apr 27 with 1142 views
Origins of Covid-19 on 13:56 - Apr 27 by A_Fans_Dad
What they appear to neglect in their calculations is "Viral Load" which I thought was supposed to be very important regarding how ill you got. I was one of the first on here to report that the virus was airborne based on the information provided by the leader of the South Korean Pandemic team a year ago and that just "washing your hands" was not enough to protect you.
Even outdoors you could be following someone shedding heavily with the breeze continually blowing it in your direction to build up the viral load you are walking through. There are no simple single answers, each situation is different. The SKs also established that at the beginning of their pandemic some people caught COVID by sitting on the same pew seat the day after someone heavily shedding had sat on it.
You are correct to a large extent. The model has to use a load prediction and have gone with ID of 10 viruses. I think there is already too much complexity or a MMC-type approach to load would have been good.
The obsession with hands has somewhat detracted from airborne transmission via droplet or aerosol. We should have worn masks sooner. I certainly took a few FP3 from work for any indoor activity.
Origins of Covid-19 on 14:05 - Apr 27 by Professor
You are correct to a large extent. The model has to use a load prediction and have gone with ID of 10 viruses. I think there is already too much complexity or a MMC-type approach to load would have been good.
The obsession with hands has somewhat detracted from airborne transmission via droplet or aerosol. We should have worn masks sooner. I certainly took a few FP3 from work for any indoor activity.
When I watched that South Korean Video I went and bought K95 masks, I already had wrap around safety glasses and gloves. Although diving goggles would probably be better than the glasses. The really funny thing about their concentration on washing your hands, they never once mentioned washing your face or hair. Tunnel vision from WHO.
-2
Origins of Covid-19 on 18:10 - Apr 27 with 1113 views
Any 3 layer cloth mask will do the job. It will act as a barrier and a filter.If everyone wears them , plus distance it should be 100% effective.There's no need for expensive masks.
0
Origins of Covid-19 on 19:21 - Apr 27 with 1100 views
Any 3 layer cloth mask will do the job. It will act as a barrier and a filter.If everyone wears them , plus distance it should be 100% effective.There's no need for expensive masks.
Would this work ?
A great believer in taking anything you like to wherever you want to.
Origins of Covid-19 on 19:21 - Apr 27 by KeithHaynes
Would this work ?
Well enough Keith-to stop transmission and give a degree of protection to the wearer. N95 and FFP3 grades protect the user but are often valved and don’t stop the wearer transmitting
0
Origins of Covid-19 on 11:10 - Apr 30 with 1037 views
Remember when the Democrats were encouraging the American public not to take a vaccine?
This bloke does, he plays excerpts from his radio show from back then in case any of you have forgotten...
"It's what people know about themselves inside that makes them afraid" - "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act" - "The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it"
-1
Origins of Covid-19 on 19:05 - Apr 30 with 997 views
EXCLUSIVE: COVID-19 'has NO credible natural ancestor' and WAS created by Chinese scientists who then tried to cover their tracks with 'retro-engineering' to make it seem like it naturally arose from bats, explosive new study claims
- An explosive new study claims researchers found 'unique fingerprints' in COVID-19 samples that they say could only have arisen from manipulation in a laboratory
- DailyMail.com exclusively obtained the new 22-page paper authored by British Professor Angus Dalgleish and Norwegian scientist Dr. Birger Sørensen set to be published in the Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery
- The study showed there's evidence to suggest Chinese scientists created the virus while working on a Gain of Function project in a Wuhan lab Gain of Function research, which was temporarily outlawed in the US, involves altering naturally-occurring viruses to make them more infectious in order to study their potential effects on humans According to the paper, Chinese scientists took a natural coronavirus 'backbone' found in Chinese cave bats and spliced onto it a new 'spike', turning it into the deadly and highly transmissible COVID-19
- The researchers, who concluded that COVID-19 'has no credible natural ancestor', also believe scientists reverse-engineered versions of the virus to cover up their tracks 'We think that there have been retro-engineered viruses created,' Dalgleish told DailyMail.com. 'They've changed the virus, then tried to make out it was in a sequence years ago.'
