General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Dale Crocker
Rebel HQ
comments

Comments by "Dale Crocker" (@dalecrocker3213) on "Student's Karen-Like Rant Is A GRIM Reminder" video.

Follow the $cience.
3
I know. I never let my children out of the house unless they are wearing a tinfoil hat to protect their brains from harmful cosmic rays and a crucifix to keep the vampires at bay. These are such simple basic precautions, and no trouble at all.
3
Don't be silly. Only Republicans die of covid. It's their punishment for accepting Trump as their leader.
2
The essential point is of course that unless masks are N95 standard or above, tight fitting and worn semi-permanently they are next to useless. In any case right now the more healthy people who catch covid and recover the better. Things have moved on. The magic mask is a thing of the past. Why are you continuing to beat this tired old drum?
2
My children are just the same when I make them wear a tinfoil hat to protect their brains from harmful cosmic rays.
2
It really isn't so stupid, perhaps just a little difficult for underdeveloped intellects to understand.
2
In the UK, as in many other countries, masks stopped being mandated months ago. They really are pretty useless you know.
1
@becauseiam7915 Mask mandate and use efficacy for COVID-19 containment in US States Damian D. Guerra1,*, Daniel J. Guerra2 1Department of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America; 2Authentic Biochemistry, VerEvMed, Clarkston, Washington, United States of America Background: COVID-19 pandemic mitigation requires evidence-based strategies. Because COVID-19 can spread via respired droplets, most US states mandated mask use in public settings. Randomized control trials have not clearly demonstrated mask efficacy against respiratory viruses, and observational studies conflict on whether mask use predicts lower infection rates. We hypothesized that statewide mask mandates and mask use were associated with lower COVID-19 case growth rates in the United States. Methods: We calculated total COVID-19 case growth and mask use for the continental United States with data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. We estimated post-mask mandate case growth in non-mandate states using median issuance dates of neighboring states with mandates. Results: Earlier mask mandates were not associated with lower total cases or lower maximum growth rates. Earlier mandates were weakly associated with lower minimum COVID-19 growth rates. Mask use predicted lower minimum but not lower maximum growth rates. Growth rates and total growth were comparable between US states in the first and last mask use quintiles during the Fall-Winter wave. These observations persisted for both natural logarithmic and fold growth models and when adjusting for differences in US state population density. Conclusions: We did not observe association between mask mandates or use and reduced COVID-19 spread in US states. COVID-19 mitigation requires further research and use of existing efficacious strategies, most notably vaccination. Keywords: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, face covering, medical mask, mask mandate, nonpharmaceutical intervention
1
Children very rarely die with covid. Perhaps that's why.
1
@pwatson5766 How are you defining a child? Throughout the entire pandemic 657 under 18s have died in the US. Most, if not all were suffering from a pre-existing life-threatening condition, particularly obesity. Tragic to each of the families but statistically insignificant.
1
@pwatson5766 Why? I'd define a child, particularly with regards to covid infection, as pre-pubescent which takes out the 16-18year olds out of the equation. Where did you get your 41 figure from by the way?
1
@danyelle6525 Only 657 children have died of covid in the US throughout the entire course of the epidemic. Do you realise what a tiny proportion that is? There has been no significant increase following the delta variant, which has been used by the pharmaceutical industry as a trick to convince people to give children totally unnecessary vaccinations. And we can't beat this. Covid is here to stay. All we can hope for is that it will become manageable -which will only happen when enough people have caught it and recovered from it to enable herd immunity to be reached.
1
@danyelle6525 The only source you really need is the US Center for Disease Control which supplied the figures I gave you. If you need further reassurance there are many articles in the European medical press which explain that, while more transmissible than previous variants, delta is not more harmful -either to adults or children. I will give a link to one such article in a separate post. Being American you will have been subjected to a stream of propaganda financed by the pharmaceutical industry to convince you that you, your children and your household pets should be vaccinated two or three times a day in order to keep covid at bay. I'm exaggerating of course, but you must know what I mean.
