"Health authorities": The virus will dramatically spread indoors. We are banning every large indoor events.
Also "Health authorities": Ok the population of West Europe and the United States is 80% urban and most people live in tall buildings. To protect the population we are ordering every one to stay tightly at home in a small apartment inside a large building with hundreds of people.
How am I typing this without it being a simpsons episode?
The result: Paris had more dead than Wuhan. 759 deaths per million inhabitants (versus Marseille at 149 I think).
New York City, total lockdown too: 2000 deaths per million inhabitants (that's really high, 0.2% of the whole city).
This interesting statement can be found via duckduckgo. Of course, completely impossible to find it via google.
This is what I think:
Using some common sense, we know (I hope this is true idk what to trust anymore with all the bs science) most of what comes out is liquid, infected people transmit droplets more than aerosol, so masks will stop alot of that and therefore it helps prevent infected people from transmitting the disease. If they don't touch their mask etc of course.
Healthy people wearing masks does not make sense, it won't protect them, and ye with all the humidity you're breathing in here it's an absolute breading ground for all sorts of stuff. Absolutely disgusting. How to get sick 101.
People that don't know if they have the virus: there is a small chance they might protect others, and a big chance they'll hurt themselves.
In either case the risk to reward is poor, the benefit it would make is so small, it makes close to no difference.
A solution: Wear a mask when in tight closed spaces to reassure yourself maybe?
change.org. Do your part to cose these rebel states!
www.change.org/...ow-for-covid-19?source_loc...
Oh so now there is south carolina too? w/e
Let's compare it to neighbouring states.
I didn't look at when they got infected, at urbanisation, density etc. I'm not going to write and publish a whole paper either. Hopefully someone will.
Quickly looking at the numbers is fun, I'll do a few more that are in the area of the rebel states (no point doing california even thought it is close):
This is just a first look but looking at Europe states, France cities, USA states, USA cities, it appears that:
- Places with stay at home orders have more deaths in %
- Places with higher pop density have more deaths in %
- Places with the most severe restriction, compared to less severe, have more deaths in %
- Democrats compared to Republicans have way more deaths in %
People should end up noticing this. They can't be that blind. At some point they'll figure it out.
How this unfolds will be quite fun to watch :)
The odds of dying in a car crash or of obesity are still astronomically higher and no one cares.
California is strongly fighting "fat shaming".
Also "Health authorities": Ok the population of West Europe and the United States is 80% urban and most people live in tall buildings. To protect the population we are ordering every one to stay tightly at home in a small apartment inside a large building with hundreds of people.
How am I typing this without it being a simpsons episode?
The result: Paris had more dead than Wuhan. 759 deaths per million inhabitants (versus Marseille at 149 I think).
New York City, total lockdown too: 2000 deaths per million inhabitants (that's really high, 0.2% of the whole city).
This interesting statement can be found via duckduckgo. Of course, completely impossible to find it via google.
This is what I think:
Using some common sense, we know (I hope this is true idk what to trust anymore with all the bs science) most of what comes out is liquid, infected people transmit droplets more than aerosol, so masks will stop alot of that and therefore it helps prevent infected people from transmitting the disease. If they don't touch their mask etc of course.
Healthy people wearing masks does not make sense, it won't protect them, and ye with all the humidity you're breathing in here it's an absolute breading ground for all sorts of stuff. Absolutely disgusting. How to get sick 101.
People that don't know if they have the virus: there is a small chance they might protect others, and a big chance they'll hurt themselves.
In either case the risk to reward is poor, the benefit it would make is so small, it makes close to no difference.
A solution: Wear a mask when in tight closed spaces to reassure yourself maybe?
change.org. Do your part to cose these rebel states!
www.change.org/...ow-for-covid-19?source_loc...
Oh so now there is south carolina too? w/e
Let's compare it to neighbouring states.
I didn't look at when they got infected, at urbanisation, density etc. I'm not going to write and publish a whole paper either. Hopefully someone will.
Quickly looking at the numbers is fun, I'll do a few more that are in the area of the rebel states (no point doing california even thought it is close):
This is just a first look but looking at Europe states, France cities, USA states, USA cities, it appears that:
- Places with stay at home orders have more deaths in %
- Places with higher pop density have more deaths in %
- Places with the most severe restriction, compared to less severe, have more deaths in %
- Democrats compared to Republicans have way more deaths in %
People should end up noticing this. They can't be that blind. At some point they'll figure it out.
How this unfolds will be quite fun to watch :)
The odds of dying in a car crash or of obesity are still astronomically higher and no one cares.
California is strongly fighting "fat shaming".
I thought it was more. Now part of this might be because republican areas are more rural? At the same time I myself compared many similar states or even red states more urban, and they always had much less deaths. Plus Netherlands versus Belgium that are next to each other. Plus east europe countries that didn't do much versus west europe that went all in and had the most deaths.
www.reuters.com/arti...n-ones-idUSKBN22X14I
Some other articles saying the same thing but they just copy pasted the reuters one.
New York times and Seattle times have their own. NYT is behind a paywall but seattle times that quote some of it is free.
www.nytimes.com/2020...red-blue-states.html
www.seattletimes.com...here-democrats-live/
The economist showing how unemployment went up more in blue states, and looking at consumer spending and more.
Unemployed are going to want "free stuff" right?
www.economist.com/gr...than-republican-ones
Fox news have a state by state you know the thing
www.foxnews.com/heal...e-by-state-breakdown
Lmao when I typed "fox news deaths in democratic states" in duckduckgo I get a whole page of FOX answers.
When I type the same sentence in google my first results are washingtonpost and theguardian 🤣
I'm not even a US citizen. I don't use a vpn. Why is what I look for filtered by a big tech us firm?
China and Russia have their own search engines.
I say west europe needs a decent one too. We can't trust the USA, they have traitors on their soil.
California tech companies have way too much power.
Maybe the french minister that refused to sell dailymotion to youtube will be proven right in the long term?
We can't rely on the USA if the USA can't rely on themselves.
Neither CNN FOX NBC have covered the big gap in deaths & unemployment between blue & red states nor between total lockdown states and no stay at home order (US states or west europe states, the more data the better).