friendica.eskimo.com

Mudflap diaspora
We'll "Follow the science"
On April 5, however, the #CDC page was replaced by a much-simplified set of instructions, which includes now this discreet note:

“In most situations, the #risk of #infection from #touching a surface is low.”


Oh is that so?
The link goes to the following:
Quantitative #microbial risk assessment (QMRA) studies have been conducted to understand and characterize the relative risk of #SARS-CoV-2 fomite transmission and evaluate the need for and effectiveness of #prevention measures to reduce risk. Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 #infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a #contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection.
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/another-covid-myth-dies-death

#Covid19 #Hoax #Lockdown #Science #2021-04
Draugr reshared this.
Christoph S diaspora
It's already known since a while that the highest risk is indoors via airborne transmission
Christoph S diaspora
Aérosols
Barbara Gross diaspora
Seriously? Zerohedge?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge
In this article, they pick and choose the one part on the CDC website that supports their agenda and conveniently ignore the section explaining that the data in a lot of these studies is rather unreliable because they were measuring in outdoor environments.
Better read the source article on the CDC website (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-research/surface-transmission.html), not the interpretation of a partisan conspiracy mongering site.
Mudflap diaspora
Seriously? Pluspora? "The censorship pod". In the couple of years since your Borg Pod came online, I've ended up blocking about 90% of the Gestapo / Karen / Censorship Nazi's from there. Any ideas why? (Don't worry- I only included links from Wikipedia...)

I read the source. It lists its sources, and then reiterates the findings at the bottom of the article: risk of infection from touching a surface is low.

Facebook has a fact-checker opening for you. Have you heard back from them?
@Mudflap Friendica works well for this -- with a block/ignore, I am able to make this plusporan vanish completely. it cannot message me, and its comments do not appear in discussion threads.

( many other Friendica UI features are more awkward and clunky )
Mudflap diaspora
+1, @BR 549 ☎.

I was going to add...

https://i.postimg.cc/Rh1mb6F6/efbfb49bfd5c86d3d8c1.jpg
Tyler Schwend diaspora
What's the implication here?

When people encounter something new, they can tend to fear it because of what it could be capable of or dismiss it until it proves that it's worth fearing. I think with COVID we went way too far in the fear direction, but I also think in the short term at least, doing so saved lives, and that's what people want...

I think CDC guidelines will tend towards being more careful than the data suggest is necessary - their job is controlling disease. It seems, if your one goal is controlling disease, you'd tend towards being careful with the new thing (and also maybe have made sure there's a stockpile of PPE in case a pandemic occurs but hey this is a government agency). As data comes available and more is learned, I think it's wrong to shame scientists for changing their mind. That's the essence of science... Observe something... a disease spreading... hypothesize about how it spreads... run experiments to test that hypothesis (or collect data from the real world over time) and if the data is wrong, your conclusion is that the hypothesis about how it spreads was wrong. That's the scientific process.

Now, the problem I have... is... taking CDC recommendations and translating those directly into law/policy. The CDC's concerns are very narrow. But life is not. Policy and law needs to factor in specialized knowledges and recommendations like the CDC's with that of others, and just a little critical thinking. Maybe some of the guidance is good, or easy enough to follow with minimal risk. Do those things. But if they wanted everyone confined to their homes for 3 weeks under martial law in order to stop the disease... maybe you need to balance that against the input/wants/needs of others.
@Tyler Schwend



the CDC has no credibility whatsoever, and should have been disbanded forty+ years ago.
Mudflap diaspora
that assessment seems somewhat fair, @Tyler Schwend

Except CDC is totally compromised, IMO.
What’s the implication here?
The Psyop quote is for the surface wiping Karens out there who are probably still wearing a mask in their car while driving around solo.
Draugr diaspora
If some of these other federated networks allow me to completely block the deplorables such as much of Plyspora I might have to migrate.

Such wonton ignorance wears thin nowadays.
Barbara Gross diaspora
@Mudflap Sure, ad hominem attack, very mature.
Pluspora is a platform, Zerohedge is a source. Platforms are not responsible for what people post on them. Sources are. And your source is complete bullshit.
I don't talk to conspiracy nutjobs, so bye.
Mudflap diaspora
ad hominem attack,
lol: ever notice how everything is an ad hominem attack to a plusporan?
@Mudflap ... meanwhile calling everyone else nazis and fascists.
Mudflap diaspora
and nutjobs.

how can they be so borg-like? Did G+ rot their brains? was "the experiment" a success?

it is SO WEIRD.
Draugr diaspora
Lol, if only we could change all of their usernames at once to "NPC 3 of 5" or NPC 5 of 9". It'd be so much more accurate.
Mudflap diaspora
lol!

This website uses cookies. If you continue browsing this website, you agree to the usage of cookies.