2 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

https://www.wnep.com/article/news/local/lackawanna-county/gym-opens-during-shutdown-for-a-second-time/523-e74f2f3e-3df1-4fa3-b6a4-2588fa230c0e

 

moron trumpers  🤡🌎

I think the people going to these gyms are idiots. But also I can't blame business owners for trying to stay open when the government gives them little to no support to stay afloat during a 100 year pandemic. Literally the one thing government really should exist for they are falling extremely short. To me (while I don't necessarily agree with them) these businesses breaking the shutdowns and staying open is more of a symptom of the ineptitude of our pathetic government that seems to be anything but "for the people". 

3 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

https://www.wnep.com/article/news/local/lackawanna-county/gym-opens-during-shutdown-for-a-second-time/523-e74f2f3e-3df1-4fa3-b6a4-2588fa230c0e

 

moron trumpers  🤡🌎

It's ok because he doesn't smoke cigarettes!! So then we should allow people to smoke indoors again right?? Same logic, if you don't want second smoke don't go to places that allow smoking then. If you don't want the virus don't go to places that allow people to not wear masks 

Just now, BirdsFanBill said:

I think the people going to these gyms are idiots. But also I can't blame business owners for trying to stay open when the government gives them little to no support to stay afloat during a 100 year pandemic. Literally the one thing government really should exist for they are falling extremely short. To me (while I don't necessarily agree with them) these businesses breaking the shutdowns and staying open is more of a symptom of the ineptitude of our pathetic government that seems to be anything but "for the people". 

I'm fine with places trying to stay open as well. As long as they are still trying to be safe about it. Some of them need to adapt to what is going on though and make changes. Some refuse to make those changes and just rely on the government to help them , that help will never come. 

12 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

https://www.wnep.com/article/news/local/lackawanna-county/gym-opens-during-shutdown-for-a-second-time/523-e74f2f3e-3df1-4fa3-b6a4-2588fa230c0e

 

moron trumpers  🤡🌎

Haha, allowing adults to decide if they want to work out and trying to make a living? eff those people. I hope they go to jail and lose their business. 

19 hours ago, Kz! said:

Thoughts on this study from China?

Wow. How is this not leading every news program in the country? Is there something wrong with the study?

How does this not get any run at all? The entire basis for virtually every restriction put in place, asymptomatic spread, might not even be a thing. No thoughts?

3 minutes ago, Kz! said:

How does this not get any run at all? 

 

because nobody pays attention to the nonstop drivel you post on here? 

5 hours ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

I really don't care what the restaurants do, I don't go to them so if people want to go then have at it. However, when it's my own damn dad ( thinks the virus is a joke) and the reason he is going is because this restaurant has literally not followed or is following a single protocol or guidline the entire year then I have a problem with it

All the other restaurants have been doing what they can to survive this while staying compliant with the pandemic rules in place. Some reason or another this restaurant is the only one that is being left go to do whatever they want while others suffer. A lot of restaurants have stayed open despite the orders of Wolfe which is fine in my book but, they are staying open while trying to keep everyone safe. These effers never closed once  the entire year and have not followed a single guidline..... Must be paying off the local cops or some sheet it's unreal. 

I get what you did and why, and I don't have a problem with it. I also wonder how effective you think your approach really is... My thought process is that your dad was already frequenting a place that doesn't require masks without you knowing so why do you think he won't just find another place that doesn't require masks to go to. 

8 minutes ago, Toty said:

 

To be fair to @Kz! - once you muck through his intermediate sources (and then promptly shower afterward), you arrive at Nature, which is not part of his normal information cesspool.

The study was published in late November. I don't know what it means and I'm not relying on a Ziegler interpretation of it.

Still, could be good news?

nice find kz (maybe) but you've cried wolf so many times you have to get why intelligent folks would default to skepticism of your posts - especially when you reference "Life Site" 

 

Thanks, found it on one of my far right twitter sources. So, I guess the next reasonable question would be, how does a study like this end up buried on sites like Life Site News? Why no mainstream coverage/analysis? 

11 hours ago, Kz! said:

Dude you’re a scumbag. Literally narcing on people trying to make a living. Really says something about this forum that you would be comfortable enough to brag about it on here.

So now we can pick which laws we want to follow and which ones we should ignore? Interesting take.

1 hour ago, Kz! said:

How does this not get any run at all? The entire basis for virtually every restriction put in place, asymptomatic spread, might not even be a thing. No thoughts?

Revised this post upon reading the study:

Sigh.......ok I’ll indulge.  The winner is 3) the asymptomatic cases were beyond their period of infectivity when identified and therefore inable to infect others.

Asymptomatic transmission has already been proven by a multitude of studies.

