Back to Squawk list
  • 36

Texas Sues U.S. Over Airport Mask Mandate

נשלח לפני
 
“President Biden cannot continue governing through executive edicts,” Texas's attorney general said in a statement. “Now is the time to strike down his administration’s air-travel mask mandate.” (paywalled, sorry) ...says the mandate didn’t provide evidence that masks in these settings have limited the spread of Covid-19. (www.wsj.com) עוד...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


Dgoldenberg
David GO 49
The sad thing folks is that while those of us commenting on this post are focusing on the facts and the policy for or against mask wearing, this lawsuit probably has nothing to do with a true belief about policy or science at all, and is completely about politics, political ambitions, and making the other side look bad. That is the big joke these days - politicians pretend to care about policy, but they really care about winning, or at least making sure the other side doesn't win. Very sad IMHO.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 12
could not agree more. the vast majority of politicians of all flavors are in it for the accolades and pension.
GeorgePepe
George Pepe 5
Also his governor keeps using “executive edicts” to get make mask mandates and things like that illegal. He’s a hypocrite.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 10
That's a rather stupid statement considering the federal mask mandates themselves are "executive edicts" - not laws. Whatever happened to "I will not govern by executive order"?

That didn't last long.
strickerje
strickerje 8
Yep, a perfect example of the OP's point - it's only bad when my opponent does it.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson -3
Why is it that Americans in general, and Texans in particular, seem to have a problem with guidelines, the betterment of the whole, and government? Is this a result of the born general belief that the US was that shining house on the hill that the rest of the world looked up to? Boy, has a pandemic changed that Hollywood image. The truth has been laid bare. The house does is not shining and some wonder if it will be even recognizable in 5 years.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 16
We don't have a problem with guidelines that are rational and scientific. Please find and post a link to a PEER REVIEWED study showing that masks make any statistical difference in stopping the spread of an airborn virus. I'll wait. It must be PEER REVIEWED. Why hasn't the CDC provided this? Or Fauci?

We have a problem with being told to do something illogical and against our will just because "the government said so". The government is corrupt.

Oh, and look up the etymology of the word "government".
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 3
Why so fixated on masks? Try this instead. 924,920. Know what that number is? That is the number of Americans that have died to date due to COVID-19. Unless, of course, you choose to deny that as well. Almost a million deaths and you are fixated on masks? When was the last pandemic you lived through? I cannot fault those in the medical community that were learning on the fly and suggesting anything that was safe. Almost a million. And you worry about masks? Almost a million and you are blaming the government? Good lord man, be happy you are not one of the nearly one million.
MarcusGiddens
Marcus Giddens 0
I don't need a peer reviewed study to tell me it's common sense during a pandemic, we did it in 1918 and it didn't rip the country apart, what's so hard about wearing a mask...not an issue for the vast majority, the only issue is we have a country that is trending way down in education and critical thinking, if you get your info from FB you are lost. Too much information, not enough wisdom.
LeanderWilliams
Leander Williams -7
It's kind of ironic that a lot of the people that are raising the most stink about not wanting anyone to tell them they have to wear masks are the ones who actually lot better WEARING a mask. I know in my city the number of occasions I have to breathe in someone's halitosis has drastically been reduced. I find I keep my mask on more for protection against odorous fumes that often foul the air by people with less than stellar oral hygiene.
orthosol
Chris Carstens 1
Wow Dan! You are completely missing the essence of their discontentment with respect to “government guidelines and mandates.” I’m one of those individuals who happen to be discontent because I see the individuals who are in charge just issuing edicts - like mask mandates and lockdowns - without offering in scientific data to back their decisions and this frustrates many people. The reason you don’t have a problem with it is because, in your own words, you believe these individuals are doing it “for the betterment of the whole and government.” Remember what President Reagan said - “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.” The difference between you and I, is that you just accept prima facie anything the government says as good, wholesome, and for the betterment of all; whereas others, see the harm mask mandates and lockdowns are doing to their children and the negative impact on their children’s’ overall well-being (e.g. emotionally, psychologically, speech development, etc.) and are simply asking the government to offer an explanation, backed by science, for implementing such measures. Here is the problem: they implement these strict measures offering no science or proof their decisions will prove beneficial. Their attitude is - “Don’t question us! Shut up, get in line and obey!” Remember all the lies Biden told during his campaign: “I’ll never implement a vaccine mandate,” but he did! After he was elected, remember what he told us: “Get the vaccine and you will not get covid; you won’t transmit the virus, you will not get sick; you will not be hospitalized, and you won’t be put on a ventilator and you can take your masks off if you’ve been vaccinated.” All of these were out-right flagitious lies! Countless people see this and question the so-called healthcare professionals and those in charge (i.e. Fauci). They offer no proof that masks even work and that they prevent the spread of the virus. Critical thinking people ask, “Why is the US the only country in the entire world that does not recognize natural immunity?” Our government officials would ask big tech to block and silence those individuals who even dare discuss natural immunity. Individuals see the government still imposing strict mask mandates on the least vulnerable individuals to this virus…and that’s children. When questioned - “Why?” - they offer no medical or scientific explanation. Critical thinking Individuals see this and question their motives. They see the government tell churches they cannot hold services, but in the same breath, they allow strip clubs to remain open. The government tells stores they must close, but in the same breath, they allow liquor stores to remain open. See the hypocrisy, there is no rhyme or reason to their decisions. A recent John Hopkins study revealed that lock-downs are not effective…yet, individuals continue to see those in charge ignoring the science. Freedom loving individuals in this country are wanting their freedoms back and are suspicious of a government who imposes strict, draconian mandates on society as a whole - without offering any proof, being back by science, that the actions they are mandating and requiring are essential and necessary.
PlainSpeaking
Brent Bahler 4
AS a former appointee in the Reagan Administration, and a student of our former president's attitudes toward government, I am compelled to provide context which was left out regarding his "government is the problem" quote. President Reagan was not a libertarian, he did not advocate the dismantling of the federal government. At the time of his inauguration our country was in the depths of economic crisis, and it was in that context in the address following his swearing-in that he said, "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.
From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be
managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of
the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the
capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the
burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher
price." I believe President Reagan would have strongly encouraged all Americans to wear a mask in all situations where people were in close contact had the Covid-19 pandemic occurred during his administration - and that he would have issued an executive order requiring compliance if voluntary usage did not rise to an effective level. In short, President Reagan was not anti-government. He was anti-ineffective government. There is a difference.
GeorgePepe
George Pepe -8
Also, #notmyattorneygeneral
TheDogeof88
Chuck Lavazzi -1
They don't believe all that science stuff down there, don't ya know.
LowOrbitTraveler01
LowOrbitTraveler01 6
(Found on another subject)

I spent 35 years with a major airline flying prop, turboprop and jet aircraft. Some time ago the safety of recirculated cabin air was discussed. An airline reported super filtration of recirculated cabin air with high performance HEPA filters. Blocking the middle of 3 seats is worthless. At the same row left and right both window seats are getting the SAME recycled cabin air (with a high percentage of filtration). Airlines push recycled air because it saves fuel. If recycled air could not be an issue the aircraft would not have Recirc on/off switches (Boeing). There can be several reasons to turn off the recirc fans. It is not an "Abnormal" procedure. Galley is most likely source for smoke and or smell that you don't want to go round and round the aircraft several times. On long international flights right after takeoff I manually ran the cabin pressurization (which increased the mass air flow through the cabin).
strickerje
strickerje 4
Regardless of the reason, my wife and I did enjoy a guaranteed row to ourselves that year. ;)
crashandburn
tom mcdo 37
I will not fly until the masks are removed. I know no one care what I think but thats the way it is.
333Jim
Jim Tucker 12
With you 100%, TM!
alexa320
alex hidveghy 6
I’m pretty sure the airlines don’t mind your personal views and that’s the way it is…..
cjcgsmith
Jan Smith 5
People have officially lost their minds! It's just so comical to see passengers in the terminals double masked and wearing those ridiculous face shields. As a former flight attendant I would have to take an early retirement because their is no way I could wear a mask for upwards of 10-12 duty hours per day. The vaccine has proven not to work and they don't even publicize the ill affects if not deaths of those that have had it. Anything Biden wants me to I do the opposite, follow the money as they say....
TiredTom
Tom Bruce 1
understand your position and agree with your right to have the opinion...
tjf50
Tim Fry 6
Equating words to bioterrorism seems a bit of a stretch to me.
kenbadger1
Ken Riehl 4
Ultimately.. You either have the virus, have had the virus, or are going to get the virus…
jefftaylor421
Jeff Taylor 5
It would be my opinion to let it be optional to both the airline or the passenger themselves. I am positive when the mask mandate ends, there will still be people wearing masks. That is their choice but not mine.
GBCUA1K
Greg Cotten 10
It’s Government v. Personal Responsibility debate.

