Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 29
| visibility 1

Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 18, 2020, 3:05 PM

lady rain bonnet at the Georgia game.

https://www.wvlt.tv/2020/10/17/coach-pruitt-says-vols-were-fined-after-he-wore-his-mask-wrong-during-ga-game/

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 18, 2020, 3:15 PM

"In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.20; I2 = 30%, p = 0.25) (Figure 2). One study evaluated the use of masks among pilgrims from Australia during the Hajj pilgrimage and reported no major difference in the risk for laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection in the control or mask group (33). Two studies in university settings assessed the effectiveness of face masks for primary protection by monitoring the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza among student hall residents for 5 months (9,10). The overall reduction in ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza cases in the face mask group was not significant in either studies (9,10). Study designs in the 7 household studies were slightly different: 1 study provided face masks and P2 respirators for household contacts only (34), another study evaluated face mask use as a source control for infected persons only (35), and the remaining studies provided masks for the infected persons as well as their close contacts (11–13,15,17). None of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group."

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

https://youtu.be/Z3plSbCbkSA

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/sweden/articles/sweden-no-masks-utopia/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ded_AxFfJoQ&feature=emb_logo

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 18, 2020, 7:01 PM

Sweden found similar results with covid-19.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 18, 2020, 7:11 PM [ in reply to It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference. ]

Masks work!!! You just have to pull them down when you cough into your hand.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

And then tell everyone that you’re following the science.***

1

Oct 19, 2020, 10:57 AM



badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 19, 2020, 9:01 AM [ in reply to It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference. ]

CDC referencing a University Hong Kong study....sigh (facepalm)

First and foremost, one study can and does not prove or disprove the existence of a phenomenon, you need to look at the body of research, not cherry pick

Number two, a study not finding a significant result does not preclude the existence of a phenomenon. That is the study failing, not the mask. Thus further research is required.

Finally,

Here is a ####-analysis.... which scans multiple datasets/cases.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7253999/


4.?Discussion

This ####-analysis of the 21 studies provided the latest state-of-art evidence on the efficacy of masks in preventing the transmission of RVIs. Our data show that the protective effects of masks against RVIs were not only significant for both HCWs and non-HCWs, but also consistent between Asian and Western populations.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 19, 2020, 9:23 AM

should be POTD. They aren't asking us to lay face down on a beach while being shot at, or endure a week of constant attack in freezing weather with no supples.

All we have to do is use a mask in public, wash our hands and stand 6 feet apart. We are asked to it for the sake of our health care workers.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 19, 2020, 9:36 AM

+1 on that.


I am just wonder why "m e t a" is screened out. Who said filters don't work.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You might want to read that more carefully. Cherry picking?


Oct 19, 2020, 1:24 PM [ in reply to Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference. ]

That study, which I actually read all the way through when it was posted, ADMITS that it cherry picked studies that had NO CONTROL. Mr. future doctor, I'm sure you don't need to be told that a study with no control is essentially worthless. For those that don't know why, IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY COMPARE MASKS WITH NO MASKS.

4.5. Limitations and future perspective
The present meta-analysis still has several limitations. First, well-designed high-quality prospective studies and studies of masking in the general public are still insufficient. Second, Droplet-borne and airborne viruses are likely to cause large-scale transmissions among the passengers within closed transportation vehicles [55]. However, relevant studies are relatively rare [32]. Third, this article included some studies of SARS patients diagnosed according to clinical diagnostic criteria for SARS due to a low detection rate of RT-PCR [56]. The lack of sufficient virologic evidence may affect our conclusions. However, this effect might not be significant, as 92% of patients with clinical SARS for whom paired sera were available had a >4-fold rise in antibody titer to SARS-CoV [57]. Fourth, control subjects without masking are generally lacking in studies conducted in healthcare settings mainly due to the ethical issue. Future studies might choose HCWs from departments without needs of masking as controls [26]. Fifth, our study didn't have sufficient data for subgroup analysis of different mask types since our inclusion criteria mainly focused on masks versus no masks, which might inherently omit studies that focused on effectiveness of different mask types. Though there were published studies that had shown different specifications of masks and different wearing methods may affect the protective effect of masks [17,32]. And when the included studies divided the time/frequency of wearing masks, we only included the group of masks with the longest wearing/highest wearing frequency. This might also ignore effects of the short/infrequent mask-wearing. In addition, the studies we included were mainly conducted in Asia, especially China, and more evidence from other countries is needed to support our views. Last but not least, information about other confounding biases, such as vaccination, hand hygiene, age, gender, and culture, may affect the protective effect of masks.


Did you notice this m*ta analysis involved studies from CHINA? This is proof you didn't read it. Because you tried to deride Chinese evidence as worthless earlier. This lack of depth is why so many people are hopelessly manipulated by the panic-pushers.