- The study also points to 'deliberate destruction, concealment or contamination of data' in Chinese labs and notes that 'scientists who wished to share their findings haven't been able to do so or have disappeared'
- Until recently, most experts had staunchly denied the origins of the virus were anything other than a natural infection leaping from animals to humans
- Earlier this week, Dr. Anthony Fauci defended US funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, saying the $600,000 grant was not approved for Gain of Function research
"It's what people know about themselves inside that makes them afraid" - "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act" - "The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it"
-2
Origins of Covid-19 on 17:10 - May 31 with 873 views
Origins of Covid-19 on 13:13 - May 31 by Ajack_Kerouac
EXCLUSIVE: COVID-19 'has NO credible natural ancestor' and WAS created by Chinese scientists who then tried to cover their tracks with 'retro-engineering' to make it seem like it naturally arose from bats, explosive new study claims
- An explosive new study claims researchers found 'unique fingerprints' in COVID-19 samples that they say could only have arisen from manipulation in a laboratory
- DailyMail.com exclusively obtained the new 22-page paper authored by British Professor Angus Dalgleish and Norwegian scientist Dr. Birger Sørensen set to be published in the Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery
- The study showed there's evidence to suggest Chinese scientists created the virus while working on a Gain of Function project in a Wuhan lab Gain of Function research, which was temporarily outlawed in the US, involves altering naturally-occurring viruses to make them more infectious in order to study their potential effects on humans According to the paper, Chinese scientists took a natural coronavirus 'backbone' found in Chinese cave bats and spliced onto it a new 'spike', turning it into the deadly and highly transmissible COVID-19
- The researchers, who concluded that COVID-19 'has no credible natural ancestor', also believe scientists reverse-engineered versions of the virus to cover up their tracks 'We think that there have been retro-engineered viruses created,' Dalgleish told DailyMail.com. 'They've changed the virus, then tried to make out it was in a sequence years ago.'
- The study also points to 'deliberate destruction, concealment or contamination of data' in Chinese labs and notes that 'scientists who wished to share their findings haven't been able to do so or have disappeared'
- Until recently, most experts had staunchly denied the origins of the virus were anything other than a natural infection leaping from animals to humans
- Earlier this week, Dr. Anthony Fauci defended US funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, saying the $600,000 grant was not approved for Gain of Function research
The thread lives up to expectations. People will believe whatever they want to, when they lean towards online conspiracy theorists what can we expect but outrageous theories.
Even worse are those who name studies and say something when it looks like they either haven't fully read the study and/or failed to understand what they did read, then spout more falsehoods.
Origins of Covid-19 on 20:53 - May 31 by A_Fans_Dad
Your response is that classic case of which expert do you believe.
Yes it is. Relevant experience is key.
I believe the virologists and epidemiologists with no vested interest in this awful situation.
Not an anti China cancer doctor.
Back in March 2020 I spoke with one of my good friends who is an orthopaedic surgeon. She had been asked about working in Covid ITU during the pandemic, she compared the difference in the specialities to a French language teacher being asked to teach Maths. She had to be entire retrained.
She understands relatively little about infectious disease in this situation and I suggest many of these "experts" are the same.
0
Origins of Covid-19 on 22:07 - May 31 with 820 views
I believe the virologists and epidemiologists with no vested interest in this awful situation.
Not an anti China cancer doctor.
Back in March 2020 I spoke with one of my good friends who is an orthopaedic surgeon. She had been asked about working in Covid ITU during the pandemic, she compared the difference in the specialities to a French language teacher being asked to teach Maths. She had to be entire retrained.
She understands relatively little about infectious disease in this situation and I suggest many of these "experts" are the same.
But you don't actually know do you? I think it odd that you don't believe the author of the study. That is you all the time, so nothing new.
0
Origins of Covid-19 on 07:15 - Jun 1 with 795 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.