I’m sure it would be worse if we moved to a private health care system.
Actually, the science says vaccination does reduce transmission. Maybe the impact is less than we would like, but “do fuck all” is false and a lie.Meanwhile the mandates do fuck all to prevent spread, which was the whole point of the mandates to start with.
Meanwhile the mandates do fuck all to prevent spread, which was the whole point of the mandates to start with.
In Toronto, the city said that despite the other public health measures lifting, its policy that employees need to be vaccinated isn’t being removed.
“Ensuring all employees, as well as new hires, are vaccinated is an important component of what the city is doing to help protect the health and safety of all employees and the communities they work with,” the city said in a statement.
And for every article you cite saying they work, one can be found that says they don't. And no need to talk about science. Covid killed science. 'The science is settled' has become a more sarcastic phrase than a factual one. It's become a useless statement.Actually, the science says vaccination does reduce transmission. Maybe the impact is less than we would like, but “do fuck all” is false and a lie.
Vaccines that work against SARS-CoV-2 have helped change the course of the pandemic by reducing illness and hospital admissions. But Chris Stokel-Walker asks what we know about their impact on preventing transmission. The range of vaccines developed in record time by pharmaceutical companies...www.bmj.com
At the start of the pandemic when scientists were less clear on how the virus was transmitted, surfaces were a huge source of worry, with people scrambling to buy wipes to disinfect anything and everything that entered their home.
Numerous studies even found that the virus could remain active on surfaces for hours after an infected person first coughed or sneezed on the surface, fuelling these fears.
It’s now understood that the virus is transmitted almost entirely through tiny airborne particles as well as through larger droplets expelled when sneezing or coughing.
But why is it that surface transmission predictions didn’t come true if the virus truly is able to linger on surfaces?
Surface transmission was already less likely due to the sequence of events that has to take place in order for it to work: an infected person has to deposit virus particles on a surface which is then touched by another person, who then has to bring their hand to their mouth, nose or eyes in order for the virus to get into their body.
But apart from that, researchers noticed that one of the limitations of the majority of laboratory studies measuring the lifespan of COVID-19 virus particles on surfaces is that lab studies usually used synthetic buffers or growth mediums to deposit the virus on the surfaces.
In real life, SARS-CoV-2 is coated in mucus when it leaves an infected person’s body through a sneeze or a cough.
In order for virus particles expelled from the body in a sneeze or cough to infect another person, they have to penetrate the mucus layer around them so they can replicate and bind to human cells.
Researchers sought to investigate the properties of mucus to see if it could partially explain the unlikeliness of surface transmission.
Researchers acknowledged that more research needs to be done on this topic to truly understand how much mucus plays into infection pathways.
?Confirmation bias at its best.
Oh I'm sorry. I forgot the only prepublished and non peer reviewed studies allowed around here were ones that supported masking forever and vaccine passports.?
The article is prepublished. If you dismiss it because you don’t like the conclusion and it has a pre published disclaimer, then that’s more cherry-picking than confirmation bias. If you take the time to read, then you can assess/critique the metrics and analysis directly.