Trump, Melania Test Positive for COVID 19

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, BillStime said:

Chris Christie tests positive - super spreader event @ the White House - should have respected RBG wishes

 

...comforting and reassuring to know you're safe in Mom's basement...quote a relief.....

[BillStime]

Will Trump have the "stamina" to continue on?  
 

He deserves no sympathy after his treatment of Secretary Clinton when she had pneumonia 4 years ago.

[3rdnlng]

46 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

 

You're back to the "Gleeful Gator" moniker. How loud and long will you laugh if our Commander-In-Chief succumbs? 

[BillStime]

 

[HappyDays]

4 hours ago, Foxx said:

https://twitter.com/brithume/status/1312076723119370242

 

 

Choose your sources wisely:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

 

Quote

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a conservative non-profit association founded in 1944. The group was reported to have about 5,000 members in 2014. The association has promoted a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. It is opposed to the Affordable Care Act and other forms of universal health insurance.

The organization requires its members to sign a "declaration of independence" pledging that they will not work with Medicare, Medicaid, or even private insurance companies.[10]

AAPS opposes mandated evidence-based medicine and practice guidelines, opposes abortion and over-the-counter access to emergency contraception and opposes electronic medical records.[10]

The association's Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (JPandS), from 1996 to 2003 named the Medical Sentinel, is not listed in academic literature databases such as MEDLINE/PubMed or the Web of Science. The quality and scientific validity of articles published in the journal have been criticized by medical experts, and some of the viewpoints advocated by AAPS are rejected by mainstream scientists and other medical groups.[24]

 

There's even more information in that Wikipedia article. It's a political group, not a medical group.

 

Notably that link only lists one study that has anything to do with mask effectiveness with regards to covid-19. Most of its linked studies are talking about the flu or the cold or other respiratory illnesses. You should ask yourself why a purported medical group is using baldfaced disinformation strategies like that.

 

Let's take a look at the one study they do link. It was a study of exactly 4 patients in South Korea:

 

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

 

So it turns out the study wasn't testing if masks prevent the spread of covid-19. It was testing how many air droplet particles end up on the outside of the mask if a person coughs while wearing one. Here's the study's own conclusion:

 

Quote

This experiment did not include N95 masks and does not reflect the actual transmission of infection from patients with COVID-19 wearing different types of masks. We do not know whether masks shorten the travel distance of droplets during coughing. Further study is needed to recommend whether face masks decrease transmission of virus from asymptomatic individuals or those with suspected COVID-19 who are not coughing.

 

But wait, there's more!

 

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/L20-0745

 

Quote

According to recommendations by the editors of Annals of Internal Medicine, we are retracting our article, “Effectiveness of Surgical and Cotton Masks in Blocking SARS-CoV-2. A Controlled Comparison in 4 Patients,” which was published at Annals.org on 6 April 2020 (1).

We had not fully recognized the concept of limit of detection (LOD) of the in-house reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction used in the study (2.63 log copies/mL), and we regret our failure to express the values below LOD as “<LOD (value).” The LOD is a statistical measure of the lowest quantity of the analyte that can be distinguished from the absence of that analyte. Therefore, values below the LOD are unreliable and our findings are uninterpretable.

 

 

This is a really good example of why you need to be careful with scientific sourcing. Here we have a conservative political group pushing studies that either have nothing to do with the subject in question or have been retracted. There are despicable people out whose entire career is spent trying to trick uninformed people into believing junk science. Don't let them con you.

 

Here's an actual scientific meta-analysis that combined the results of many separate tests to show masks ARE effective in reducing the spread of covid-19.

 

https://hartfordhealthcare.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleid=27691&publicId=395

 

Quote

The IHME, a research center that has provided projections on hospitalizations and deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic, performed a meta-analysis earlier this summer of mask studies from the United States, China and Germany that confirmed what most medical experts have advocated for months:

If 95 percent of people wear cloth masks when within 6 feet of other people in public, it will reduce COVID-19 transmission by at least 30 percent. So if every infected person transmits the virus to 30 percent fewer people, it improves the chances of subduing COVID-19’s spread in the United States.

 

 

Here's another one:

 

https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 

And another one:

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302301?via%3Dihub#bib6

 

Quote

The risk of influenza, SARS, and COVID-19 infection were reduced by 45%, 74%, and 96% by wearing masks, respectively, which were consistent with previous meta-analyses during the SARS outbreaks

 

Note that the above study makes a clear distinction between influenza, SARS, and covid-19, and specifically shows that masks are especially effective with controlling the spread of covid-19. Why do you think the link you posted threw a bunch of different illnesses into a blender? Could it be they have an agenda?

 

The science is proven on this - large scale usage of masks substantially reduces the risk of spreading covid-19. It isn't a perfect method and certain types of masks have better results, but across the board it has been shown to be an effective method. You should be skeptical of any source trying to convince you otherwise, not just on this matter but on anything else they are telling you.

Edited October 3, 2020 by HappyDays

[BillStime]

5 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

As this thread amply proves:
 

 

 

 

[HappyDays]

3 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Will change zero minds of those who want to politicize masks. The fact is, as this article lays out, there has never been anything close to scientific cinsensus on the benefits of mask usage.

 

See my post above. Has your mind been changed? Did you actually click and read through that link and analyze its claims, or did you just believe the headline?

[BillStime]

Just now, HappyDays said:

 

See my post above. Has your mind been changed? Did you actually click and read through that link and analyze its claims, or did you just believe the headline?

[stevestojan]

35 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

And you wouldn't be concerned with this guy at the wheel?

 

Weird picture of Jo Jorgensen. 
 

 

juuuust kidding. 
 

 

and no, but I don’t visit PPP often because I won’t change minds and mine won’t be changed. I truly hope Trump recovers quickly. I’ll leave it at that. 
 

go Bills. 

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, Rob's House said:

 

I didn't provide a link to prove a negative?

 

That's your argument?

Don't fall for his childish trap. Air cannot exist since I can't see it, says numbnuts. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

6 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

See my post above. Has your mind been changed? Did you actually click and read through that link and analyze its claims, or did you just believe the headline?

I clicked and read. It is not new information.
 

(article removed)

 

Edited October 3, 2020 by Buffalo_Gal

[keepthefaith]

15 hours ago, Q-baby! said:

You’re an idiot. Trump knew better. They didn’t because their “leader” lied to them. Get a clue moron! 

 

So then the leaders of all countries who experienced Covid deaths (which is essentially every nation on earth) are incompetent, and add 50 US Governors to that list. 

 

5 hours ago, Niagara Bill said:

Yes you can, he did not show leadership or respect for others..I do wish him a full recovery

 

Then neither did every other world leader or 50 US state governors.  They're all guilty of failures of leadership. 

Edited October 3, 2020 by keepthefaith

[HappyDays]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I clicked and read. It is not new information.

 

No, in fact it is very old information about the cold and the flu. It is actually appalling to me that a purported medical organization would post studies about entirely different viruses and use them as proof of something. Not to mention a scientific study that was retracted by the authors before it was linked in that AAPS article. I can tolerate ignorance but what they're doing is intentional disinformation.

[Big Blitz]

2 hours ago, Kemp said:

 

I'm neither the one who said it nor one of the buffoons who trusts his judgment.

 

I'm not the one who thinks masks don't help. It's politics that have put so many current serving Republicans in danger of dying. If you don't care, so be it.

 

 

Cam Newton must be a Republican to.

[3rdnlng]

16 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Choose your sources wisely:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

 

 

It's a political group, not a medical group.

 

Notably that link only lists one study that has anything to do with mask effectiveness with regards to covid-19. Most of its linked studies are talking about the flu or the cold or other respiratory illnesses. You should ask yourself why a purported medical group is using baldfaced disinformation strategies like that.

 

Let's take a look at the one study they do link. It was a study of exactly 4 patients in South Korea:

 

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

 

So it turns out the study wasn't testing if masks prevent the spread of covid-19. It was testing how many air droplet particles end up on the outside of the mask if a person coughs while wearing one. Here's the study's own conclusion:

 

 

But wait, there's more!