For the record I had Covid prior to Vaccine availability and now have 3x shots and I work globally in some austere environments where general hygiene is still a mystery. I only wear a mask when forced to by law or policy.

A tremendous disproportionate death rate to anti-vaxers during late 2021 is not the Government’s fault, by any measure and I am neither happy or sad about that, but I will not tolerate friends and family of the deceased anti-vaxers from stating anything other than it was his/her choice…period.

Helmets, seat belts, vaccines and even masks save lives, but not all of them. Ignorant people think some safety measure is foolproof…sorry, but that is not how it works.

I do not support mask mandates, but I do support personal acceptance of risk and you are free to choose whatever Safety measures, if any, you like…just do not blame anyone, or the government if there is a negative outcome.

If you are compromised or feel at risk, you can choose to say home, or wear a mask, or get vaccinated…or just go about your life and hope for the best…it is just your choice.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane -8
Personal responsibility rules.

And, masks do not work. The Danish study proved this back in 2020.
franciemr
Fran Moreno-Randle 7
It has been recently admitted that originally science showed N95 masks were helpful but there was a deficient in supply. In order to keep what was available for 1st responders, public was sold a bill of goods being told to wear the hook behind the ears style. Not because of effectiveness, but because that's what was available. Guess the thinking was anything is better than nothing.

I found it amusing the 1st time I flew. Had to maintain social distancing all throughout the airport - even boarding in groups of 10, all socially distanced. Then we took our seats, and we were, as usual, shoulder to shoulder, rubbing elbows with strangers, packed in like sardines. But...everyone was wearing these homemade or store-bought skimpy masks, no one wearing an N95 mask.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 7
That's called insanity. But what it really is, is an exercise in applied behavioral psychology. Mental abuse to break people's will. Psychological abuse.
GBCUA1K
Greg Cotten 1
Assuming ing you are referring to
Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers [Ann Intern Med
. 2021 Mar;174(3):335-343. doi: 10.7326/M20-6817. Epub 2020 Nov 18.]

You clearly have not read the article.

They imposed a 50% effectiveness criteria as their bench mark and the study showed a 46% improvement, so in that sense it was a failure (against an arbitrary criteria), but if you cannot consider a 46% improvement as a valid argument against "masks do not work" there is simply no use in having scientific debate.
strickerje
strickerje 4
The study also says the difference wasn't statically significant due to the small sample. (That is, only 1.8% of masked participants contracted the virus vs. 2.1% of the unmasked - a difference that turned out to be 10 people.)
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey -5
I agree with your sentiment, but not your facts. The unvaccinated did NOT account for a large number of deaths in late 2021. It was the opposite and still is. (look at Israel, the UK and Scotland) But the news continues to gaslight people by claiming the opposite with no evidence.

Masks do not save lives. They do not stop the spread of respiratory viruses AT ALL and actually make you sick. The pandemic of 1918 was not a pandemic of the flu (as we've all been told), but rather of bacterial pneumonia - caused in large part by people wearing dirty, bacteria infested masks for extended periods.

As my old algebra teacher used to say, "Figures don't lie, but liars do figure"
GBCUA1K
Greg Cotten 3
Here is my data source:

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths-by-vaccination

It shows unvaccinated deaths in the US at a rate 10x of those w vaccines.

What is your data source?

And please update Wikipedia on the Spanish Flu...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

Spanish flu, also known as the Great Influenza epidemic or the 1918 influenza pandemic, was an exceptionally deadly global influenza pandemic caused by the H1N1 influenza A virus.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 7
I hate to tell you this, and there will be no convincing you (only time will help with that) but the CDC is highly corrupt. I suggest you look at data from other countries. Keep in mind that the CDC (and FDA) get most of their funding from pharmaceutical companies - a situation that should be illegal - so of course they are going to report favorably on vaccine effectiveness.

and if you think Wikipedia is a source of accurate information when it comes to any social/economic/political issue, then there is no helping you.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 8
And the point here is that people don't tend to die from respiratory viruses. They die from complications arising from secondary infection.

Watch the lawsuits once the world finds out that most people who supposedly died "from" covid, actually had the flu and died from secondary pneumonia (or some other bacterial infection)or had pneumonia to begin with and got NO TREATMENT because they were diagnosed as having Covid (with a fake/faulty test) and were then told "there is no treatment for this virus".
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 4
As I said, Wikipedia is not interested in the truth. Here is a paper from the National Institute of Health:

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/bacterial-pneumonia-caused-most-deaths-1918-influenza-pandemic

Relevant point in paragraph 6:

"The published reports "clearly and consistently implicated secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory flora in most influenza fatalities," says Dr. Morens. Pathologists of the time, he adds, were nearly unanimous in the conviction that deaths were not caused directly by the then-unidentified influenza virus, but rather resulted from severe secondary pneumonia caused by various bacteria. Absent the secondary bacterial infections, many patients might have survived, experts at the time believed. Indeed, the availability of antibiotics during the other influenza pandemics of the 20th century, specifically those of 1957 and 1968, was probably a key factor in the lower number of worldwide deaths during those outbreaks, notes Dr. Morens."
GBCUA1K
Greg Cotten 1
It is a shame you did not mention the key finding in the first paragraph…

The majority of deaths during the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 were not caused by the influenza virus acting alone, report researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health. Instead, most victims succumbed to bacterial pneumonia following influenza virus infection. The pneumonia was caused when bacteria that normally inhabit the nose and throat invaded the lungs along a pathway created when the virus destroyed the cells that line the bronchial tubes and lungs.

They would have survived the bacterial infection if the virus had not paved the way for it to succeed.

Simple infections that succeed due to a compromised immune system are in fact the very reason hospitals try to get you home as soon as possible, because they by the very nature of their business are the meeting place for most of society’s virus and bacteria colonies.
bruceahz
Bruce Horwitz -1
The statistic that is important to look at is what percentage of vaccinated end up in the ICU or dead as compared to what percentage of the unvaccinated do.

If you are in a community with high vaccination rates - heck, let's say one with a 100% vaccination rate - then you will expect most of the people who get sick to be from, you guessed it, the pool of vaccinated people. Does that mean vaccines don't work. Absolutely not.

Your comment about "liars do figure" could not be more appropriate.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 4
Your comment makes no sense. Vaccines, by (original) definition should impart immunity to a disease. These shots do not do that, therefore they are not vaccines.

Do you worry about contracting polio or smallpox when you go out in public? If not, why? Because you received an *actual* vaccine when you were young? And how many "boosters" for those have you needed?

By the way, the majority of people ICU with Covid are "fully vaccinate" (whatever that means).
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON -2
And how many "boosters" for those have you needed?

Polio vaccine requires three boosters for protection that lasts through childhood, and Smallpox vaccine requires a booster every three years forever.

Your definition is wrong, too.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
“… If you are in a community with high vaccination rates - heck, let's say one with a 100% vaccination rate - then you will expect most of the people who get sick to be from, you guessed it, the pool of vaccinated people. Does that mean vaccines don't work…” actually your comment shows that the vaccines are not working because if 100% of people are vaccinated no one should be getting sick. A true vaccine prevents the illness, these new vaccines don’t.
Ginabedina
Gina Davis 12
If masks worked, if the vaccine worked we wouldn’t be where we are. You never, ever mass vaccinate during a pandemic, ever. I feel American’s need to go back to school and take a basic virology course. It’s over… the masks need to come off and all mandates need to end.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 3
You never, ever mass vaccinate during a pandemic, ever? You think that because the bubonic and smallpox plagues of the past went so well, I suppose. Hundreds of millions of deaths and untold misery, but at least they didn't have to wear a mask at the grocery store, amirite?

Is there some anti-vaxxer absolute stupidest statement ever contest that I'm not aware of?
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 4
Gina is right. Perhaps you should listen to some of the top virologists around the world who have discussed this. Anthony Fauci is not a virologist and has barely practiced actual medicine in his career. Same goes for most of the top staff at the CDC. They're just bureaucrats following a script.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON -2
Some of the top virologists around the world? You sound like a daytime tv ad for weight loss pills.

Who cares about Fauci or the CDC.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 0
The stress of the pandemic and social media have provided the nieve and loons a self-gratifying zone in which to share and relish their weird and twisted ideas. Anti-vaxxers are all breathing their own air.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 3
Masks help prevent transmission to others. Vaccines have helped reduce the severity of illness, thereby reducing the burden on our doctors and hospitals.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 0
No they don't and no they haven't. They've both produced the opposite results.
Tell that to the 70-80% of "fully vaxxed" people in the hospital suffering from "less severity of illness".

Gina is right - if the vaccines worked, it wouldn't/shouldn't matter to you who wears a mask. But these aren't vaccines and after that was repeatedly pointed out to the CDC they just changed the definition of "vaccine" last August, so these injections would fit the definition.
strickerje
strickerje 2
Good point. If the vaccines worked to prevent infection and spread, then why is the spread worse now that the majority of the population is vaccinated than a year and a half ago when no one was?

