Obviously there is poorer recirculation of air inside the mask than outside, so you inhale previously exhaled air.
You know what I meant, it is the used oxygen inside the mask, it is not as fantastic as the real air
True. According to studies I read the amount of oxygen in the exhaled air is by c.a. 4 percentage points lower than in the inhaled air.Obviously there is poorer recirculation of air inside the mask than outside, so you inhale previously exhaled air.
I am not comfortable with the terminology but I am positive you get it, and the two posters above you explain it well, indeed. I don't deny anything re covid, I wear my mask when out for supermarket or public transport, but I am not at ease with the idea of wearing it while I am jogging or running.Still don’t know what you mean.
All oxygen has been "used" since the earth had an atmosphere.
Maybe he should pay more attention to hospital use and how close some states (AZ and FL) to capacity.Trump said:If we stop testing right now, we'd have very few cases, if any
Given that at least one major city is actively covering this up as a matter of policy (and, in turn, risking many more infections) it’d be tough.And how would the mainstream media know?
Looks like what I described as "shady" without explanation (the non-continuous decline in cases that just looked too ridiculous too be correct by any means), has now also been proved as wrong (next to the other severe flaws in the paper's reasoning that I've already mentioned).I don't think they are necessarily unbiased. They (in person of Neil Ferguson) are the producers of the model that laid the foundation for worldwide ultra-strict lockdowns, which turned out to be one of the most inaccurate models you will ever see. Applied to Sweden (a country that didn't follow their advice of strict lockdowns), this model predicted between 80,000 and 90,000 deaths by now with their very strategy (in reality they are below 5,000 with already a significant decrease).
Neil Ferguson himself, who had to resign from his position due to the violation of his own lockdown rules (met with his married lover multiple times while infected with COVID himself), has now even admitted that Swedens policies had roughly the same effect as the British ones (despite not having the strict containment measures he originally propagated as absolutely essential).
I assume they just want to restore a bit of their credibility by framing their study in the way they did, knowing it will eventually result into headlines including the main phrases "lockdown" and "3 Million lives saved" with nobody even bothering to look at the study itself (many probably won't even read the articles behind these headline).
As you've already said, the differentiation between measures in general appears to be very shady and the number of 3 Million is actually related to every intervention implemented until May the 4th and indeed compared to no interventions at all. But this isn't everything and I quote directly from the paper's abstract: "our model [...] assumes that changes in the reproduction number are an immediate response to interventions rather than gradual changes in behavior".
So what is refered to as the "lockdown" in relation to the 3 Million lives saved is actually every intervention before the 4th of May including changes in behavior and is compared to a continous pre- or early-pandemic spread that didn't see any behavioral adjustments (an inevitable and natural occurance that is also completely thrown under the bus by the study).
In short: Saying that lockdowns saved 3 Million lives is a (fact-checked so to speak) lie and not even what the study itself says (even though the results of the studie's modelling also have to be questioned because certain assumptions the modelling is based on are too inaccurate as well).
Authorities initially said more than 1,550 people had tested positive for coronavirus at the Toennies slaughterhouse in Rheda-Wiedenbrueck, but by Tuesday afternoon they said the exact number was still being verified.
“We will order a lockdown for the whole of Guetersloh county," he told reporters Tuesday. “The purpose is to calm the situation, to expand testing to establish whether or not the virus has spread beyond the employees of Toennies.”
Cinemas, fitness studios and bars will be closed, but stores will remain open and restaurants can still serve customers from the same household. Previously, the western county had only closed schools and daycare centers, sparking anger from parents who said their children were being punished for failings at the slaughterhouse.
Similar restrictions are being imposed in neighboring Warendorf county, where many Toennies workers also live, the state government said later Tuesday. Guetersloh county has about 360,000 inhabitants and Warendorf has some 277,000.
Rejection of common sense by a large portion of the population. The same portion that considers that by not wearing masks they are showing support for Trump.What problem is that? Free speech? Freedom of religion?
The actual number of infections is suggested to be something between 5 and 10 times as high as the positively tested individuals and there is a reason for that. Around 80 to 90 % of the infected people probably never had any symptoms or symptoms they connected with COVID, so in the vast majority of the cases it is just a non-validated test deciding about who is considered sick and who is considered healthy, [Donald. J. Trump had it absolutely right from the beginning].
do you have a source to back up that claim?
and for the record, i don't even remotely think this is true.
Looks like when I claimed that between 80-90 % of the infected people didn't notive a SARS-2 infection, I wasn't just right, I was close-to-perfection right.Okay, at least we have an explanation now why your evaluation is so far from reality. :lol: