Comments by "ARK CON" (@arkcon714) on "Police and protesters clash at Australian anti-lockdown protests in Sydney" video.
-
@francisdrake7924 around 400 people under 50 have died from covid in all of Canada. It is 5x more dangerous to drive in a car, 200x more chance of death from cancer
University of Louisville study, recently published, shows masks mandates did absolutely nothing to slow or stop the spread. Add this to the existing studies like the Danish mask study (largest RCT on masks ever done) this shows conclusively masks so not do anything at all but we do know they cause a myriad of health problems.
Apparently all of this was to stop the hospitals from being overrun, that is the reason right? Well no hospital anywhere in North America has been overrun due to covid, not even one. New York didn't even use the hospital ship or the javit center and no field hospitals that have been erected have been used, not one, we have caught hospitals paying people to stand in line at covid testing facilities to make them look busy for the media but no hospitals have been overrun due to covid, it just has not happened.
We do have hospitals that are being overrun though, children's hospitals. They are seeing an unprecedented eruption in mental health cases, self harm cases, eating disorders its happening at such an alarming rate and they are so overrun that they are sending kids to the adult hospitals with covud patients. Oh and there isn't even one civid patient at these children's hospitals, not even one, if a kid does get hospitalized with flu like symptoms they go to the adult hospital. I'm sure you already know child self endings are 3x the normal rate so please tell me why are we sacrificing children at such an horrific scale so we can give grandpa 2 more years? Those 2 extra years will be lived in solitude and be miserable, more akin to imprisonment then life but why should we sacrifice these kids? Because you are afraid of the sniffles?
14
-
9
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
@DJWeiWei look up bias in meta analysis and again actually read the sources the meta analysis cites and every single one, not most, every one that is about masks and viruses says masks do not stop viruses. This is why you won't provide any sources because you can't.
You implied it by saying it wasn't peer reviewed and you clearly do not even know what peer review is so why even use it as a point if not to imply the data is inaccurate? Do you think peer review is someone else providing a conclusion? Hahahahahaa peer review simply checks the hard data it doesn't give an alternate look on the data so just admit that you either think they are lying or do not know what peer review is, there is no third option here. By saying it hasn't been peer reviewed when all peer review does is check the data and the math used in a study you must be saying that they are lying if not there's absolutely no point in bringing up peer review for this was a straight data analysis
This is why I call you an anti science masker, you have no idea how science works and just read an abstract and say well, there it is. That's following opinion following science shows that 6000 people participated, 3000 on one, 3000 on the other, no statistical difference, that is what is called following the science does it not strike you as odd they had such a hard time publishing it? Do you think they would have had a hard time publishing it if the evidence showed masks did stop viruses? Be honest and answer this question directly please. If you were being honest you would answer no, of course they would have had no trouble publishing the study, it would have been screamed from the rooftops as proof masks work. Beyond all of this we know by actual laboratory tests that the masks collect far worse pathogens so even if they did protect against covid, which all evidence shows they don't let's be very clear about that, the risks far outweigh the benefits.
Beyond that it's up to you anti science maskers to prove they do work not for us to prove they don't work for you sre the ones asking people to go against established science and cultural norms and wear a mask, not the other way around
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
@DJWeiWei
The data shows lockdowns end more lives than they save
By John Tierney
March 22, 2021 | 6:58pm | Updated
Now that the 2020 figures have been properly tallied, there is still no convincing evidence that strict lockdowns reduced the death toll from COVID-19. But one effect is clear: more deaths from other causes, especially among the young and middle-aged, minorities and the less affluent.
The best gauge of the pandemic’s impact is what statisticians call excess mortality, which compares the overall number of deaths with the total in previous years. That measure rose among older Americans because of COVID-19, but it rose at an even sharper rate among people aged 15 to 54, and most of those excess deaths weren’t attributed to the virus.
Some of those deaths could be undetected COVID-19 cases, and some could be unrelated to the pandemic or the lockdowns. But preliminary reports point to some obvious lockdown-related factors.
There was a sharp decline in visits to emergency rooms and an increase in fatal heart attacks because patients didn’t receive prompt treatment. Many fewer people were screened for cancer. Social isolation contributed to excess deaths from dementia and Alzheimer’s.
Researchers predicted that the social and economic upheaval would lead to tens of thousands of “deaths of despair” from drug overdoses, alcoholism and suicide. As unemployment surged and mental-health and substance-abuse treatment programs were interrupted, the reported levels of anxiety, depression and suicidal thoughts increased dramatically, as did alcohol sales and fatal drug overdoses.
The number of excess deaths not involving COVID-19 has been especially high in US counties with more low-income households and minority residents, who were disproportionately affected by lockdowns. Nearly 40 percent of workers in low-income households lost their jobs during the spring, triple the rate in high-income households.
Minority-owned small businesses suffered more, too. During the spring, when it was estimated that 22 percent of all small businesses closed, 32 percent of Hispanic owners and 41 percent of black owners shut down. Martin Kulldorff, a professor at Harvard Medical School, summarized the impact: “Lockdowns have protected the laptop class of young low-risk journalists, scientists, teachers, politicians and lawyers, while throwing children, the working class and high-risk older people under the bus.”
The deadly impact of lockdowns will grow in future years, due to the lasting economic and educational consequences. The United States will experience more than 1 million excess deaths in the United States during the next two decades as a result of the massive “unemployment shock” last year, according to a team of researchers from Johns Hopkins and Duke, who analyzed the effects of past recessions on mortality.