In hindsight, the vaccine was a waste of resources, and we should have been focusing on effective treatments, and minimizing the disruption to those least at risk rather than instituting one-size-fits-all policies that did more harm than good.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 3
There is more transmission now only because the newest variant is more transmissible than prior variants of the virus. The important point is that deaths are not worse now. They are lower as a percentage of the population and a percentage of the positive tests. Also, 18 months ago we had many more lockdowns, people weren't traveling, things like gyms were closed, etc. Now we have a more transmissible virus and more things are open. So have more transmission. The goal of the vaccines and masking is to reduce death, severe illness and overwhelmed healthcare system. The goal is not to eliminate the spread of the virus.
strickerje
strickerje 9
The goal of the vaccines absolutely was to stop the spread. When cases spiked again, we were told the new patients were all unvaccinated. When it became apparent that wasn't the case (it's why we had the term "breakthrough cases" - because cases of vaccinated people getting sick was supposed to be very rare), we were told, at least your risk of hospitalization and death is far reduced with the vaccine (this so far still seems to be true). What gets me is the goalposts keep moving, and the powers that be pretend they never said what we remember them saying. It's next level gaslighting.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 0
Isn’t that what science is all about? Regular analysis of new data and changes to approach as a result? Everyone loves to play Monday morning quarterback.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 5
Yes, but we've known the "science" of respiratory illnesses and airborne transmission for over a 100 years but for some reason, threw it all out the window in 2020. Not scientific.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 0
How would you have handled this virus, since everything has been known for 100 years?
strickerje
strickerje 5
I agree, but where I object is, first, when authorities act as though they're certain when there are really still a lot of unknowns, and second, when they refuse to admit they were wrong before and instead claim the updated messaging was always their position. This sort of tactic erodes trust.
strickerje
strickerje 3
One more point I forgot - it's misleading to compare the percentage of positive tests now to 2020 because far more people are being tested, whereas before the tests were widely available, only the symptomatic were tested. It stands to reason that more symptomatic people will test positive than the general population.
333Jim
Jim Tucker -5
Right on, Gina! As for Mr. Baker, perhaps we should communicate in his native tongue - "baaaaaah, baaah, baaahhh..."

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

jmadunleavy
John D -7
Congratulations Patrick, the Q’Anons have voted your comment down so much that it’s not shown!
A true indication of a mental illness crisis in America.
strickerje
strickerje 8
The comment was downvoted because it was a personal attack with no substance. Any such comment (from either side) should absolutely be downvoted.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
I vote down any post that is strictly attack politics or the Neil TD regardless of Trump, Biden, Obama… If people want that crap they can go on Facebook, this page used to be adults who could discuss subjects without all that BS, we had fun with friendly banter but never this stupid Trump or Brandon BS.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
Ooops should have proof read that befor hitting post button. Should have read “…attack politics or insults…”.
picturetaker
Christian Parada 7
The CDC warned people in California during last years wildfires that masks won't stop smoke particles, and we're supposed to believe that the masks will stop a virus that's even smaller than the smoke particles? Wake up.
clarify
clarify 1
That's simply not true. Here's what the CDC says:

"Cloth masks will not protect you from wildfire smoke.

Cloth masks that are used to slow the spread of COVID-19 by blocking respiratory droplets offer little protection against wildfire smoke. They might not catch small, harmful particles in smoke that can harm your health.

N95 and KN95 respirators can provide protection from wildfire smoke and from getting and spreading COVID-19. KN95 respirators are commonly made in China and are similar to N95 masks commonly used in the United States. Look for KN95 masks that meet requirements similar to those set by CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for respirators."

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/covid-19/wildfire_smoke_covid-19.html
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 3
"Cloth masks that are used to slow the spread of COVID-19 by blocking respiratory droplets offer little protection against wildfire smoke."

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/covid-19/wildfire_smoke_covid-19.html
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 3
Must be a pretty old article because since in July 2020 the CDC admitted that SARS-CoV-2 was an airborne virus and thus did not depend on respiratory droplets. That was itself long after studies published in March 2020 had shown it was an airborne virus which made sense since most Coronaviruses are. Sadly too many people don’t bother trying to follow the science, not even some with the CDC who issue statements that contradict other statements the CDC has issued. Science is not about picking a side and following only what matches that ideology, it’s about facts and data that doesn’t care about ideology.
picturetaker
Christian Parada 3
A smoke particles is about 2.5 microns in diameter, covid is .1-.05 microns in diameter. Fauci said in his emails to Sylvia Burwell, she served as the Health and Human Services Secretary during the Obama administration, that the masks that people buy in drug stores are ineffective at keeping out the virus which is small enough to pass through the material. After that, the CDC changed their recommendations and he went along with it despite what he himself wrote.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
When the person sitting next to you is on fire, that is a different problem entirely.
couch480
Cannon Couch 6
I just flew from the US to Jamaica and back. Every single person on board provided proof of a Negative Covid test prior to boarding. I am vaccinated and boosted. I sat next to my husband in first class. I should not have had to wear a mask.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson -5
I believe it is called "being cautious". The outcome of not being cautious may be deadly. Sure, a bit of discomfort, even if in business class, is a very small price to pay for being cautious. Let alone being considerate of others that are less convinced as yourself.
strickerje
strickerje 9
There are lots of far greater risks that we take every day though. I understood the reaction before we knew what we were dealing with, but now that we know the actual fatality rate is on the order of half a percent (and the population isn't uniformly at risk), I would think we'd change tactics accordingly. Isn't that what it means to follow the science?
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson -3
That is following the math and not the science IMHO. When it comes to disease, there should be no relenting until the risk is next to zero. We are still a far way from there. While C-19 may be on the run, now is exactly NOT THE TIME to relent with the possibility of future varients existing. IMHO. Patience not patient.
strickerje
strickerje 8
I'm not sure I follow the science vs. math distinction since they're intertwined, or what it has to do with your point. There will never be zero risk, but I'd argue the risk is next to zero now. Almost no children have died either with or of COVID (since the school mask mandates are a point of contention today), and in fact, mortality is a fraction of a percent until well into the 70+ age range. Restrictions have unintended consequences too; it's not as simple as "better safe than sorry".
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 5
It's only *maybe* deadly for .03% of the population (and that's without any intervention). That's a much lower statistic than the flu.
DRN2001
Dan Nelson 4
Ask any surgeon and he’ll tell you surgical (and cloth) masks don’t filter viruses; the insanity continues!
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 2
Ask any surgeon and he’ll tell you viruses don't shoot out of your big mouth bone dry and one at a time.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
So how do Think they transfer? SARS-CoV-2 is an airborne virus so it travels from person to person in the air. Your cheap poorly fitted mask won’t stop it.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 1
It never ends, does it Tim. The difference between droplet and airborne is the size of the respiratory particle, not whether or not there is one. Airborne means aerosolized droplet, not no droplet.

Science hasn't agreed on exactly where the cutoff is between the two, but it's definitely not zero.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
Try understanding the simple fact that Airborne viruses do not require droplets. When we look at what kind of respiratory protection we need to enter a contaminated aria we either get the right gear or die so little details count. Your fixation on droplets would get you killed if you were in my business.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
Backing up a minute... I have a question. So when you're suiting up for a job and someone else on the crew points to your respirator and says:

"those things aren't 100% effective, so if you shouldn't use it"

What do you say?
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
If there is any question about proper PPE we stop everything and we check to make sure we have the right gear.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
So as far as your health and well being is concerned, you err on the side of caution. Interesting. Ok, so after you don't answer his question, he then says (while pointing at your tyvek suit):

"There's no proof those things work. Show me the proof! Show me the peer reviewed studies! If you wear it you're a sheeple, because our boss and bill gates are just trying to control us so wake up!"

And so on. This is fun.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 3
Texas should just elect to secede from the USA and get it over with. Such a different mindset - at least the current edition of politicians and those that voted them in. IMHO, you can't act like a country and be in one at the same time.
strickerje
strickerje 1
Texas was one of the states that attempted to secede with the Confederacy. If it were to happen again, I have no reason to believe the feds wouldn't try to stop it again.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 2
Let's hope it is a case of temporary insanity!
IAOA
IAOA 3
Remember when big pharma approved Thalidomide for pregnant women? That was safe! So was smoking..that was safe. I don't trust big government. It's all about big profits. Not saying one thing or another on masks..but it boils down to the distrust of big government and having their fingers in my slice of pie.
bruceahz
Bruce Horwitz 3
IAOA - interestingly, Thalidomide was NOT approved by the FDA, thank you US "big government".
strickerje
strickerje 5
I remember when the left was against big pharma and the "military industrial complex".