So if a study claims that they saw no asymptomatic transmission, it likely means one thing: The people in the study tested positive for COVID but were beyond the period for the viral cells to be viable and able to spread. (Or were near the end of their contagious period and had very low infectivity)

Once you’ve been infected with the virus, you are only contagious for about 10 days, with the highest level of infectivity towards the beginning.  You could potentially still show up positive on a PCR test for days, even weeks, beyond that.  But at that point you’re shedding non viable viral cells.

That’s the tricky part about trying to contact trace off people who are asymptomatic.  Since they have no symptoms, how do you know where you are on the infectivity timeline?  

You could be contact tracing off someone who’s on day 12 of their infection timeline and 2 days beyond their ability to infect anyone else.  So what good would contact tracing do?

21 minutes ago, Toty said:

 

To be fair to @Kz! - once you muck through his intermediate sources (and then promptly shower afterward), you arrive at Nature, which is not part of his normal information cesspool.

The study was published in late November. I don't know what it means and I'm not relying on a Ziegler interpretation of it.

Still, could be good news?

nice find kz (maybe) but you've cried wolf so many times you have to get why intelligent folks would default to skepticism of your posts - especially when you reference "Life Site" 

 

Because they purposefully distinguish asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission, which is fine from an immunological perspective, but less so from an epidemiological one. If the context is the latter, then the attempt to distinguish them in this case is an obvious agenda to criticize common sense measures like mask mandates. Which, for anyone with a couple brain cells to rub together, should be a non-starter at this point.

TL/DR: The guy is a moron of epic proportions. He is a child tugging at your shirt trying to talk with adults. He can be safely ignored forever.

3 minutes ago, Gannan said:

So now we can pick which laws we want to follow and which ones we should ignore? Interesting take.

Strong libertarian vibes here.

32 minutes ago, Imp81318 said:

I get what you did and why, and I don't have a problem with it. I also wonder how effective you think your approach really is... My thought process is that your dad was already frequenting a place that doesn't require masks without you knowing so why do you think he won't just find another place that doesn't require masks to go to. 

It's a small town and the neighboring town isnt much bigger. You know who is doing what, when all the other places has 1 or 2 cars in the parking lot and this specific one has over 100 cars it's not hard to figure out what is going on. I didn't care till my mom who probably couldn't survive a cold right now told me my dad was going there often. Maybe he finds another place but, I don't see any others sticking out like a sore thumb like this one. 

 

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

So now we can pick which laws we want to follow and which ones we should ignore? Interesting take.

Yeah I'm bragging about it..... Trying to get a place to follow guidlines because my trump loving dad thinks the virus is fake and frequents an establishment that follows no safety protocol so he doesn't kill my mother is being a scumbag. Lol. This dude can not be for real 

2 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Sigh.......ok I’ll indulge.  How about because it’s an inaccurate study?  Asymptomatic transmission has already been proven by a multitude of studies.

So if a study claims that they saw no asymptomatic transmission, it likely means one thing: The people in the study tested positive for COVID but were beyond the period for the viral cells to be viable and able to spread. (Or were near the end of their contagious period and had very low infectivity)

Once you’ve been infected with the virus, you are only contagious for about 10 days, with the highest level of infectivity towards the beginning.  You could potentially still show up positive on a PCR test for days, even weeks, beyond that.  But at that point you’re shedding non viable viral cells.

That’s the tricky part about trying to contact trace off people who are asymptomatic.  Since they have no symptoms, how do you know where you are on the infectivity timeline?  

You could be contact tracing off someone who’s on day 12 of their infection timeline and 2 days beyond their ability to infect anyone else.  So what good would contact tracing do?

Kz only concern is over a lockdown and his quest (which he is certainly entitled to) to get and find the answer he so desires and has no logic or reason to think any other way.

Yours is a rational response.  I also clicked on the tweet but the life site as previously mentioned is closed for Christmas.

6 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Sigh.......ok I’ll indulge.  How about because it’s an inaccurate study?  Or just an anomaly of a sample? Asymptomatic transmission has already been proven by a multitude of studies.

So if a study claims that they saw no asymptomatic transmission, it likely means one thing: The people in the study tested positive for COVID but were beyond the period for the viral cells to be viable and able to spread. (Or were near the end of their contagious period and had very low infectivity)

Once you’ve been infected with the virus, you are only contagious for about 10 days, with the highest level of infectivity towards the beginning.  You could potentially still show up positive on a PCR test for days, even weeks, beyond that.  But at that point you’re shedding non viable viral cells.

That’s the tricky part about trying to contact trace off people who are asymptomatic.  Since they have no symptoms, how do you know where you are on the infectivity timeline?  

You could be contact tracing off someone who’s on day 12 of their infection timeline and 2 days beyond their ability to infect anyone else.  So what good would contact tracing do?