1
@danyelle6525 Believe it or not I have tried several times to provide links to articles in the European press which show how delta, while more transmissible than earlier variants, is no more harmful either to children or adults. YouTube blocks them all but I'm a stubborn bugger so I will keep on trying.
1
Medical Science News October 11 2021
1
@danyelle6525 Medical Life Sciences News October 11 2021
1
It's worse in Europe! Would you believe this from the European Centre for Disease Control? "The evidence regarding the effectiveness of medical face masks for the prevention of COVID-19 in the community is compatible with a small to moderate protective effect, but there are still significant uncertainties about the size of this effect. Evidence for the effectiveness of non-medical face masks, face shields/visors and respirators in the community is scarce and of very low certainty." Utter madness, Greaseball Trumptards!
1
I insist that my children wear tinfoil hats to protect them from harmful cosmic rays. It's only reasonable.
1
@runnergo1398 That's what they all say. Follow the science!
1
@1369Stiles But sneezing is not relevant. Covid spreads mainly through aerosols - normal breath in other words.
1
Rose-Marie Bothi Highly effectual (or slightly effectual) against large droplets but no use at all against aerosol-bone virions so small that they can pass through the weave in your mask in groups of several thousand. Why don't you wear your mask and sit in a room with a few other people and the windows closed? That'll larn yer.
1
Rose-Marie Bothi All evidence shows that immunity to one strain leads to robust resistance to any consequent strain. The immune system quickly adjusts any any symptoms are invariably mild.
1
@grahvis They don't and never have done. It's just a myth to make you feel safe and as though you are helping.
1
@therealitycheck287 It is extremely ignorant to believe that masks have anything but the most minimal effect on the spread of covid. In fact, over-reliance upon them has almost certainly killed more people than they've saved.
1
@1369Stiles The mask myth was exploded long ago, as alas was the surface contact route. At least 60% of infections occur through aerosols. Masks aren't going to stop them going out or coming in and as for droplets - good old-fashioned courtesy of putting your hand over your mouth if you cough or sneeze will work just as well in keeping them from reaching others. As far as deaths are concerned you've really got to be pretty old or pretty ill to die with covid. Obesity is America's big problem, because that counts as ill when it comes to covid. So fatality is the result of poor lifestyle or unfortunate genetics or most common of all, sheer old age.
1
@therealitycheck287 Try harder.
1
@therealitycheck287 There is no evidence that masks significantly prevent the passage of aerosols unless of a high standard (N95 or above) and tightly fitting. Smaller aerosol particles escape through the weave of most masks but the most significant escapes are via the edges. Believing in magic is stupid.
1
@therealitycheck287 Mask mandate and use efficacy for COVID-19 containment in US States Damian D. Guerra1,*, Daniel J. Guerra2 1Department of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America; 2Authentic Biochemistry, VerEvMed, Clarkston, Washington, United States of America Background: COVID-19 pandemic mitigation requires evidence-based strategies. Because COVID-19 can spread via respired droplets, most US states mandated mask use in public settings. Randomized control trials have not clearly demonstrated mask efficacy against respiratory viruses, and observational studies conflict on whether mask use predicts lower infection rates. We hypothesized that statewide mask mandates and mask use were associated with lower COVID-19 case growth rates in the United States. Methods: We calculated total COVID-19 case growth and mask use for the continental United States with data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. We estimated post-mask mandate case growth in non-mandate states using median issuance dates of neighboring states with mandates. Results: Earlier mask mandates were not associated with lower total cases or lower maximum growth rates. Earlier mandates were weakly associated with lower minimum COVID-19 growth rates. Mask use predicted lower minimum but not lower maximum growth rates. Growth rates and total growth were comparable between US states in the first and last mask use quintiles during the Fall-Winter wave. These observations persisted for both natural logarithmic and fold growth models and when adjusting for differences in US state population density. Conclusions: We did not observe association between mask mandates or use and reduced COVID-19 spread in US states. COVID-19 mitigation requires further research and use of existing efficacious strategies, most notably vaccination. Keywords: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, face covering, medical mask, mask mandate, nonpharmaceutical intervention
1
@therealitycheck287 Do your prejudices extend to Europe? Report of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, February 2021. Conclusion: "The evidence regarding the effectiveness of medical face masks for the prevention of COVID-19 in the community is compatible with a small to moderate protective effect, but there are still significant uncertainties about the size of this effect. Evidence for the effectiveness of non-medical face masks, face shields/visors and respirators in the community is scarce and of very low certainty."
1
@therealitycheck287 A negligible level of protection, possibly. Certainly nothing to make a fuss about. The writers of the report were simply being polite. It's not exactly a glowing recommendation, is it?
1
@therealitycheck287 Studies which "prove" masks work at limiting spread are many. But then you can prove the moon is made of green cheese if you know enough scientists looking for a job to do. The same applies to proving that masks are ineffective of course, and although the there are sound political and financial reasons for "proving" that they do work, there are none, really, for proving that they don't. So really all you can do is look at the real world and see states and countries where mask mandates have been introduced, and when, and try to find some correlation between such events and a subsequent reduction in covid case numbers. And you can't. It can't be done in any way which proves a statistically significant correlation. Getting you to stick a bit of cloth over your face is just the government's way of making you feel you are doing something to help. It also has a couple of subsidiary functions: immense financial profitability and, not least of all, it gives people the opportunity to divert their fear and anger away from the disease and the way it is being mis-handled on to those of us who, very sensibly, refuse to be fooled by this simple conjuring trick.
1
@sally8708 The essential difference of course is that all the measures you mention(well most of them) are of proven efficacy. The case for masks is shaky at best.
1
@sally8708 The world is not one vast operating room, despite efforts to make it seem so. We are not walking around with gaping wounds and breathing through ventilators.
1
@qjtvaddict Read this: Subramian and Kumar "increases in covid 19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States". European Journal of Epidemiology.
1
@sally8708 You're missing the point. Masks worn in surgical situations protect patients undergoing surgery from possible bacterial infections via droplets exuded through surgeons' mouths and noses. Masks worn in everyday situations do little or nothing to protect people from either infecting or being infected with coronaviruses.
1
@sally8708 Yes, it is an interesting and thought-provoking paper. I do rather resent your accusation that I haven't read it though! Obviously it represents only a small window onto the situation and while I have not indeed accessed current updates, it must be obvious that percentages will change quite rapidly. I find it useful mainly because it undermines many preconceptions about cause and effect in dealing with the pandemic. The old adage about the road to hell being paved with good intentions has never been more obvious than in the present instance. For the record, I am extremely dubious about the effects of masks, handwashing and social distancing. I have always had my suspicions, but since May, when it became clear that the vast majority of infections are through aerosol transmission, my reservations are even more pronounced. Over-reliance on these procedures may have done more harm than good. I think it probable there is some optimum level of vaccination which will lead to herd immunity. What thus is, goodness knows, and it will differ according to the demographics of individual communities. One thing we can be pretty certain of is that it will not be a 100% vaccination rate. With the vaccines performing as they are this will only lead to a permanent condition of epidemic with people getting booster shots every couple of months or so. Great news for the pharma companies and their shareholders, but perhaps not as welcome to the rest of us.
1
Mask stop covid. Masks stop covid. Masks stop covid. There, I could go on but you already believe it, don't you?
1
@jimjones813 I'm not sure what point you're making. You need a respirator mask of some sort in order to be able to breathe and it has to be fitted really tight to be any use at all, otherwise the aerosols just pour out in all directions. There's no getting out of this; even back at the start of the pandemic when it was thought infection was primarily through droplets masks were pretty useless. Now it has been revealed that most infection is via aerosol they are purely cosmetic. They seem to be be turning into badges of political affiliation, which is really weird.
