The CDC is full of crap...
The CDC says that, “Cloth masks will not protect you from wildfire smoke.” Yet wildfire smoke particles are nearly twice the size of the coronavirus. If masks don’t protect against wildfire smoke, why does the CDC recommend them for protection against the coronavirus?
It’s way past time for everyone to ditch the mask.
https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/covid-19/wildfire_smoke_covid-19.html
Why? Because the viruses don't float around freely, they're part of respiratory droplets, which are about 10x the size of smoke particles, as your illustration nicely shows.
Also, reducing virus intake by a factor of 20 means the chance for a viral load that leads to infection is reduced drastically. That's good enough if you don't breathe right into each others faces.
Unlike respiratory droplets, smoke permeates air much more evenly and stays airborne MUCH longer. Also, reducing the amount you breathe by a little isn't sufficient, because any amount is damaging to your body.
lhttps://www.bitchute.com/video/EdffVJbFxb96/
Viruses = dead cells. Coronavirus can NOT make you sick, or kill you.
But, vaccines can.
That completely misses the point of the parent post as well as my reply. Plus it's wrong. So maybe sit this conversation out, Daniel.
You seem to have ruffled feathers today. My post was relevant, as the conversation was about smoke and viruses.
As for the video, your conclusion was made without watching. What A wonderful display of your character.
This is an open forum, and we are all free to post when and where we choose.
As for your unwarranted controlling suggestion, I'll suggest that you block me. As you have proven your issue's with free speech.
I'm a dog and I don't have feathers, just like that video doesn't have any merit.
The video confuses two entirely different concepts and mashes them together to sound appealing and reasonable enough to someone who agrees with the underlying political message and wants it to be true.
You wouldn't mistake a baseball for a basketball despite them both being described by the term "sphere" - because they have plenty other properties to set them apart.
Likewise, someone with the right knowledge and the tools won't mistake a dead cell for a virus because they are both described by the term "corona" - which, much like being spherical, just describes one of many properties.
Everything else in the video is just filler to make this jumbled together junk sound more appealing, but it's pointless because the core statement is bullshit.
Also, this thread is about masks, not about the virus itself so this conversation would still be better off elsewhere.
Well, you would need to take your argument about whether or not, a virus is a dead cell with Dr. Judy A Mikovits. As she disagrees with your assumptions.
And the conversation was about masks, smoke, and virus.
Your ruffled feathers are showing.
Well, and a large majority of people smarter and much more knowledgeable in the field than myself disagree with this Dr. Judy Mikovits, whoever that is.
I really don't understand your need to insert yourself into this conversation. This was about whether masks are useful, based on the size of particles and the filtering ability of the masks. Specifically, my only claim was that for the comparison of particle sizes you should not refer to the virus itself but to respiratory droplets, exactly as is stated in the opening post right below the highlighted text section.
That would still be true if your claims had any merit, which they don't, because the excretion method via the lungs would still be the same as your video conveniently points out, so we would still be talking about respiratory droplets.
You have added nothing to that specific conversation. You could have just as well responded to the opening post separately instead of my comment. So why bother?
So, you and the majority of people smarter than you disagree with Dr. Judy A. Mikovits.
But you have no idea who Dr. Mikovits is. Maybe you should learn how to use google search, before discrediting Dr. Mikovits, and making yourself to look like a fool.
Scientifically speaking, a "virus" has never been isolated. What we know for certain is that so-called "viruses," which the scientists who are bought and paid for by mega corporations refer to as "non-living particles," are nothing more than bits and pieces of cell debris from expired cells. If and when the day comes that they can isolate an alleged "virus," place it in a dish with cells and develop a video recorder that can record what can currently only be seen as still images of microscopic specs under a scanning electron microscope, so we can watch a "virus" in real time from start to finish invading and infecting cells as has been proffered to the public - rather than assuming that scanned images of DNA and RNA from bits and p
- rather than assuming that scanned images of DNA and RNA from bits and pieces of expired cells are "viruses" - that will be a good start. Then they will still have to prove "contagion" exists