Oh, it was done by a bunch of Chinese scientists so maybe they just missed the mark. As to the last bit, IDK, seems pretty unlikely that all 300 asymptomatic carriers identified were beyond their infection timeline, but I guess it's possible. I'd like to see more studies like this one being conducted. 

3 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

It's a small town and the neighboring town isnt much bigger. You know who is doing what, when all the other places has 1 or 2 cars in the parking lot and this specific one has over 100 cars it's not hard to figure out what is going on. I didn't care till my mom who probably couldn't survive a cold right now told me my dad was going there often. Maybe he finds another place but, I don't see any others sticking out like a sore thumb like this one. 

 

Yeah I'm bragging about it..... Trying to get a place to follow guidlines because my trump loving dad thinks the virus is fake and frequents an establishment that follows no safety protocol so he doesn't kill my mother is being a scumbag. Lol. This dude can not be for real 

Yeah, trying to get someone's source of livelihood closed is a scummy move. Everyone who frequents the restaurant does so of their own free will. Let adults decide if they want to eat there. Don't eat there if you don't want to. It's not hard. 

56 minutes ago, Kz! said:

How does this not get any run at all? The entire basis for virtually every restriction put in place, asymptomatic spread, might not even be a thing. No thoughts?

So I read the study.  It appears the problem herein lies with yours and Mr. Ziegler’s warped interpretation of it.  (Or maybe you guys didn’t read it?).

Because if you read the study, then you would have read this part:

”Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no "viable virus” in positive cases detected in this study.”

In other words, like I just said in my last post, the asymptomatic people who tested positive were past their period of infectivity by the time their positive test showed up and were contact traced.

4 minutes ago, Kz! said:

As to the last bit, IDK, seems pretty unlikely that all 300 asymptomatic carriers identified were beyond their infection timeline, but I guess it's possible. I'd like to see more studies like this one being conducted. 

It actually turns out that’s exactly what happened.   Please read the actual study next time before spreading misinformation about what it says.  Thanks in advance.

Just now, Phillyterp85 said:

So I read the study.  It appears the problem herein lies with yours and Mr. Ziegler’s warped interpretation of it.  (Or maybe you guys didn’t read it?).

Because if you read the study, then you would have read this part:

”Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no "viable virus” in positive cases detected in this study.”

In other words, like I just said in my last post, the asymptomatic people who tested positive were past their period of infectivity by the time their positive test showed up and were contact traced.

So in a study of 10 million they found 0 asymptomatic cases that hadn't past their viability period? Damn, that's nuts.

Just now, Phillyterp85 said:

It actually turns out that’s exactly what happened.   Please read the actual study next time before spreading misinformation about what it says.  Thanks in advance.

No.

Just now, Kz! said:

Yeah, trying to get someone's source of livelihood closed is a scummy move. Everyone who frequents the restaurant does so of their own free will. Let adults decide if they want to eat there. Don't eat there if you don't want to. It's not hard. 

Love how you keep ignoring the part where I said I don't give a flying **** if they are open but, when I have a dad who does not listen or care about the virus going there and could kill my mom from going there you ukin moron. 

Also said others are being compliant with safety but are staying open and I'm fine with that but at least they are still trying to stay safe and this particular restaurant isn't  but you ignore that too you complete jackass. 

You should make a trip to the restaurant maybe you can get the rona too. Then you can share the same disease as your orange fat God . 

1 minute ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Love how you keep ignoring the part where I said I don't give a flying **** if they are open but, when I have a dad who does not listen or care about the virus going there and could kill my mom from going there you ukin moron. 

Also said others are being compliant with safety but are staying open and I'm fine with that but at least they are still trying to stay safe and this particular restaurant isn't  but you ignore that too you complete jackass. 

You should make a trip to the restaurant maybe you can get the rona too. Then you can share the same disease as your orange fat God . 

Shutup ****. Someone's not following covid protocol to your liking somewhere. Go find them and narc on them to daddy government! 

1 minute ago, Kz! said:

Shutup ****. Someone's not following covid protocol to your liking somewhere. Go find them and narc on them to daddy government! 

You truly are a piece of crap that you are trashing someone for trying to protect their mom from dying. What kind of sick a-hole does that? 

1 minute ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

You truly are a piece of crap that you are trashing someone for trying to protect their mom from dying. What kind of sick a-hole does that? 

Yeah, that's what I'm trashing you about. lmao, I can't even believe covid narcs like you exist. 

15 minutes ago, Kz! said:

No.

Oh.....so you enjoy spreading misinformation?  Strange...

2 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Oh.....so you enjoy spreading misinformation?  Strange...

Is this the first time you've met Kz?