Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1299259)	5/3/2021 9:37:51 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By Mick Mørmøny Respond to of 1580142

Yeah, I have pharmacists in my family, as well, and they are blown up about it. The reality is the hard science just doesn’t support it. Arguably, an N95 when used in a precisely correct manner could be useful, but the general public would never get that right. It is really easy for people to get roped into this situation. I’m not going on too much about this, but a pretty important turning point for me as June 20 last year. By then I had come to realize something wasn’t right but I couldn’t really figure I out precisely what. It was after Fauci had waffled (I believe in June 4) and I started reading a lot of studies at that time. A weird thing happened in the days before June 20, Suddenly, articles I had read just days before started returning 404s. Sometimes, articles just changed. Here was one of the interesting ones. cidrap.umn.edu Note the paragraph: ”The authors and CIDRAP have received requests in recent weeks to remove this article from the CIDRAP website. Reasons have included: (1) we don’t truly know that cloth masks (face coverings) are not effective, since the data are so limited, (2) wearing a cloth mask or face covering is better than doing nothing, (3) the article is being used by individuals and groups to support non-mask wearing where mandated and (4) there are now many modeling studies suggesting that cloth masks or face coverings could be effective at flattening the curve and preventing many cases of infection.” This is really interesting for something that is purportedly a science based journal. Of the points above NOT ONE is based in science. In addition, I believe there was an “in between” article I didn’t capture in which the authors were just angry about it. In the end they dutifully complied, although were powerful enough to retain their position while stopping short of a flat refutation. This was in July of last year. Far more articles just quietly disappeared. You get science. I’m sure your wife does as well. You will both agree this kind of strong arm tactic isn’t how it is done under normal circumstances.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1299259)	5/4/2021 1:24:54 AM
From: rzborusa	1 Recommendation Recommended By pocotrader Respond to of 1580142

As for the anti-maskers, There are filters on everything from engines to cigarettes. Anti-mask is mostly politics. Only a fool would believe they do no good or worse some harm.