At the very least, government and the media should look in the mirror if they want to know why half the country doesn't trust them. We've been lied to for so long about so many things.
alexa320
alex hidveghy 0
When did they stop? When was that announced? I must have missed it…….again, those two are commercial companies! They are not the government…..may be regulated by them, but that’s it. They’re in business to make a profit. Isn’t that what capitalism is all about??
strickerje
strickerje 3
It's the left that's pushing the vaccine mandates. I don't know what you're talking about.
alexa320
alex hidveghy 0
Really?
In my state, which is blue, the mandate was dropped last week! Do try and keep up……
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 5
a bit late to the party, I'd say. Several blue states dropped their mandates simultaneously - overnight. They must have gotten the memo.

The science didn't change; they just saw the real poll numbers and said "oh shit, we better drop this".
strickerje
strickerje 1
I don't know which state that is, but most red states dropped mandates last year or never had them, so my point stands.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 0
And take a look at the statistics in terms of COVID death in "red" states vs "Blue" states (and I hate calling States that, because it diminishes the importance of ordinary people everywhere who might think differently).
strickerje
strickerje 3
They look pretty evenly distributed to me: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/
Dgoldenberg
David GO 0
Ah, but those statistics include the early days of the pandemic when there was no vaccine and the virus was predominantly in heavily populated cities. Since there has been a vaccine the numbers are different. "In October, 25 out of every 100,000 residents of heavily Trump counties died from Covid, more than three times higher than the rate in heavily Biden counties (7.8 per 100,000). October was the fifth consecutive month that the percentage gap between the death rates in Trump counties and Biden counties widened." I didn't research for anything more recent, but I did remember this article with these stats.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 3
Saying someone died "from" covid in itself is the problem here. Hospitals and health agencies are counting a death from *anything* as a covid death so long as the person tested positive using a faulty PCR test. They told you this to your face a long time ago but you didn't believe them:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/kI7YBmSmek45/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Fnw7ZC5WjBMx/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/u6ess8HOAxwX/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/w2NDEljTdPXS/

And hospitals are being paid quite well for every Covid diagnosis and death they report. That's a problem.

So again, I do not trust our government agencies or their data. I have much more faith in what independent doctors have to say, who are brave enough to speak up.
strickerje
strickerje 1
Where's this from? I see no data broken out by county.
Dgoldenberg
David GO -2
I'm guessing you don't read the NYT, but this came from an article with statistics in it. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/08/briefing/covid-death-toll-red-america.html

And I know somewhere I saw some interesting interactive maps where you could place Biden vs Trump counties on top of a map of Covid cases and deaths to see the relationships. Again I have no idea if that is still the case or not. This was from November.
strickerje
strickerje 2
Article is behind a paywall, and I'd prefer to find the source data anyway. NYT has been playing up the partisanship throughout all this.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 2
You mean the same NYT that told us for 3 years that Trump colluded with Russia?
RaymondHoff
Raymond Hoff 3
You don't trust big government? Do you tell the air traffic controllers that you don't trust what they are telling you so you'll land on 31L instead of 13R?
alexa320
alex hidveghy -2
Some people are really dumb, aren’t they?
Must be communist, no doubt. Favorite key word.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 3
Sounds like you are looking for an excuse - any - to justify your fear. I do hope your family is a bit more enlightened about science. Yes terrible mistakes are made, but the vast vast vast majority of the time, it simply saves lives. Full stop. The increase in life expectancy in the first world is greatly due to advancements by pharma. Ask a diabetic teenager, ask an elderly man who is recovering from prostate cancer, ask a woman who survived cervical cancer. How, in all honesty, can you justify your denier mindset? But I understand that I or others will not convince you otherwise so I wish you good luck.
alexa320
alex hidveghy -1
Big pharma is the government now?!
And Phillip Morris?
I thought all those were corporations, you know, companies? Sorry, my bad……
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 2
Essentially, yes:https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/geopolitics/revolving-doors-of-fda-and-big-pharma/

Follow the money.

This should be illegal. Like putting Jeffry Dahmer in charge of his own prosecution.
avionik99
avionik99 3
If the city your flying into does not have a mask mandate then you should not be forced to wear a mask on that flight! This should be step one toward full mask mandate removal
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 2
and if your destination doesn't have a mandatory seat belt law, no seatbelts!
couch480
Cannon Couch 10
Mandates and laws are not the same.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON -3
didn't say they were, sweetheart.
pthomas745
Pa Thomas -6
Covid don't care and will continue to kill.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/new/
jmadunleavy
John D 3
The indicted Texas AG loves to sue. Takes after his predecessor who is now governor. God save us.
strickerje
strickerje 3
Anyone can sue. If a court decides the suit has merit, then it doesn't really matter who brought it to court.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 2
Indicted for what? A charge that was politically motivated for an act that had already been dealt with civilly?

Do you have the slightest clue what it is all about? Or, just following liberal talking points intended to mislead you?
hangar14
Rick D 2
and also a sad commentary on the type of situation we are in when FA becomes a forum for political comments. As I have heard before, Air Force One doesn't care who is sitting in the back. Up in Canada, we have a type of 'rule by personal order' going on.
narayan
narayan 2
It's about viral load. Masks, even poor ones will reduce viral load significantly. Read about it. Your body has some capacity of destroying viruses until it can't.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane -1
No, they will not. The Danish study proved this in 2020.
overpar56
Steve Stein 4
Reread the authors of the original study and their follow up. They continued to say mask wearing was beneficial. Are they 100% effective? Nothing is, but viral load is reduced with a well-fitting mask. I wear an N95 into my doctor’s office. Why? There’s sick people there, as in grocery/depart stores, etc. I still have my freedom last time I checked.

And the 2020 study was almost 2 years ago. Plenty of peer-reviewed studies even refuted the Danish study.

Regurgitating any media “breaking news” story, or Facebook/Twitter/Uncles Brothers 2nd cousin source is irresponsible.

BTW, BA-2 is whacking Denmark pretty hard right now. Take a look at their numbers as of today, and most Danes are vaccinated 80-90%) Covid is a fast moving target.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 3
This is actually not correct. The study found that masks were less than 50% effective in protecting the wearer of the mask. However the original idea of masking in 2020 was to protect those around you. It had not been disproven that a mask prevents transmissibility. If people were more focused on protecting society around them rather than focusing on themselves, this thing would have been reduced a lot in the early days.
strickerje
strickerje 7
That actually wasn't what we were originally told - the masks were absolutely pitched as protecting the wearer, and when it became apparent that wasn't true, the message morphed into protecting others.

Early on, when we were more unified and COVID seemed more deadly than it was, most were on board with the lockdowns and mask mandates, and those who turned against them only did so after it became apparent there was no defined goal and no end in sight. And the fact that infection and death rates are pretty similar between states and countries with strict restrictions and those without suggests that there isn't really anything we could have done to reduce or stop this. Those who claim this would all have been over long ago if not for the resistors are being disingenuous, at best.
sledogpilot
Duane Mader 11
We have to protect the protected from the unprotected. If I can’t swim you should wear a life vest in the pool for me.
Dgoldenberg
David GO -4
Makes no sense. Of course me wearing a life jacket doesn’t protect someone who doesn’t from drowning. But me wearing a mask prevents someone who isn’t masked from catching whatever I may have. Which is why surgeons have worn masks for years. Next time you need surgery or go to the dentist why don’t your ask your doctor not to wear a mask?
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
Surgeons don’t wear cheap poorly fitted masks. There is a difference between a medical grade N95 and the dollar store masks housed everyone wearing. Your argument is worthless to anyone trained in respiratory protection.
strickerje
strickerje 4
Ah, the "surgeons wear masks" argument - nevermind that surgeons wear masks to prevent their fluids directly entering an open wound, and they only wear them for one surgery, not walking around in them all day or reusing them. This is really not the same thing at all.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 1
This is not correct. As early as July 2020 the CDC specifically said that masking would protect the community. It relied upon a case where 2 hairdressers with Covid who wore masks did not spread it to a single one of their clients. In Missouri. In NY the message was always about protecting those around you. And we always were told that the masks might not protect us as well as they protect others. New Yorkers (particularly NYC’ers) have a strong sense of community, which is why mask wearing was almost universally accepted. When you live on top of people you learn that we’re all in this together. It had nothing at all to do with politics.
soccerizus23
Wendy Maguire 1
And why do you think surgeons wear masks? Next time you're having a surgical procedure tell the doctor, no need for masks.
engal5165
Engal Hafner 2
Surgeons wear masks to prevent the transfer of Bacteria.
Their operating rooms are also climate controlled, and typically oxygenated.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey -1
Surgeons wear masks to keep from sneezing or spitting into your open body during surgery. Masks do not prevent the spread of respiratory viruses. We've known this since the 1918 pandemic.
LeanderWilliams
Leander Williams 1
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but it seems like an awful lot of people lately passing away from COVID were people who either did not mask or did not vaccinate, and after the fact on their deathbeds they unanimously have said they wish they had either masked up or gotten the vaccine. I can never understand the reasoning. Whether or not masks work, I would rather wear one and find out I was right, than not to wear one and find out everyone else was wrong.
fishnuke
Ted Fisher 2
It is appalling to see the amount of regurgitated pro-virus disinformation in these comments. There are many statements here that are not medically or logically sound "masks don't work", "if the vaccine worked why do people still get infected", "you don't vaccinate during a pandemic", etc (seriously WTF, what happened to smallpox and polio? driven into near extinction through massive global vaccination and quarantine campaigns!) What are your sources, Dr. Facebook and Fox propaganda network? A lot of really putrid anger too. In science, when reality does not line up with your views, you don't get angry, you reevaluate your understanding of the world.

