unicorn

Each individual study may have low to moderate certainty, but the Cochrane report combines all of the (many) studies, to greatly increase the certainty. While it is true that even larger studies could show an effect (one way or the other), what seems fairly certain at this point is that if there is an effect, that effect is small. It would be foolish to have faith in masking for providing protection from either influenza or SARS-CoV2. At this point, efforts should be directed towards providing better ventilation in public facilities, and vaccination.

Well, the confidence intervals in these studies were reported and combined: "...Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence)...". So it is possible that wearing masks is slightly beneficial--or slightly harmful. If so, however, any effect is almost certainly quite small. I'm sure that most ER physicians try to follow their hospitals' guidelines when intubating patients when practical (more likely done by paramedics prior to arrival). Covid patients don't require intubation these days, so hopefully any healthcare professional would assume something else is going on. Regardless, what an ER physician might or might not do in any given situation is obviously not evidence of anything, and certainly does not invalidate scientific investigation. To suggest otherwise is silly at best--perhaps rather childish. Of course, there will always be those who feel that their personal beliefs or intuition can invalidate scientific study. One of my cousins in Europe is a bit nutty and has been a lifelong anti-vaxxer. She was even able to convince an unscrupulous pediatrician to falsify her daughter's records to indicate that the daughter was vaccinated. That (wiser) daughter not only got all of her vaccines when she turned 18, but also became a physician. In the late Spring of 2021, the daughter got a call from her mother's hospital requesting permission to take her (unvaccinated) mother off of life support following a battle with the virus, believing further care was futile. The daughter requested they keep her on life support until she was able to come in and say her goodbyes. During that delay, the mother came to, and was eventually able to be weaned off the ventilator, although her lungs are permanently damaged, and she's hooked up to oxygen for the rest of her life. It may come as little surprise to many that this cousin is still clinging to her anti-vax beliefs, despite overwhelming evidence of the stupidity of that belief staring at her in the face. Likewise, there will always be those who believe masks will protect them, irrespective of the number of studies done and the accumulation of evidence. Many people simply lack the ability to re-evaluate their beliefs in the face of new evidence. Quite a few people, in fact: it's amazing to witness all of the people who believe Trump is merely being persecuted despite almost countless indictments from various courtrooms around the US.

Happy Saturnalia!

I doubt that's the case in the US. One has to have a valid visa to legally live in the US. Asylum is definitely one of those mechanisms, and does allow the asylee to eventually obtain US citizenship. Being the son of a US citizen would be another way, of course. Even His Royal Highness Prince Harry is only allowed permanent residency in the US because he's married to a US citizen. The prince may be allowed to live in any of his father's realms (I don't know what those rules are), but the US is certainly not one of Charles III's realms. I suspect Prince Harry won't take up US citizenship because in doing so, by law, he'd have to give up any title of nobility he holds. Apparently there is some sort of grandfather rule in the US as well, though in that case the grandchild must take the oath of allegiance before he turns 18: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_of_the_United_States#Naturalized_citizenship Grandparent rule. Section 322 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA), added in 1994, enabled children of a United States citizen who did not become citizens at birth, to use the physical presence period in the United States of a grandparent who was a citizen to qualify for United States citizenship.[68] Under the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, Section 322 was amended to extend also to children who generally reside outside the United States with a United States citizen parent, whether biological or adopted.[69] The child must be in the legal and physical custody of the United States citizen parent, the child and parent must be lawfully present in the United States for the interview, and the child must take the oath of allegiance before the age of 18 years (for those 14 years or older). The application (Form N-600K) may only be submitted by the United States citizen parent, or by the grandparent or legal guardian within 5 years of the parent's death

Yes, of course, no one is suggesting that we shouldn't wash our hands. Many illnesses, such as norovirus and Hepatitis A, almost certainly seem to be spread at least in part by poor hand hygiene. Even then, norovirus is so contagious that it can be transmitted by inhalation as well (it's the most contagious agent known to man). https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6828a2.htm "...Transmission occurs through several different routes, and multiple transmission routes can coexist during norovirus outbreaks (6,7). In addition to foodborne and direct person-to-person spread, transmission can also occur through ingestion of aerosolized particles and through contact with contaminated environmental surfaces, which are believed to harbor the virus and play a role in sustaining outbreaks...".

Studies don't "argue." They present factual data. We do not learn the truth by arguing. We learn the truth from scientific studies. We didn't know it at the time, but the effective intervention was the lockdowns. People worked from home. Restaurants, bars, theaters, subways, busses, and discos were closed. I worked at a primary care physician in 2020, and even the medical offices were mostly closed. Most of the visits were telehealth from the physicians' homes. We would come in for only a day or two per week, and only saw patients without coughs (patients were screened outdoors for their reason for visit, and if they had respiratory symptoms which weren't chronic, they were seen outside, usually by the younger physicians). When I first started seeing patients, and it was believed to be transmitted via surfaces, we wiped every surface, from phone, computer keyboard, door handles, etc., with disinfectant wipes, and wore gloves. As soon as the studies came out which showed the virus wasn't transmitted via surfaces, I stopped the disinfectant wipes, as did most of my colleagues. Yes, I also rigorously wore masks at the time (even with a face shield!), since the best knowledge of the time was that they'd be effective (they filtered droplets in lab studies). The recently-published studies had observers to verify masking compliance. In addition, some of the studies were done in medical settings, and the results have always come the same: no significant difference. In fact, the researchers doing the studies wanted to find a difference, so they were careful to ensure compliance. I certainly wish masks would help, but the issue has been carefully examined by multiple groups of scientists around the globe, and the results have been consistent. If any good came out of the pandemic, it was that methods of transmission prevention were rigorously studies, and we now know mostly what works and what doesn't.

The latest research from late 2022 and 2023 has shown that masks do not provide significant protection from infection. I posted a link to the latest research in another string: It has also been known for a longer period of time that this virus is not transmitted from surfaces, so hand-washing also does not seem to provide protection from respiratory viruses either. The two interventions which appear to offer good protection and (1) good ventilation/air exchange (indoor locations), and, of course (2) vaccination. The effective air exchange in most modern airplanes explains why we weren't hearing about outbreaks from plane flights (although planes obviously hold many people in very close quarters). Hopefully, cruise ship companies are also getting the message regarding the importance of effective ventilation. It is extremely rare for vaccinated individuals to get seriously ill (unless severely immunocompromised).

I must confess that it doesn't upset me as much as it used to when they use straight actors to portray gay characters, such as Brokeback Mountain. I guess that view softened somewhat when they started casting more gay actors in straight roles (such as some of Matt Bomer's roles). That being said, most of the time they should be able to find a gay actor talented enough to play a gay character.

I looked this man up on Wikipedia, and it had the curious notation that he was simply "exiled to the United States." How does that happen? Does Thailand get to dictate the visa policies of the US? How do Thai officials simply get to decide that one of their citizens will be allowed to live in the US indefinitely? Or did they simply get him an EB-5 (investors') visa? This man's website implies he became a US citizen, but didn't make clear how that happened. I suppose the EB-5 would be the only way I could think of that happening, off-hand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-5_visa

At least I figured out how to use google translate for your graph, so others can understand:

This is one of the times I agree with @Moses. But asking SK to consolidate his thoughts and communicate concisely is like asking Putin to stop murdering, you to use google translate when attempting to communicate in English, or asking the fire hydrant to cross the street. Just for laughs and your own edification, just put whatever you were trying to say with "Than shorter then better" in google translate and see what it comes up with. One has to accept that in life there are many things which should happen, but never will. https://translate.google.com/

I didn't think I needed to qualify with "everyone except the most stupid idiots." Just like when Trump said "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by: " his implicit backing of white supremacy groups is well-understood by everyone (except the most stupid idiots).

Well, strictly speaking, "Trump Says All Immigrants Are "Poisoning The Blood" of the US" is a lie, because that's not what he said. However, when Trump talks about "blood," everyone knows what he means, and that's pretty disturbing.

The Met museum was shamed in the December 17th issue of 60 Minutes by Anderson Cooper. However, I would ask the OP not to further defame the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Latchford "Douglas Arthur Joseph Latchford (15 October 1931 – 2 August 2020) was a British art dealer and smuggler... Latchford was born on 15 October 1931 in Mumbai, India, which was at the time under the British Raj. He was educated at Brighton College in England before returning to India shortly before Independence. Latchford initially worked in the pharmaceutical industry in Mumbai. He moved to Bangkok in 1956, and in 1963 established a drug distribution company. Latchford also invested profitably in Thailand land development and became a Thai citizen in 1968. He was briefly married to a Thai woman and took a Thai name, Pakpong Kriangsak. A long-time devotee of the sport of bodybuilding, Latchford became a patron of the sport in Thailand and was the honorary president of the Thai Bodybuilding Association from 2016 until his death...". It looks as though he died before he could be brought to justice.

If you had no symptoms You may end isolation after day 5.

According to the latest CDC guidelines: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/your-health/isolation.html If you had no symptoms You may end isolation after day 5. If you had symptoms and: Your symptoms are improving You may end isolation after day 5 if: You are fever-free for 24 hours (without the use of fever-reducing medication). Your symptoms are not improving Continue to isolate until: You are fever-free for 24 hours (without the use of fever-reducing medication). Your symptoms are improving. 1

Here's a summary of the latest research (randomized clinical trials) from Cochrane, in studies including hundreds of thousands of people: Cochrane Library has reviewed these studies: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full?highlightAbstract=covid%7Cmask "...We included 12 trials (10 cluster‐RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community). Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported (very low‐certainty evidence)..." (RCT means randomized clinical trials, the most rigorous form of scientific scrutiny) https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses "Ten studies took place in the community, and two studies in healthcare workers. Compared with wearing no mask in the community studies only, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (9 studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 13,919 people). Unwanted effects were rarely reported; discomfort was mentioned... Four studies were in healthcare workers, and one small study was in the community. Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (5 studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people). Unwanted effects were not well-reported; discomfort was mentioned..."