Before March of 2020 nearly every CONTROLLED study on the effect of masks with virus transmission showed no statistically significant different between masks and no masks. In fact, it consistently found that cloth masks MADE IT WORSE (though slightly). That's why the CDC and WHO made it loud and clear (UNTIL MARCH OF 2020) that there was no reason for healthy people to wear masks. There was an obvious and abrupt change from governments and corporate media. And there was a scramble for new m*ta-analysis studies (not actual experiments) to "mask" the fact that science had overwhelmingly demonstrated that masks don't make a difference.

I provided more than one source. There are thousands of epidemiologists, pulmonologists, virologists, microbiologists, statisticians, etc etc that have been consistent (and silenced) this whole time about the facts we knew BEFORE the politicization of Covid19.

And you may be fine with a government mandating something that scientific studies suggest is worthless, but I am not happy with that. Groupthink and mainstream media consensus are the reason so many people believe that masks help. Not science.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You might want to read that more carefully. Cherry picking?


Oct 19, 2020, 2:40 PM

It is Dr. Futuredoc, PhD from Clemson University. The "future" was from marrying into a family of Docs, especially since she is a Clemson girl as well...

Meanwhile your PI is Ms. Xiao is a postgraduate student at the School of Public Health, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.

Yes, it includes China, Germany, and the US. But that itself is the difference - as it is scanning and noting regional biases. That is kinda the point, you expand and survey a wide range of studies.

It is a #### analysis. Not a clinical trial. Your study is a database #### analysis as well but from 4 databases. If I really need to go into research design to explain why a control population involving policy analysis isn't applicable, well it is lost. The point of a #### analysis is to expand the survey field to make a generalization. You can't really do that with control clinical studies (although what you are scanning would include that). You can only make a point about your research sample. Even your study noted: Most studies were underpowered because of limited sample size, and some studies also reported suboptimal adherence in the face mask group. -again an issue with study design. Also, it was for influenza strains, not a wider RVI which would be more applicable.

For example 2.2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria - my link provided

The studies meeting the following criteria were included: (1) concerning the relationship between the face mask and preventing RVIs; (2) diagnosis of respiratory virus must have laboratory evidence, or the local clinical diagnostic criteria are applied during an acute large-scale infectious disease when laboratory evidence might be not available; (3) complete data available of both cases and controls to calculate an odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI); (4) appropriate study design; (5) no language restrictions applied. The exclusive criteria were as follows: (1) conferences/meetings abstracts, case reports, editorials, and review articles; (2) duplicate publication or overlapping studies; (3) studies with unavailable full texts.


Next, if you want to poke political leanings, well I am a classical libertarian. Government mandates are not something I generally recommend... actually strongly discourage but I agree with the police power that allows government to regulate based on health, safety, morals, and general welfare. Since folks are stupid enough to ignore public health recommendations, the gubbermint does retain the power to both out stubborn the stupid. I believe in extremely limited government but where government is involved it should be highly effective. Radical concept I know...

Please provide more than one peer-reviewed, I would love to see your literature. As someone on the "opposite" spectrum of most of my field's political leanings, I have never felt there has been any "silencing" from my more pro-government minded academics. This isn't climate change research whereby government tries to silence research like it was back in the mid 2000s. That just makes academic louder...

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Wonderful. Let's do this then, Mr. Pretend Libertarian.


Oct 19, 2020, 3:59 PM

None of the studies we reviewed established a conclusive relationship between mask ? respirator use and protection against in?uenza infection.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x

Conclusion: Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/


None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/face-masks-to-prevent-transmission-of-influenza-virus-a-systematic-%20review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05

“Self-reported assessment of clinical outcomes was prone to bias. Evidence of a protective effect of masks or respirators against verified respiratory infection (VRI) was not statistically significant”; as per Fig. 2c therein:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/face-masks-to-prevent-transmission-of-influenza-virus-a-systematic-%20review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05

I can keep going a LONG time. Essentially all of science before March or 2020 points in a similar direction. Virtually all the rushed politicized and opportunistic pro-mask "analysis" came after that.

And you are the opposite of a libertarian. Don't try to score points by pretending. No libertarian would agree to medical authoritarianism based on nothing.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Wonderful. Let's do this then.


Oct 19, 2020, 4:12 PM

First, please note that the studies while they might inform are not directed toward Covid. Influenza and the common cold can be both transmitted in both a similar mechanism (via droplets) as well as less common Covid vectors such as touch surfaces and aerosols.

But digging deepers, you evidence provided is quite muddlied.

Ok, source #1

Subanalyses performed for one of the larger randomised controlled studies in a household setting found evidence of reduced rates of in?uenza-like illness if household contacts consistently wore the mask or respirator.

Source #2 only followed healthcare workers via equipment and being diagnosed with a cold. It could not rule out or account for other non-work vectors.

Re-read your last case example as this is clear in the summary

"There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission. "

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Wonderful. Let's do this then, Mr. Pretend Libertarian.


Oct 19, 2020, 4:32 PM [ in reply to Wonderful. Let's do this then, Mr. Pretend Libertarian. ]

And one more very important point.