1
On the contrary anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers are capable of thinking for themselves, rather than blindly believing everything they are told. That's why many of them are Trump supporters. He thinks for himself too.
1
That is completely and utterly untrue. Although vaccinations vastly improve the chances of survival in younger age groups, the elderly and infirm continue to form the largest section of those who die, vaccinated or not.
1
@qjtvaddict More or less irrelevant.
1
He is on the right track. It is you who is being brainwashed. "Subramian and Kumar "increases in covid 19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States". European Journal of Epidemiology." Google the above and also the current infection rates in states where vaccination rates are highest and lowest. You might get a bit of a shock.
1
@vinsonche9088 Don't be an idiot. You must know that YouTube wipes direct links. All you have to do is Google the title of the paper, which is published by the US National Library of Medicine as well as by the European equivalents. The good old days of blue writing are gone. Do it. This is real.
1
@markbriten6999 It's published in most international science libraries. including the US National Library of Medicine. It is quite new and the peer-review process (for what its worth)is current.
1
I don't suppose it has crossed your mind that masks are the biggest money-spinner since cigarettes, has it?
1
@markbriten6999 What? A product which every single person in the world MUST have and has to be replaced on a regular basis? Malboro Man is eating his heart out!
1
Actually the efficacy of masks in preventing the spread of covid is questioned in many European countries. A recent study by the European CDC found them to be of very little use. It's the enormous fuss you make over the issue which amuses us.
1
@runnergo1398 Masks are effective ( to a certain extent) in preventing relatively large organisms such as bacteria in entering wounds etc, but are of very little use in preventing very much smaller viruses from entering into the human body via aerosols.
1
@qjtvaddict Wot?
1
Do you have any idea why the rate of infection in Texas is plummeting, whereas in states with high vaccine levels this is not the case?
1
@Fomites Google texas covid.
1
@Fomites Google texas covid then google any state with a high vaccination level, Vermont for example.
1
@Fomites Of interest: Subramian and Kumar "increases in covid 19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States". European Journal of Epidemiology.
1
Subramian and Kumar "increases in covid 19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States". European Journal of Epidemiology. Read this. It is quite educational.
1
@jcspoon573 Hang on! I know what it is and obviously recognise its limitations, but it provides interesting food for thought, don't you think? And your analogy doesn't really bear much close examination, does it? The fact is that countries and states which go for mandated 100% vaccination programmes will inevitably find themselves in situations whereby their localised epidemics will continue virtually forever. The relatively low success rate of the current vaccines and their short shelf life guarantee this. On the other hand, populations in which there is a level of vaccination, but which also experience increasing long-term immunity in individuals via infection, will approach herd immunity threshold in a relatively ordered manner. This is already being demonstrated - not only through this study but in real world terms. All you have to do is compare current infection rates in low vaxxed states with those in high vaxxed states to see this. States such as Texas and Florida, with low levels of vaccination and a resistance to mandates, experienced hard hits in the summer, but their infection rates are now dropping dramatically. High vaxxed, high mandated states such as Vermont, while suffering fewer casualties in the past, continue to see a steady rise in cases or at least a very much slower rate of decline.
1
@jcspoon573 I have to disagree. This is information. Information needs assessment. Resistance or immunity? A fine distinction, but the resistance provided by infection seems to be of a far higher degree of efficiency than that provided by vaccination. In the UK around a quarter of new cases occur among the fully vaccinated. Over 65% of hospitalisations occur among the fully vaccinated and over 80% of deaths. As far as can be judged, none occur among the previously infected. These does not mean that vaccines are useless, of course. Far from it. It is just that they are ineffective in persons whose immune systems are shot, as is the case with a great many elderly people who continue to form the vast majority of fatalities. In America the situation is somewhat different since obesity, in all age groups, is a very significant factor in death rates.