Had Israel occupied Gaza, the current situation would not have taken place.

I feel a song coming on...

Protesters blocked a major freeway into downtown Los Angeles during the morning commute today. Many trapped people included young schoolchildren (including quite a few whose first meal of the day was supposed to be at the school), and at least one man interviewed who said he was on his way to his dying father's hospital bed. A similar protest recently blocked the bridge linking Oakland to San Francisco. Regardless of whether you agree with the protesters on this particular issue, has such a protest ever swayed you to view protesters' issue more favorably? I would think it would have the opposite effect. For example, if I were the President and about to meet the Israeli ambassador about negotiating a cease-fire, I would announce that due to the protest, I would delay the meeting by 24 hours, and if there were any similar harassing tactics, I would double the delay each time. For me, causing the suffering of innocent children and other civilians is almost a form of terrorism in and of itself.

In posting an article such as this, it would be nice to have more background as to what she posted. Otherwise, no way to form an opinion.

While there are a few unaffiliated members of Congress, a 3rd party candidate can only act as a spoiler in Presidential elections because of the electoral college system. This very famously happened in the 2000 election, in which the spoiled asshole Ralph Nader handed Bush, Jr. the presidency. Although Gore won more votes than Bush Jr. in the popular vote, in Florida Bush Jr. garnered 537 more votes than Gore, and that was enough to tip the electoral college vote. Since Nader received almost 100,000 votes in Florida, there is no question but that he handed the election to Bush, Jr., which has had serious repercussions for this country and the world in general. A 3rd party candidate could certainly be decisive in the upcoming election as well. Of course, much will depend on whether Trump can be criminally convicted before the election, but Trump's team is shotgunning so many objections/appeals, that he may well be able to delay such a conviction. Although I suspect a majority of Americans share my horror over Trump, who's an obvious professional shyster, Biden is a weak candidate, and a 3rd party candidacy could stop any chance he has to defeat Trump (such as Kennedy's planned run). Even a small number of votes in swing states (Florida, Ohio, Virginia, etc.) would doom Biden. Of course, a run by a Republican could spell big trouble for Trump, but the Republican candidates (other than Trump) have all pledged to support the eventual nominee.

When I walked my dog into the park today, I noticed a car going into the parking lot with a menorah on the hood of the car with the words "Happy Hanukkah" in big letters. Given all of the hostilities and crazy people around, that seemed rather foolhardy to me. I mean, most people can recognize that just because one in Jewish doesn't mean one is a supporter of Netanyahu, and just because one is Muslim or Arab or even Palestinian doesn't mean one is a supporter of Hamas. That being said, it just takes one nutcase to get into a powder-keg situation. It reminded me of those Palestinian students in New Hampshire who got attacked while wearing Palestinian head wraps. Yes, in an ideal world, it shouldn't be a problem. But don't people understand that it only takes one nut-case for disaster to strike? Of course, the Palestinian students should have been able to wear what they wanted without getting attacked. But was it wise to put themselves out there? Or are these people trying to pick a fight? Wouldn't you think this is a time to lay low? We're going to Qatar next month, and will leave our rainbow flags at home, thank you.

Well, not quite. Of the original 13 states, only one wasn't on the coast (Pennsylvania), and it was a larger one. In the 18th Century, the idea of electing a national leader by votes of the common citizen was novel, and that's why the founding fathers came up with the electoral college. Now, the system is easily recognized as horrible in many ways, but getting rid of it would require majorities of both parties, so such a Constitutional amendment is unlikely to pass--it gives less powerful parties the opportunity to game the system.

Assuming you've been vaccinated for diphtheria, the only bacterial infections which affect the throat, generally, are strep and gonorrhea (staph can cause an abscess, but that would be obvious), and none of those cause a cough. I'd be curious as to what the other medications were. Viral infections usually turn the corner after 10 days, so it could be just a coincidence. If one of those medications was prednisone, that could really have made a difference, especially if there's a history of asthma. Hopefully you were tested for gonorrhea (though, again, that won't cause a cough). The antibiotic may have been helpful if a sinus infection developed and was the cause. Normally, a sinus infection will cause site-specific pain under either eye, behind the nose, or near the center of either side of the forehead. Since it doesn't appear as if a specific diagnosis was made, it would probably be prudent to recheck the hsCRP and CBC to make sure the numbers normalize when this is over. Although quite unlikely, you want to make sure something weird isn't going on (for example, leukemia, or tuberculosis). If one of the medications was prednisone, do not recheck the CBC/hsCRP until at least a week after you finish the prednisone.