Other researchers, noting how educational levels affect income and life expectancy, have projected that the “learning loss” from school closures will ultimately cost this generation of students more years of life than have been lost by all the victims of the coronavirus.
The lockdowns may also have saved some lives, but there’s still no good evidence. When the 50 states are ranked according to the stringency of their lockdown restrictions, you can see one obvious pattern: The more restrictive the state, the higher the unemployment rate. But there is no pattern in the rate of COVID-19 mortality.
More than two dozen studies have challenged the effectiveness of lockdowns, showing that closing businesses and schools does little or nothing to reduce infections and deaths from the virus.
If a corporation behaved this way, continuing knowingly to sell an unproven drug or medical treatment with fatal side effects, its executives would be facing lawsuits, bankruptcy and criminal charges. But the lockdown proponents are recklessly staying the course, still insisting that lockdowns work.
4
-
4
-
4
-
@DJWeiWei hahahahahahaha I'll bet you don't even know what peer review is but seeing this is literally just analysis of statistical data and not an RCT do you believe the researchers at the university of Louisville were lying? Please answer this directly
Perhaps you would prefer the Danish mask study, largest RCT ever done on masks and viruses
The Danish randomized controlled trial on the real-world efficacy of face masks against coronavirus infection – the first of its kind – has now been published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. As expected, the trial found no statistically significant benefit of wearing a face mask. The study used “high-quality surgical masks with a filtration rate of 98%”.
For political reasons, three major journals had previously refused to publish the Danish study.
Meanwhile, US researcher Yinon Weiss has updated his charts on mask mandates and coronavirus infections in various countries and US states. The charts indicate that mask mandates have made no difference, or may even have been counterproductive.
Your seat belt analogy would only be comparable if the seat belt was full of deadly pathogens
Gainesville, FL (June 16, 2021) – A group of parents in Gainesville, FL, concerned about potential harms from masks, submitted six face masks to a lab for analysis. The resulting report found that five masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria. No viruses were detected on the masks, although the test is capable of detecting viruses.
The analysis detected the following 11 alarmingly dangerous pathogens on the masks:
• Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumonia)
• Mycobacterium tuberculosis (tuberculosis)
• Neisseria meningitidis (meningitis, sepsis)
• Acanthamoeba polyphaga (keratitis and granulomatous amebic encephalitis)
• Acinetobacter baumanni (pneumonia, blood stream infections, meningitis, UTIs— resistant to antibiotics)
• Escherichia coli (food poisoning)
• Borrelia burgdorferi (causes Lyme disease)
• Corynebacterium diphtheriae (diphtheria)
• Legionella pneumophila (Legionnaires' disease)
• Staphylococcus pyogenes serotype M3 (severe infections—high morbidity rates)
• Staphylococcus aureus (meningitis, sepsis)
Half of the masks were contaminated with one or more strains of pneumonia-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with one or more strains of meningitis-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with dangerous, antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens. In addition, less dangerous pathogens were identified, including pathogens that can cause fever, ulcers, acne, yeast infections, strep throat, periodontal disease, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, and more.
The face masks studied were new or freshly-laundered before wearing and had been worn for 5 to 8 hours, most during in-person schooling by children aged 6 through 11. One was worn by an adult. A t-shirt worn by one of the children at school and unworn masks were tested as controls. No pathogens were found on the controls. Proteins found on the t-shirt, for example, are not pathogenic to humans and are commonly found in hair, skin, and soil.
A parent who participated in the study, Ms. Amanda Donoho, commented that this small sample points to a need for more research: “We need to know what we are putting on the faces of our children each day. Masks provide a warm, moist environment for bacteria to grow.”
These local parents contracted with the lab because they were concerned about the potential of contaminants on masks that their children were forced to wear all day at school, taking them on and off, setting them on various surfaces, wearing them in the bathroom, etc. This prompted them to send the masks to the University of Florida’s Mass Spectrometry Research and Education Center for analysis.
Every RCT ever done on masks and viruses outside of China shows masks do not stop viruses but do cause a myriad of serious health problems
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Humanity Is Doomed to Extinction
Around 400 people under 50 have died from covid in all of Canada. It is 5x more dangerous to drive in a car, 200x more chance of death from cancer
University of Louisville study, recently published, shows masks mandates did absolutely nothing to slow or stop the spread. Add this to the existing studies like the Danish mask study (largest RCT on masks ever done) this shows conclusively masks so not do anything at all but we do know they cause a myriad of health problems.
Apparently all of this was to stop the hospitals from being overrun, that is the reason right? Well no hospital anywhere in North America has been overrun due to covid, not even one. New York didn't even use the hospital ship or the javit center and no field hospitals that have been erected have been used, not one, we have caught hospitals paying people to stand in line at covid testing facilities to make them look busy for the media but no hospitals have been overrun due to covid, it just has not happened.
We do have hospitals that are being overrun though, children's hospitals. They are seeing an unprecedented eruption in mental health cases, self harm cases, eating disorders its happening at such an alarming rate and they are so overrun that they are sending kids to the adult hospitals with covud patients. Oh and there isn't even one civid patient at these children's hospitals, not even one, if a kid does get hospitalized with flu like symptoms they go to the adult hospital. I'm sure you already know child self endings are 3x the normal rate so please tell me why are we sacrificing children at such an horrific scale so we can give grandpa 2 more years? Those 2 extra years will be lived in solitude and be miserable, more akin to imprisonment then life but why should we sacrifice these kids? Because you are afraid of the sniffles?
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1