1
@jcspoon573 You are misjudging me completely. I agree with practically all you say - apart from infection not protecting as well against variants as vaccination. Setting that aside, my view is that the best way forward is for healthy people to achieve immunity through infection, thus setting up genuine and robust cordon of protection for the vulnerable. Vaccination does not achieve this. Of course the vulnerable should be vaccinated - although it has to be said that palliative drugs might well be just as effective. The present approach seems to me to be more geared toward continued profits for drug companies than it does towards reducing the pandemic to endemic status, and dealing with it as such.
1
@jcspoon573 As to your first point, resistance via infection leads to more or less total resistance to the first strain encountered and robust resistance to subsequent strains, leading to only mild symptoms. It is clear that this should be so, and what data we have indicates that this is, in fact, so. Opportunities for mutation exist in all situations. The number of coronaviruses which have existed, and currently exist, is so vast that mutation becomes an utterly unpredictable event. Only by drastically reducing the number of potentially infectious people via immunity through infection can the likelihood or a new variant becoming predominant be reduced. As to your last point, it can be said with some certainty that successful new strains which may occur will be those which are more transmissible, but less virulent, than preceding strains.
1
@jcspoon573 But the facts as I have already presented them to you clearly prove you are incorrect. Despite what the drug companies would like you to believe, people who are vaccinated continue to become infected, to be hospitalised and to die. People who have become infected and have recovered do not. There is not getting out of this. It is the way it is.
1
@jcspoon573 No .You're wrong. Studies of antibody levels which claim extra efficacy for vaccines are immediately suspect. Drug companies have been manipulating data for decades to advance the case for their products, and the examples you give are simply an illustration of this. What is important is what happens in the real world, not in the pharma company's laboratory. And in the real world people who have been infected with coronavirus never get the same variant again, and if they are unfortunate enough to contract another variant their symptoms will be mild This is evidenced by the fact that, as already stated, vaccinated patients make up a considerable proportion of those who are hospitalised and die, whereas, to my knowledge, nobody who has been previously infected has apparently suffered any severe outcome from any subsequent re-infection.
1
@jcspoon573 I like the word "suspected". And they would say that, wouldn't they? The fact is that infection can continue for very long periods. Several months with the same infection. This does not mean re-infection. The only way a reinfection can be properly judged to have occurred is if a second test reveals a new variant. I repeat: as far as I am aware there are no recorded instances of a patient dying or suffering a severe outcome as the result of a proven secondary infection. By contrast, thousands of people are dying who have received two vaccinations.
1
@jcspoon573 Now you are just being paranoid. I have actually found one suspected case of death from a secondary infection, as it happens, but that was before the time period for secondary infections was upped from 90 days to120 days, as it is now. You are simply barking up the wrong tree. You have been fed a load of guff by an egregious press and pharmaceutical industry determined to add to its billions of profit by exploiting this pandemic for all its worth. The UK's Office of National Statistics has just a couple of days ago given a clear update on the latest position. I will attempt to give you the link in another post, YouTube being, as ever, on the side of Mammon, it is likely to be deleted, but I will persevere.
1
@jcspoon573 I still don't see the Oxford study you refer to. As I say, defining re-infection is a hard business. What in the past has thought to be re-infection has turned out to be the same infection, extended over many weeks. The case I found seems to have come into this category, and I suspect your Oxford cases might also. Anyhow do try to access the ONS paper. It might calm you down a bit.
1
@jcspoon573 Where can I access this Oxford study then? I'm genuinely interested. As for the rest, I find it hard to believe that the vaccines are going to lose money! And as for hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin - we'll never know, will we? At least not from studies - only from real-world experience.
1
@jcspoon573 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exW9EcK52cA
1
@TS-bj8my No.
1
This is a very interesting scientific paper Subramian and Kumar "increases in covid 19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States". European Journal of Epidemiology.
1