I spent over a decade using aviation to study droplets and aerosols in the atmosphere. Larger droplets, like ones that you exhale while breathing and talking, linger in a room for hours. Circulating in the air flow, like the air heated by your body rising in a plume above you, and the cooler air sucked in to replace it (this is why solder fumes always go toward your face). Even a poorly fitted paper mask will greatly reduce the abundance of those highly contagious large droplets, going both ways. A real mask, with a rating and properly fitted, treated with salt brine, will actively adhere viral particles and disable them (here are some electron micrographs of this happening, from a 2017 paper in Nature "Universal and reusable virus deactivation system for respiratory protection" https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39956). A real mask also helps greatly with smoke -- I live in Colorado, which now hosts regional fires every year. Just got evacuated for the last one which did $1 billion in damages overnight, way to round out 2021.

People still get infected because there are too many unvaccinated people, and people not following basic hygiene practices like wearing a mask and avoiding crowds. Irresponsible disease incubators spreading contagion. The basic reproduction number R0 for delta/omicron is around 5 to 9, meaning each infected person will likely infect that many more people. Once sufficient portion of the population is immune, sustained spread will fall. The equation is 1 - 1/R0, which gives 80-89% of the population needs to be immune. Since not enough people are getting vaccinated, which can be done very quickly, we just have to wait for the rest of the population to slow burn through their infections. With the orders of magnitude higher death toll and medical expenses. Thanks guys. We're finally getting close with infection numbers dropping. This could have happened last year if people would have just gotten their damned shots. Also would have helped if we had implemented strict quarantine and testing and contact tracing on travelers from the beginning instead of pretending everything was fine. The delusional response was literally the worst in the world.

The spread of viral disinformation for political reasons is indistinguishable from bioterrorism. Doing it out of ignorance, like seen in these comments is one thing. However the sources of that disinformation know better, and are actively trying to undermine the pandemic response to score political points with their gullible base. The disinformation campaign in the US has been so successful, that more Americans have died of COVID than people in any other country. Why are you contributing to this instead of fighting the pandemic with the rest of us? Over 950,000 dead Americans in 2 years, and you people are whining about having to wear a mask for a couple of hours? Not too far from those imbeciles throwing mask tantrums during flights.
strickerje
strickerje 5
I find it appalling that anyone's still arguing it's the unvaccinated causing the spread, when we've known for at least 6 months that the vaccinated contract and spread the virus just as easily, they just might not suffer as severe symptoms.

And 950,000 dead "with" COVID isn't the same as "from" COVID, which the media is finally starting to address (but some of us have been saying from the beginning).

Finally, are you seriously suggesting that disagreeing with the hysteria is bioterrorism? Science is a process; it's meant to be debated. When one side shuts down the debate, there's no longer scientific progress.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 5
Yes, and that death toll is almost certainly over inflated by a factor of 95% according the CDC itself (if you understand what they're telling you). The vast majority of people who supposedly died "from" covid had an average of four other serious health conditions.

They told us to your face on live TV what they were going to do - and no one really believed them:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/kI7YBmSmek45/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Fnw7ZC5WjBMx/
Dgoldenberg
David GO 1
Not sure where you are getting your facts from re the 950,000?
strickerje
strickerje 4
950,000 is the number the OP provided. It's fairly close to the CDC's figure of 922,904 as of today, which they define as "Deaths Attributed to COVID-19 on Death Certificates".
fishnuke
Ted Fisher 0
Thanks. I was going on a very rough average from several sources. Some states (Florida) have opted to do a lag in reporting, making the day to day numbers, unreliable.

958,300 https://www.covidvisualizer.com/
878,289 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_United_States
928,518 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_by_country_and_territory
928,723 https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home

Still, how many died "of COVID" vs "with COVID" is about as nasty a distinction as "of AIDS" or "with AIDS". The real numbers lie in the "excess deaths".

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
strickerje
strickerje 5
It's an important distinction because it shows how dangerous (or not) COVID really is. If healthly people are dying in significant numbers, it's much more cause for alarm than if it just exacerbates preexisting conditions.

And we can't just accept the number of excess deaths as the actual number of COVID deaths, because there isn't evidence that every excess death is because of COVID. In fact, given the reports of suicides, drug overdoses, domestic violence, etc. coinciding with the lockdowns, I'd say a case could be made for the restrictions being as damaging as COVID itself.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 2
You are correct Strickerje: Excess deaths mean nothing as a raw number. There many, many factors that account for higher-than-normal average deaths per year, many of which you listed.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
Here in Canada Stats Canada reported more deaths related to lockdowns then from the virus.
Also we are about 85% vaccinated and just went through the worst wave so far. Lockdowns, masks, vaccines…don’t seem to be working.
Jeraboam
Jeraboam 1
Stats Canada: "Beyond deaths attributed to the disease itself, the pandemic could also have indirect consequences leading to an increase or decrease in the number of deaths due to various factors, including delayed medical procedures, increased substance use, or a decline in deaths attributable to other causes, such as influenza." Nowhere could I find any Stats Canada statement attributing more deaths related to lockdowns v the virus.
We went through a relatively brief wave where medical staff appeared to be almost unanimous in acknowledging that while the infection rate soared, the ICU admissions and deaths were kept down because of masks, social distancing, vaccines, group size restrictions, etc. No-one liked these restrictions but most Canadians supported them and the national community benefitted from them.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/210712/dq210712b-eng.htm
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 3
No Ted, it's not. In fact, practically no one died from AIDS back in the late 80s. They died of poisoning from AZT, a drug that never even got out of the testing phase 20 years earlier because it killed practically everyone who took it (another Fauci debacle).

However, there is a great distinction between dying "with" something and "from" something. If you have chronic diabetes but are managing it well, and then die from a freak accident like falling down the stairs or getting killed in a car accident, no doctor in their right mind is going to list the cause of death as diabetes. Yes, you died *with* it, but not *from* it.

Unfortunately, our health institutions are counting deaths from practically everything as a death *from* covid. See the links I posted in other replies.
fishnuke
Ted Fisher 0
That is an incorrect assumption about vaccination not lowering spread, the math is incorrect. This is an example of a disinformation meme which is undermining the pandemic response. NOT bioterrorism, just a misunderstanding of the math which could have been planted and reinforced by the bioterrorists, see below "Disagreeing...".

Vaccines or even prior infection make you substantially less likely to contract COVID, and substantially more likely to recover quickly with minimal symptoms. Therefore a vaccinated or previously infected person is substantially less likely to spread the virus. They are infectious over a shorter time period, and less likely to need treatment (meaning interacting with fewer people). While a vaccinated person *can* spread, they are more than a factor of 10x less likely to become infected in the first place, and another factor of 10x less likely to require hospitalization, where they would be surrounded by staff and vulnerable people for weeks, instead of isolating at home alone for days. Thus, the vast majority of spread is by those people refusing to get vaccinated. Who are almost assuredly not wearing masks, not avoiding crowds (compounding factors). At least 90% of current spread is squarely on the shoulders of the intentionally unvaccinated, and they are a constant danger to all of the vulnerable people who have legitimate medical reasons they cannot be vaccinated, like some cancer patients. And 9 times out of 10 at least, the unvaccinated are the ones infecting the vaccinated. If the country had 80-89% vaccination rates (instead of 64%), cases would have dropped to nil months ago. We could have all moved on, instead of some people pretending like we can move on prematurely.

Likely all kind of moot now anyway, as finally enough people have been infected that it is making up for the lag in vaccinations. Within a few weeks we'll start seeing fewer daily deaths, instead of a 9/11's load every day, following the trend of fewer cases. Fewer cases because more people are immune. This came earlier than I was projecting. If vaccination and/or prior infection did not slow spread, we would not be seeing any reduction in infections. QED

What is so frustrating to me is that we can vaccinate people far more quickly than the virus spreads. Millions of shots a day instead of hundreds of thousands of new infections. So this whole thing could have been put down last summer, instead of this slow burn and higher casualties.

Disagreeing is one thing. Let's see the data and the math. It is necessary to assume you might be wrong so that you can learn. However intentionally spreading disinformation during a deadly pandemic for political reasons, is the bioterrorism. Unwittingly parroting disinformation is unfortunate, but is distinct from intentionally/cynically causing harm. Such as this meme that since vaccinated can still be infected, that vaccines aren't doing anything to stop infections. It is an incorrect distortion and not held up by the numbers. Incorrect math. Even a 5% effective vaccine is better than a 0% at lowering infection rates amongst the vaccinated, and we're dealing with something more like 50-90%.

The bioterrorists are the propagandists who are vaccinated, but are knowingly spreading these lies about vaccines and distorting the numbers, playing up adverse reaction reporting, etc, to advance their political agenda/paycheck. The ones denigrating mask mandates and lockdowns, while simultaneously whining about the Biden administration not doing enough to fight the pandemic. They are actively undermining the pandemic response, leading to thousands of needless American deaths day after day, and they are prolonging this nightmare for all of us. Those people are the bioterrorists, who have weaponized COVID disinformation. Then there are the creeps pushing miracle cure snake oils instead of vaccines. These are just grifters and a smattering of mentally ill. Selling silver drink or sheep drench or whatever their latest "not a vaccine" special secret cure might be. FDA should be on them harder. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" Ben Franklin. Our species annihilated smallpox via mass vaccination and quarantines, followed by forced encircling vaccinations of any new outbreaks. Polio is reduced to some backwards pockets of uneducated religious zealots in a few places, again thanks to vaccination. Measles, mumps, etc barely a thing anymore except for outbreaks when too many anti-science people congregate.


From 2019 to 2020, US life expectancy went down 1.2 to 3 years depending on demographic, and many more dead in 2021 will make that worse. You can pretend all you want that COVID isn't killing people, but that is not reality. Sure most people are fine, but a lot of people who get infected are not. Isn't it worth a little inconvenience to protect them?
strickerje
strickerje 2
You wrote a dissertation here without actually saying anything new. My arguments have been based on publicly available data; I'm not misinformed as you suggest just because you disagree. Your assertion that the vaccines reduce infection rates or prevent spreading the virus isn't supported by the data; the statistics show the vaccinated are only less less likely to be hospitalized or die. Your claim that the current drop in new cases is because of the vaccine doesn't make sense, because we're now seeing the same trajectory that case rates followed before the vaccines were available.

The rest was a meaningless rant (again with the "bioterrorists") with some random quotes thrown in. Perhaps you're the one who should actually look at the math and consider that you might be wrong?
fishnuke
Ted Fisher 2
No papers. Here are some.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/73/12/2257/6124429?login=true
"Our results indicate that vaccination can have a substantial impact on mitigating COVID-19 outbreaks, even with limited protection against infection. "


https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2786039
"Vaccination with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was significantly less likely among patients with COVID-19 hospitalization and with disease progression, consistent with risk reduction among vaccine breakthrough infections."


https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.11.21253275v1

"Effect of vaccination on transmission of COVID-19: an observational study in healthcare workers and their households"


You got any peer reviewed papers that say otherwise, or is it all just opinion?


Vaccines certainly reduce infection rates and hospitalization rates. Reducing infection rates reduces transmission rates en masse. How is there any argument?!


Vaccine immunity rates have been somewhat hamstrung by the determinedly unvaccinated, who keep infecting us at higher rates than we infect them. We are finally seeing the intersection of those curves and the sufficient net immunity to curb sustained spread.

With COVID, we need at least 80-89% previously infected or vaccinated to slow the spread sufficiently, which it appears we are finally hitting. I honestly thought it would take longer than this. Regardless, it appears we are getting there, with cases finally dropping after 2 years.

Vaccines or prior infection (with more consequences) provide some protection against future infection. If you are less likely to get infected, than you are less likely to spread. Integrate that over 8 billion people, or 326 million Americans, you get different numbers of infected vs time curves based on whatever numbers you put in to your model.

CDC certainly did us no favors with their inconsistent messaging, nor the FDA with its slow age group approvals for younger audiences. And vaccine rollout was, inefficient, as far as accessibility. Please don't get me wrong, I think we can do a lot better as a people.

Colorado 5.7m pop, 1,301,611 infected, 11,681 deaths.
New Zealand 5.1m pop, 28,360 infected, 53 deaths.

(Sure Colorado isn't an island yet, but still, that's a big difference)
strickerje
strickerje 0
Your first source is a model-based study that was done before the vaccine rollout. The second one shows the reduction in hospitalizations and deaths, which I didn't dispute. The only one that's relevant is the third, and even it predates Omicron.

I'm going by the real world data. Israel last year had one of the world's highest vaccination rates, and this year it had one of the highest Omicron case rates. The problem seems to be the vaccine's waning effectiveness over time and reduced effectiveness against Delta and Omicron.

As I said, I don't doubt the vaccinated are at lower risk, I just take issue with the narrative that the unvaccinated are alone prolonging the pandemic, because that's just a convenient scapegoat.

I definitely agree on the CDC's messaging. Beyond the changes over time (some of which were justified by new data, but not all), the inconsistencies by setting eroded trust. Wearing masks into a restaurant only to take them off when you sit down never made sense. The portrayal of cruise ships (where you have a private room) as "floating petri dishes", while being packed in coach on airplanes is fine, never made sense.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 4
Sorry, Ted, but polio and smallpox are not the same thing as a respiratory virus AT ALL. Vaccination and quarantine are viable solutions for eradicating the former because they are not zoonotic. Corona viruses (i.e. the common cold) can be carried and transmitted by quite a number of animals/birds/insects.

There is nothing political about this, (unless you understand that the whole end goal of this fake pandemic was political itself). However, those of you who keep saying that the unvaccinated are the problem are simply choosing to ignore what the gods at the CDC have been telling you for months: The vaccines do not stop you from contracting covid or spreading it to others. In fact, vaccinated individuals who contract covid have the exact same (or higher) viral load than the unvaccinated.

So the "vaccines" DO NOT WORK. Period.
PlainSpeaking
Brent Bahler 1
Michael, no vaccination is 100% effective. Just as not all heart by-passes are successful, or all hip replacements are successful. The list goes on. But for healthy persons, the vaccines are effective 95% of the time. As we approach one million Covid deaths in the US, one can only wonder why the vast majority of those killed by the infection or from contributing causes chose to risk their lives by believing in misinformation and conspiracy theories (none of which had any credible, provable or even logical basis).
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 1
I forgot to add that both polio and smallpox had declined quite dramatically in the United Stated BEFORE a vaccine was available for either - mostly due to better living conditions. And there's quite a bit of evidence that the vaccines were the actual cause of many polio cases.

There's also a correlation between polio and the roll-out of DDT, which the government touted as perfectly safe for years ("DDT Is Good For Me!" - remember that ad campaign?). https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5467597/Children-sprayed-dangerous-pesticide-DDT-shocking-clip.html

The surgeon general also used to tout cigarettes as healthy and refreshing.

How long before people figure out that out governments and medical institutions are corrupt?
fishnuke
Ted Fisher 0
Sources, numbers? Math?

Main difference with smallpox, other than other hosts, was the grotesque disfigurement. COVID kills people locked up invisibly in hospitals behind HIPAA walls. Where few people see them.

COVID vaccines lower infection risk, and symptoms. Therefore reducing transmission rates. If you are less likely to be infected, then you are overall less likely to transmit. And if infection is less likely to be a big deal anyway, big whoop. That is called vaccines "working". Nothing is 100%, and the vaccines sure are better than 0%, and a hell of a lot better than previous infection, since COVID has some nasty tricks to disable robust appropriate immune response. So what if 1/10th of vaccinated people end up just as infectious as every unvaccinated who gets infected? And with lower symptoms for less time and less care required? That is still increasing the immunity of the population at large, and eventually getting to the point where this is ended. By the numbers, not wishful thinking.

I thought the worst year for Polio in the US was 1952, the year the Salk vaccine was introduced which ended it here. Just over 3000 dead, and 20k with disabilities, less than 60k total infections. Orders of magnitude less than this.

Certainly we were lucky with airborne smallpox not having other animal hosts. Regardless, it remains a shining example of what we can do. Guinea worm eradication is ironically just through education, no drugs. The disabling parasitic worm is nearly extinct mainly because Jimmy Carter convinced the WHO to do something about it after he retired. Don't drink unfiltered water (even a tshirt or a sock!), and if you have a Guinea worm, don't put your infected limb into someone's drinking water to cool the burning wound. It's a nasty worm whose larva infect 1mm water fleas (copepods), which other people drink and become infected with meter long egg layers. The intermediate water flea hosts are easily filtered with cloth or boiling. Dating back to prehistory (5000 year old mummies with them), peaking millions of infections a year in the 1980's throughout SE Asia and Africa. Now a few dozen a year in isolated spots in Africa, prolonged by ongoing idiotic conflicts.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 1
You know, you're writing style is very good. Good grammar and compelling arguments that seem to come from well thought-out thesis.

The problem is that you're just making shit up.

What does the scarring from smallpox have to do with anything? That has nothing to do with eradicating a virus or the type of viruses that can be successfully controlled with vaccination.

And your entire last paragraph is completely irrelevant to the conversation.


There is no evidence that covid vaccines lower your risk of infection. Source? (and please don't quote the CDC or the vaccine makers themselves). In fact, it's quite the opposite:

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/new-study-shows-vaccines-must-be?utm_source=url
(You might want to open and READ the actual links provided in the article.)


Covid does not "disable a robust appropriate immune response". What a load of crap. Where in the hell did you get that information?
On the other hand, the jabs do just that (see link above).



Sorry, pal. Most people recover from Covid just fine, and then have better immunity than they would from vaccination.

And that's exactly how this whole thing should have been handled early on. Let it run it's course through the population as quickly as possible and then everyone has natural immunity. It all would have been over by August the same year.
preed66617
Pat Reed 0
btweston
btweston 0
Yes he can. He’s the President. You don’t have to like it.
cgwng
Alain Duncan 14
Since when has the USA been dictatorship?

[This poster has been suspended.]

jmadunleavy
John D 1
Clearly this bubba has no concept of Executive orders
strickerje
strickerje 4
Executive orders were intended to be a means by which the executive branch directed its agencies to enforce legislation. It was never intended to be an end-run around the legislative process.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
Executive orders were intended to be a means by which the executive branch directed its agencies to enforce legislation... so is that like a gentle reminder to do their damn job?

You sure it wasn't intended to be an end-run around in specific and well defined circumstances? Like, say, a war. Or maybe a national health emergency. Just throwing ideas out there, so let me know.
strickerje
strickerje 2
If it's a circumstance that has been delegated to the executive branch by act of congress, then it isn't an end-run. War is not one of those; it constitutionally requires an act of congress even if some presidents have deployed the military without congressional authorization and not been challenged.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
Executive orders were intended to be a means by which the executive branch directed its agencies to enforce legislation... so is that like a gentle reminder to do their damn job?

You sure it wasn't intended to be an end-run around in specific and well defined circumstances? Like, say, a national health emergency. Just throwing ideas out there, so let me know.
waynej007
waynej007 1
So, 480,000 deaths / year in the US alone from smoking (includes 2nd hand smoke). Where are the face diapers for that? Why is the government allowing tobacco products to remain on the market? Because big money at stake! 600,000 cancer deaths / yr (US), probably includes that 480k number. Where's all the complaining about that?

As others have noted, hospitals get big money for every covid "reported" death. John was in a bad car wreck, but he tested positive the other day... BTW he died of covid!
myeyeshazel
Lori Wash 1
Just another example of Texas AG deflecting all the pending indictments he has accrued over the years.
frager
Gerry Ward 1
Beg pardon Sir! If I wish to wear a mask when I travel it is none of your business!
MarkEagle
Mark Eagle 1
“President Biden cannot continue governing through executive edicts” Seems that's all that his predecessor did.
strickerje
strickerje 2
And so did the one before that, and so on. I'm not OK with it from either side.

But this is the problem with politics in the U.S. now; it's always fine as long as it's not the other guy.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane -1
Liberal idiots are voting down my posts without even the intelligence to make a cognitive argument. Pathetic.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson -8
While conservative idiots keep posting nonsense supported by "convenient truths". A galvanized society as never seen before. Wonder what it will be like in 5 years.
alexa320
alex hidveghy -2
Huh? Surely not another conspiracy theory? That’s so yesterday…..
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 2
What's the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth?

https://rumble.com/vrjph6-whats-the-difference-between-a-conspiracy-theory-and-the-truth-about-6-mont.html?mref=6zof&mrefc=2
clarify
clarify -2
Would you recognize an intelligent, "cogent" argument if it bit you on your posterior?

The evidence that masks reduce the spread of COVID has only been increasing. But you think you heard what you wanted to hear from the "Danish study" that you cite every chance you get. Apparently you're too afraid to follow the science. That's not how intelligent people act.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 3
Please provide a PEER REVIEWED STUDY showing that masks make any statistical difference in reducing the spread of a respiratory virus. Fauci told you the truth the first time he spoke (then he got the memo from his puppet masters)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/prujdWuCxa8/
Viperguy46
Jesse Carroll 1
Go Texas, let's succeed and shut off their gas.......
Rosomak
Rosomak -5
Maybe Texas should figure out how to keep the power grid up and running first. Last I checked hospitals require electricity

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Moviela
Ric Wernicke 15
Wearing a mask to defeat the virus is like putting up a wrought iron fence to keep out mosquitos.
jalworth
James Alworth 1
Wearing a condom is not to keep you from getting pregnant... It's to protect others from you.
jeldonjam
Jed Dunkin 6
Actually James condoms were created to stop the spread of venereal diseases, preventing unwanted pregnancies was another benefit.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane -4
It's not working. We still have too many liberal idiots.

If only Margaret Sanger hated liberals as much as she hated blacks.
jmadunleavy
John D -6
State your legitimate sources. I'll save you the trouble. There aren't any.
Ginabedina
Gina Davis 13
There are plenty of studies on masks and aerosol viruses YOU need to read! The person ahead is correct masks do not work against covid. Read people read!
333Jim
Jim Tucker 4
That's right, Gina. Liberals want everyone else to do the homework for them. This is not a courtroom, I/we do not have to answer to the ignorant for their failings.
Dgoldenberg
David GO 2
Why is this political? Liberals vs conservatives? Why isn't this just about the science? And science is always developing and always being argued about. Ask yourself why and who made this political.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
Sadly everything is political now. No one cares about the truth or facts just what their side says. I wish there was a way to take politics out of many social issues like health care, education, air travel…
strickerje
strickerje 0
It's political because it pertains to public policy. As to why it's partisan, both sides politicized it.
NewNole2001
Ashley Grant 1
Here's 49 studies that show just how wrong you are: https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-here-are-49-scientific-studies-that-explain-why-they-do/
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 0
Gotta love it when idiots post a link and don't have the slightest clue what's in it. It appears to back up their claim but they're as ignorant as the liberal "journalists" who wrote it.

Masks do not work. They are statistically irrelevant. The Danish study proved this about the real world use of masks.

"A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point."

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
Dgoldenberg
David GO 2
This study looked at the impact on the mask wearers. It did not look at the impact on those people around the mask wearers. That's what masks were originally intended to do. Unfortunately we have developed into a selfish society full of people who only care about themselves. Such a shame. If we all cared a bit more about society as a whole we would be in a better place.
NewNole2001
Ashley Grant 1
Gotta love when an idiot cherry picks one out of forty-nine studies that STILL shows a statistically significant benefit from wearing a mask to somehow try and prove that masks don't work.

Thanks for needlessly prolonging this pandemic with your intransigence, stubbornness, ignorance, and outright selfishness.
strickerje
strickerje 1
The point is, something isn't really proven or disproven when studies contradict each other. Skepticism and open debate are integral to the scientific process.

And the linked study says the observed difference was *not* statistically significant (last sentence under Results).
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey 0
Non of them peer reviewed.

[This poster has been suspended.]

jeldonjam
Jed Dunkin 6
Exactly right Jimbo when painting automotive or aircraft you have to wear respirators.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 1
Hey Jimbo, if you want your experiment to be realistic you better to get out there in that garage with him.

Would you like a mask?
Maggie0402
Mark Smith 1
Your 100% correct the virus isn’t kept out with these mask
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson -1
Prime example of an individual living in an anti-vaxxer world. Sad actually. Wonder if his/her grandiose statements would still stand if say a parent or sibling became infected or was experiencing long-Covid.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
Prime example of someone who has closed their mind and instead of debating the message just name calls (anti-vaxer).

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
Viruses don’t ride busses either so your analogy doesn’t make sense. Airborne viruses like SARS-CoV-2 stay in the air as aerosols and if a sufficient number of them enter a person’s airway they can cause an illness. For a mask or respirator to prevent the virus from entering a person’s airway it needs to have a proper filter and be fitted to stop air from bypassing the filter. Even a medical grade N95 is not actually rated for protection from airborne viruses but it is vastly superior to an unfitted and unrated mask like we see people wearing. Please do yourself a favor and Google “respiratory protection”, read a few articles from reliable sites like OSHA or NIOSH and learn what masks and respirators are and how to select the right one for the threat your being exposed to.

[This poster has been suspended.]

TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
No need to be rude Jimbo. It is better to try to educate people then to try to alienate them.
Have a great day.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 0
He's on something.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON -1
Stupid comment, stupid reply.

but you already knew that (obviously).
333Jim
Jim Tucker 0
Exactly,k Ric!
overpar56
Steve Stein -1
Texas should follow up on their desire to leave the Union. Make it the home of the MAGAs. Let them have their own constitution, their own military, their own economy. Texas in a net drain on the country anyway. Then you’ll see massive tax increases, corporations moving out of state, and then, because of immigration blockades, let their food supply dry up because no one will do stoop labor. They can’t even modernize their power grid after their asshole gov promised he would.

It’s a shithole state. I turned down a job there because I refused to move there, even when I was a Republican back then. Reminds me of Blazing Saddles and Henley Lamar running the place.
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson 2
Yes, great for Texas to talk big boy, and being a separate country blah blah blah and play to its intellectually challenged is far far different than reality. Texas could not handle separation and the responsibility that goes with it so shut the f**k up politicians! I to was recruited for a position in Texas a decade ago and am glad I thought twice and went with a "thanks but no thanks" reply. The current sociological state is so ripe for social unrest that the remainder of the country and world for that matter now see the reality. With Texas being #4 in the USA for mass shootings is not good nor is the #8 ranking of % of citizens incarcerated. Think it would get better if independent? Hmmm, I somehow doubt it.
strickerje
strickerje 1
Is that mass shooting statistic the raw number or per capita? You know Texas is the second most populous state, right?
Viperguy46
Jesse Carroll 1
Maybe your stats are a little off....However, loudmouths like you are not wanted in Texas! We where doing just fine until half of California and other Yankees moved here and brought their stinking Liberal ways. Look in a mirror and say, you will stay out of Texas!
jahar007
jerry harris -1
More nonsense from a "Red State" during a worldwide Pandemic.....nothing to see hear, move on please.
JJ7
JJ Johnson -4
If you support continuing the use of masks that don't work, you are really a virtue signaling closet Fascist
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
Do we need to do a bunch of name calling like children? If you want those types of conversations may I suggest Facebook. Let’s all try to keep this site from devolving to that legal of immaturity.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
Honestly, If I had to choose I think I'd rather be a virtue signaling closet fascist than a whiny little crybaby drama queen.
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
Read my reply to JJ
JJ7
JJ Johnson 0
Well based on all the responses the liberal snowflakes and their love of masks outnumber the conservative Americans by a slight majority. Never thought pilots would be Beta Male soy boys. A lot of you would have never survived the belly of a B-17 during WW2. You would have been typists or back in the States selling shoes.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
A lot of you would have never survived the belly of a B-17 during WW2...

None of you would without a mask, genius.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey -1
What I find interesting about this whole thread is that we're debating masks when what we ALL should be focusing on at this point, is whether there was ever actually a pandemic. I posit there wasn't. I'm not saying there is no virus; it's pretty clear that an engineered virus was released on the public, but it turned out not to be very deadly - only a .03% fatality rate (without intervention) for the vast majority of the population, except in already unhealthy people or the elderly.

There is a lot of evidence that this whole thing was planned quite a long time ago.

How many people are aware that a patent for a method of detecting covid19 was issued in 2015? How is possible to patent a test for a disease that supposedly didn't exist until four years later?
https://nl.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20210601&DB=&locale=nl_NL&CC=US&NR=11024339B2&KC=B2&ND=4#

How many people are aware the Moderna was granted exclusive patent rights for its mRNA technology in late 2019? This was before anyone had even heard of Sars-CoV2 in the US and a a few months before anyone was talking about 'vaccines'

How many people are aware that the World Integrated Trade Solution's website shows that hundreds of millions of Covid19 test kits were shipped world wide in 2017-2018? How is that possible? Of course, once this was discovered, they changed the description to simply read "Medical Test Kits". Snopes and other BS fact-checking site are trying to explain this away as a typo. Yeah, someone was trying to type "medical test kits" but mistakenly typed "Covid-19 Test Kits" ... thousands of times... three and half years before the world ever heard of such a thing.. and on the World Bank's website, no less.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200905084636if_/https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/ALL/year/2017/tradeflow/Exports/partner/WLD/nomen/h5/product/300215

Or how about the Rockefeller Institute describing the exact scenario we're in now,
back in 2010? (page 18 should sound familiar):
https://thewatchtowers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Rockefeller-Foundation.pdf

And then of course, there was Event 201 in November of 2019 - a simulation of a world-wide pandemic caused by.... you guessed it... a coronavirus. You know, just in case something like that were to ever happen - two months before it really did. Sponsored by the World Economic Forum, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Johns Hopkins and several other interesting partners who've been prominent voices (and gotten very rich) over the past two years.

Speaking of the WEC - this page should tell you a lot about what the real agenda is:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/covid-19-the-great-reset/

Planned for years.

What has actually happened is an epidemic of fake tests, fueled by non-stop media hysteria (they're complicit, they know it's all a scam)and a bunch of fake statistics. What happened to the Flu for the last two years? Did it politely step aside to make room for Covid, or is it more likely that all flu and pneumonia cases/deaths were just lumped into the "covid" column? Use your logic, people.

This is a long, but very interesting interview, showing the patent office data that proves this virus (and the fake pandemic) has been in the making for nearly two decades:

https://www.brighteon.com/a569c7c9-9572-47ed-ba3c-130b0c13aa55

Turn off your TVs, people. You've been lied to on a scale so grand that no one would ever believe it.

And that's what they're counting on.
LeanderWilliams
Leander Williams 2
Tell this information to the 958,300 families who lost loved ones. They don't care if it is .3% or 300%. Their loved ones are still dead. And, as for it affecting old people, I am 76 years old, and I take 6 pills daily and two shots. I wear my mask and I have not have covid and I regularly test negative. You need to revisit demographics. There are hundreds of thousands of people younger than me in cemeteries because of COVID.
strickerje
strickerje 1
The same could be said if anything, including flu deaths. The statistics will be meaningless to those personally affected, but that's no way to form public policy. The statistics are relevant because the mitigation measures have consequences too. Everything has to be weighed against the statistics or else you'll end up with a situation where the cure is worse than the disease.
MichaelDealey
Michael Dealey -1
I'm glad you're doing well. More proof that people who are healthy and taking care of themselves are not likely to be affected by this virus.

But again, you're assumption that 958,300 people have died *FROM* covid is quite debatable. That's what you're being told, but there's quite a bit of evidence from CDC stats and from the mouths of health officials that people actually died from something else - quite possibly as a direct result of the drastic measures taken by governments to "protect" people to what amounts to the common cold for the vast majority of the population.

see my links in other posts. EVERYTHING was counted as death from covid.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
Do you really want us to believe the folks who (according to you) pulled off what is by far the most complex and expensive con in human history were stupid enough to file a smoking gun patent FIVE YEARS too soon?

I'm about to click your link and read the patent. This better be good.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 0
Dear Self,

Don't be a sucker. Just don't, because it's the same old shit only a complete imbecile would fall for. Patent US-11024339-B2 describes a generic computer process for collecting and saving vitals like temperature and blood oxygen levels from other devices and saving them to a single location (database).

The obvious patent-troll from the UK filed his application on May 17. 2020. Not a single one of the listed separate-but-related earlier applications mention covid-19 specifically or even hint that it might exist. Not a one.

Don't waste your time.

Sincerely,
Self
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
You did it to yourself. I often check links but sometimes the post has more then enough evidence in it to tell me the link is a waste of time. You got suckered but were nice enough to come back and warn everyone else so thanks for doing that.
USParacaidista
Mike Zorro -5
Nobody cares (except for other mask snowflakes)
TheDogeof88
Chuck Lavazzi 0
Either the Texas AG is unaware of the legal responsibilities of the FAA or this is just more performative stupidity at the taxpayer's expense. Personally, I vote for the latter.
chsaver13
Carol Thompson -2
Texas would sue if one looked cross-eye at another. How petty.

כניסה לאתר

עדיין אין לך חשבון? הירשם כעת (ללא תשלום) כדי ליהנות מתכונות מותאמות-אישית, מהתראות טיסה ועוד!
אתר זה משתמש בקוקיות. המשך השימוש והניווט שלך באתר מביע את הסכמתך לכך.
סגור
האם ידעת שמעקב הטיסות של FlightAware נתמך על ידי פרסום?
תוכל לעזור לנו לוודא ש-FlightAware יישאר חינמי בכך שתאשר קבלת מודעות מ-flightaware.com. אנו מתאמצים מאוד להקפיד על כך שהמודעות שלנו יהיו רלוונטיות ולא מטרידות כדי ליצור עבורך חוויית משתמש מעולה. מהיר וקל לכלול את המודעות של FlightAware ברשימה הלבנה ואפשר גם לשקול את האפשרות ליצור חשבונות פרמיום.
סגור