dialamah

Wrong again. Check the research I cited. It says that the better the mask, the better the protection - but not that anything else is useless.

Studies from 1993 to 2020. You shoulda checked before posting. Public money has given us many things -- baby formula, computers, MRIs, cancer research and treatments, the internet, to name just a few.

Tylenol is not an NSAID, and NSAIDs are metabolized through the kidney, not the liver, so wouldn't cause liver damage. Advil (aka ibuprofen) is an NSAID, so they were probably taking Tylenol (aka acetaminophen) which is metabolized through the liver. When combined with excessive alcohol use, Tylenol can contribute to liver damage. If your friends were not drinking heavily, the Tylenol would not have hurt them. My partner was taking a dose recommended by his doctor to help with chronic pain. Unfortunately, it was enough to damage his kidneys.

my partner got Stage Four kidney disease from NSAIDs.

@Infidel DogI see your 34, and raise you 137. An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19: The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts. Public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high. Only one observational study has directly analyzed the impact of mask use in the community on COVID-19 transmission. The study looked at the reduction of secondary transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Beijing households by face mask use (10). It found that face masks were 79% effective in preventing transmission, if they were used by all household members prior to symptoms occurring. The study did not look at the relative risk of different types of mask. The remaining study found the use of masks was strongly protective, with a risk reduction of 70% for those that always wore a mask when going out (13), but it did not look at the impact of masks on transmission from the wearer. (A study of influenza) found that “in an adjusted analysis of compliant subjects, masks as a group had protective efficacy in excess of 80% against clinical influenza-like illness.” (From a study prior to Covid) “homemade masks worn by sick people can reduce virus transmission by mitigating aerosol dispersal. Homemade masks worn by sick people can also reduce transmission through droplets.” Etc. The authors reference 137 sources for the information they provide; some of them are more supportive of masks, some less so, but the preponderance of evidence is that masks help prevent the spread of illness, including Covid-19. The available evidence suggests that near-universal adoption of nonmedical masks when out in public, in combination with complementary public health measures, could successfully reduce ReRe to below 1, thereby reducing community spread if such measures are sustained. Economic analysis suggests that mask wearing mandates could add 1 trillion dollars to the US GDP (32, 34)

Ohhh ... petty!

Several studies, both before and during Covid, have demonstrated masks effectiveness. Not a cure-all, but effective in helping reduce the spread of viruses. Why is it that during a pandemic, you're telling people masks aren't effective and vaccines are too dangerous. Do you want a bunch more people to die? Is that you're goal here? Do what you want about masks and the vaccine, but stop spreading misinformation.

The definition of Freedom of Speech has to do with government not interfering with citizens expressing their views (except in some limited cases - such as inciting people to violence.) Private entities have no obligation to let you say anything you want while on their premises or using their services. For example, if I came into your Church - which is open to the public if it is like most Churches - and began telling everyone that there was no God, it was all a hoax, you or your pastor would have every right to toss me out; freedom of speech doesn't mean I can say anything I want anywhere I want.

Isn't it pathetic that 2 grand a month is more than a minimum wage job.

Your attempt to insult me isn't what I was referring to. And anyone who still thinks women belong at home IS old, no matter their age in years. Then why are so many well educated young people taking shit jobs? That trickle down idea didn't pan out. Corps too often take their wealth and offshore it, while doing almost nothing to improve the lot of their staff - unless forced to. Which, in your mind is virtually all immigrants. Which reminds me - you denigrated and insulted a poster who was much more expert in immigration than you could ever hope to be me merely because that poster provided real data and info that disproved your claims. Anyway, I'm already tired of you.

Maybe it's not that people are stupid, but that it's a bad idea.

Where is the link to this quote?

@Goddess. where is the link to what you are telling us Patricia Daly said. Please and thank you. (Yes I changed the post)

1. Nope. Just like a restaurant can refuse service to someone based on what they are wearing (or not wearing), or their behavior, so too can public sites decide who shall or shall not join or post. The right to enter a restaurant or post on a public website is actually a privilege granted by the owner and not an unassailable right. 2. I don't know what the poster said after the first line, or how it differed from the previous post, but the trend is for public sites to delete content/people who post misinformation. Opinion among readers and other posters may vary on what constitutes misinformation, but the site owner has the right to decide that. 3. Doesn't matter. 4. All media does that to some degree, whether it's left wing, right wing or centrist.

Well, at least this is better than the claim that only the very elderly and terminally ill patients are at risk from Covid.

There were 43 seriously ill Covid patients, on fop of the regular number of people who need beds. That's a lot of people for a small hospital to manage, even fully staffed. Why are you blaming everyone but the unvaxed for the situation hospitals find themselves in, even though most nurses, doctors and other people who work in hospitals put the overload directly on Covid patients?

I believe experts are putting that down to the full reopening Alberta engaged in earlier this year - no masks, no restrictions on size of groups, etc. Alberta held off on reinstating restrictions as long as they could, but then had to succumb - Kenney even apologized for moving too quickly to transferring Alberta to Stage 4. BC has better numbers than Alberta, and also a higher vaccination rate of 82% (last I saw). Viruses from different places are different even if only slightly; that's why scientists can determine where a virus originally came from as it moves around the world. Also, depending on how data is presented can paint different pictures. Perhaps Alberta and the UK are organizing their data differently. I agree that all the different data points, explanations and voices is confusing. That is why I pay attention to what the majority of experts say; it's true they can (and do) make mistakes or that additional information changes their recommendations, but the more the studies that they do show the same outcome, the more likely that data is to be correct. There are always exceptions, of course, but for now the best information remains that which the majority of experts recommend. IIMO.

1. You get so het up about things. Anyway, capitalism is failing millions of people who got the education and are looking for better jobs, but can't find them. Capitalism also ensures that the rarer things have more value attached to them: consequently, higher paying jobs are less common and harder to get than low-paying jobs. If everyone currently working at McDonalds got themselves an "education" to better themselves, there wouldn't be enough of those "better" jobs for them all, and a shit-ton of retail and fast food joints would be desperate for employees. Well, they are anyway as people really don't want to work for shit wages. 2. It's "my" money I'm being generous with; I pay taxes and don't get anything back at tax time. Not to mention, the money spent by the government isn't your money or mine; it's the government's money. The law mandates taxes; those taxes contribute to a better country for us all and are your contribution to that better country for all. It's not your money; it's everybody's money, inasmuch as the government represents everybody. 3. Plenty of conservatives don't begrudge taxes or social programs; my impression is that you are one of the few. Of course, helping others is a 'moral' issue; the means is what is at issue. I support corporations and businesses paying workers more, so that 1. government doesn't have to; 2. people don't have to live on poverty wages; 3. more taxes can go to government. You support ... well, I guess it's that everybody get educated to obtain jobs that aren't there while corporations continue to get government handouts while paying their workers shit wages. 4. Many do, including the immigrants you love to hate and denigrate for sharing houses and taking all the low-paying jobs. 5. Your "facts" only tell part of the story and are overshadowed by your emotionalism. 6. ??? 7. Why do you insist on insulting an entire group of people when there are variations of belief and attitudes among any group. You're an individual with views and beliefs I consider dunderheaded. But not everybody who leans right is the same as you, so no point in calling all right-wingers 'dunderheads'; just the ones who are.

So someone looking for work gets work at a wage that won't pay for food and shelter, including, and you are mad they get a break on taxes But that's exactly what your uncompromising and compassionless rhetoric supports Wow, you are old aren't you!

I guess if we hadn't been primed to think we deserve cheap goods and services, corporations and businesses could pay their staff good wages and people wouldn't have poverty level income, requiring that they pay no income tax to (barely) get by.

1. Breakthrough infections are a thing, just as they are with flu shots. People who are unvaccinated are more likely to get sick, and more likely to spread the disease than those who are vaccinated. 2. I get my "special privileges" because I'm significantly LESS likely to get sick and to infect anyone else. 3. Prove it. If you are talking about info from Isreal claiming that 86% of people with Covid were vaccinated, that data was bogus. "Morris ran the numbers from Israel in August as the delta variant took hold. The data showed that for people under 50, unvaccinated Israelis were over 10 times more likely to end up in the hospital than who were fully vaccinated. Among people over 50, the risk jumped to over 20 times more likely." Full story, including how the bogus numbers were 'calculated', here.

So what? It is primarily unvaxed people who are landing in hospital. If it were the other way around, or even half and half, then this argument against vaccination might make sense. So what? The therapeutic benefits of rabies vaccines, cold medicines and antibiotics are temporary, but that has never stopped anyone from taking them Neither you nor the website and video you referenced say anything about exactly who is saying the vaccines have zero impact; in the meantime, we have plenty of evidence that they are effective. So? Should people with cancer turn down chemotherapy if it's suggested a second time because it "should have worked 100% the first time"? Allowing normalcy is exactly the goal. Isn't it yours?

Fifty five people transferred from Northern BC to lower mainland because they are critically ill and the hospitals up there are overwhelmed and don't have beds. 43 have Covid; 42 of them are unvaccinated. "But vaccinated are just as likely to get sick" claim the unvaxed. "But the hospitals aren't that full" claim the unvaxed." "Hardly anyone gets seriously ill, unless they're old and nearly dead anyway" they say. "It's my right to go anywhere and endanger anyone" the unvaxed whine. Unvaxed subtext: I care about nobody but myself.

Do you mean the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? And choosing to administer rapid tests to their employees. Is that an infringement on rights? What about administering rapid tests on people before allowing them to shop? Would that be an infringement? Yes, I am sick to death of masks and keeping distance and having non-emergency medical treatment postponed. BTW, I agree that people shouldn't get the vaccine if they don't want to. What I don't agree with is their whining about the consequences and basing their decision on fringe medical people and organizations.

It remains the unvaccinated who get sick and fill up our hospitals. It is the unvaccinated who primarily spread the virus. If everybody who could be were vaccinated, the virus could spread much less easily.