 

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/L20-0745

 

 

This is a really good example of why you need to be careful with scientific sourcing. Here we have a conservative political group pushing studies that either have nothing to do with the subject in question or have been retracted. There are despicable people out whose entire career is spent trying to trick uninformed people into believing junk science. Don't let them con you.

 

Here's an actual scientific meta-analysis that combined the results of many separate tests to show masks ARE effective in reducing the spread of covid-19.

 

https://hartfordhealthcare.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleid=27691&publicId=395

 

 

Here's another one:

 

https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 

And another one:

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302301?via%3Dihub#bib6

 

 

Note that the above study makes a clear distinction between influenza, SARS, and covid-19, and specifically shows that masks are especially effective with controlling the spread of covid-19. Why do you think the link you posted threw a bunch of different illnesses into a blender? Could it be they have an agenda?

 

The science is proven on this - large scale usage of masks substantially reduces the risk of spreading covid-19. It isn't a perfect method and certain types of masks have better results, but across the board it has been shown to be an effective method. You should be skeptical of any source trying to convince you otherwise, not just on this matter but on anything else they are telling you.

Thanks for the laughs. I don't disagree with wearing a mask or that anything you posted was necessarily false but when you admonished Foxx for using his source while quoting Wikipedia and Lancet it felt like a SNL moment.  

[dickleyjones]

Welp, this whole thing sure looks baaaaaad on trump and team. It will hurt him in the election to be sure...just how much remains to be seen.

[BillsFanNC]

12 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

See my post above. Has your mind been changed? Did you actually click and read through that link and analyze its claims, or did you just believe the headline?

 

I havent read it, but I will. My point is that there is no scientific consenus on the efficacy of mask use to prevent the spread of respiratory viruses. Can you find well designed studies that suggest they are helpful? Yes. Can you also find well designed studies that suggest that they arent? Yes. 

 

Is it advisable to wear a mask in situations where social distancing is not optimum? Absolutely.  Are people and politicians who try to score political points by demonizing anyone who isn't wearing a mask in all situations also anti-science? Absolutely. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, HappyDays said:

 

No, in fact it is very old information about the cold and the flu. It is actually appalling to me that a purported medical organization would post studies about entirely different viruses and use them as proof of something. Not to mention a scientific study that was retracted by the authors before it was linked in that AAPS article. I can tolerate ignorance but what they're doing is intentional disinformation.

The people spreading disinformation are those that think any old piece of cloth can prevent this virus from infecting them or others. I choose to think it is being pushed so people feel they have some measure of control over it (they do not). Even with that benign attribution, it can be harmful in leading to a false sense of security over contracting the virus.

If it worked, we would all wear masks and be done with this. The country would be open, and as soon as the virus died out, we'd dispense with the masks. However, masks do not, can not, stop the transmission.

In the words of PA Gov Tom Wolf, it is political theater:
 

 

[HappyDays]

9 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Thanks for the laughs. I don't disagree with wearing a mask or that anything you posted was necessarily false but when you admonished Foxx for using his source while quoting Wikipedia and Lancet it felt like a SNL moment.  

 

Really, Wikipedia? Is that part of the Trumpian fake news network now? Come on man.

 

The Lancet is a two century old scientific journal. What am I missing here? I'm not up to date on the latest Trumpian talking points.

 

I've gotten far less interested in politics than I used to be over the last 4 years but the disinformation campaigns surrounding covid-19 are very concerning to me. I worry that more than ever we live in an age where people are unable to discern good sources. To be fair it isn't just right-wing. There are a bunch of left-wing people theorizing that Trump is faking the illness in spite of all evidence to the contrary. I can't tell if people were always this bad at separating fact from fiction or if the internet has made it worse. Certainly there are a number of political organizations driving the misinformation but at the end of the day people are eating it up.

Edited October 3, 2020 by HappyDays

[BillStime]