All/most of your listed studies (that I could tell) focused on front-line healthcare workers. It kinda makes sense from a research perspective, but in those cases, the health care profession will likely be exposed to dozens of close-contact situations, dealing with bodily fluids, etc that would not be common for an average joe. Thus, the results of the test are "flavored" with selection bias. You just have to account for that in the literature review.

Thus you need to step back and look at a few other factors such as the result of distancing an masks in reducing non-close contact transmission cases.

You have to be careful and not overextend study findings to things the study was not trying to address. Overreach can be a big problem.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 19, 2020, 1:33 PM [ in reply to It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference. ]

Yep the bottom line is that this virus is not being transmitted by walking through someone elses slobber. It comes from sneezing,coughing, picking your nose etc and then touching other things that other people in turn touch and so forth. This whole mask thing is total BS.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference.


Oct 19, 2020, 3:20 PM [ in reply to It's a total joke either way. Makes absolutely no difference. ]

Absolutely untrue. Those are old numbers. Every Epidemiologist in the entire world says wearing a mask "helps" prevent Covid-19 spread.

It is astonishing to me that people still want to push this false narrative. Like Trump at a Georgia rally, "85% of the people who wear masks contract Coronavirus". It's merely a political agenda.

WHO: "Why should people wear masks?
Masks are a key measure to suppress transmission and save lives. Masks reduce potential exposure risk from an infected person whether they have symptoms or not. People wearing masks are protected from getting infected. Masks also prevent onward transmission when worn by a person who is infected.

Masks should be used as part of a comprehensive ‘Do it all!’ approach including: physical distancing, avoiding crowded, closed and close-contact settings, improving ventilation, cleaning hands, covering sneezes and coughs, and more."

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/question-and-answers-hub/q-a-detail/q-a-on-covid-19-and-masks

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


You are either completely ignorant or lying. Proof...


Oct 19, 2020, 3:54 PM

"Every Epidemiologist in the entire world says wearing a mask "helps" prevent Covid-19 spread."

It's sad that you actually believe that. The video linked in my original post includes TWO world renowned epidemiologists saying the opposite of your ridiculous claim.

Dutch Medical Care Minister Tamara van Ark said: "From a medical point of view, there is no evidence of a medical effect of wearing face masks, so we decided not to impose a national obligation."

Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, added: "Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8583925/The-land-no-face-masks-Hollands-scientists-say-theres-no-solid-evidence-coverings-work.html


Henning Bundgaard, chief physician at Denmark’s Rigshospitalet and a professor in cardiology, is finalizing a study that explores how effective face masks are outside hospitals in halting the spread of the virus. He says research conducted before the pandemic hit isn’t conclusive. “All these countries recommending face masks haven’t made their decisions based on new studies,” Bundgaard said in an

https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/face-mask-photo-op-adds-to-bewilderment-over-non-use-in-denmark

And the WHO earlier this year.... and every other year of their existence.... said masks being worn by healthy people are not advised. Only after March of this year did they sing a different tune. And there are NO conclusive studies that explain that shift.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 18, 2020, 3:18 PM

More like Yasser Arafat....

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 18, 2020, 3:55 PM

Was Bama fined yesterday. SEC said they were going to fine teams if any coach talked (within 6 feet) to a ref without wearing his mask. On at least two occasions Saban was less than 2 feet away screaming at a ref. I have no idea how many other times he did it that I didn't see.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

But he's 's.p.e.c.i.a.l'.....***


Oct 19, 2020, 9:53 AM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 18, 2020, 5:42 PM

Johnny Majors is smiling where ever he is. LOL

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 18, 2020, 8:16 PM

Coach Saban was not even wearing a mask when he was confronting the referee on the intentional grounding call during the UGA game. I wonder if he will get fined this week ????

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 7:56 AM

Hes immune now

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 7:56 AM [ in reply to Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old ]

Hes immune now

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 7:56 AM [ in reply to Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old ]

Hes immune now

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 7:56 AM [ in reply to Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old ]

Hes immune now

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 8:16 AM

can anyone explain to me why football coaches and baseball managers have to wear masks on the sideline or in the dugout. these guys are tested over and over just like the players are. it is mind boggling to me. but of course we all know the reason. pure optics and part of the narrative.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 9:45 AM

Also, why don't football coaches have to wear uniforms like baseball coaches?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 1:36 PM [ in reply to Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old ]

It's the appearance of complying with the protocol which makes absolutely no sense to start with. You must wear your mask to walk to your table but then you can take it off and spit partially digested food everywhere as you talk while eating. You can also riot your ### off and that in no way contributes to the spread.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Tennessee hasn't been the same since they got their


Oct 19, 2020, 8:22 AM

##### got handed to them in the 2004 Peach Bowl.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Peach_Bowl_(January)

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

There's something in these hills.


Re: Vols fined $100,000 for Pruitt wearing his mask like an old


Oct 19, 2020, 3:18 PM

Salt, meet wound.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Replies: 29
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic