Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask

How to stay healthy and prevent risks and consequences on your health and public health. occupational disease, industrial risks (asbestos, air pollution, electromagnetic waves ...), company risk (workplace stress, overuse of drugs ...) and individual (tobacco, alcohol ...).
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by izentrop » 16/06/22, 00:11

Israel plans to reimpose COVID mask
Israel's coronavirus czar warns of steadily rising COVID infection rates, says the Health Ministry may reinstate mask-wearing requirements.
Zarka estimated that there are between 15 and 000 new COVID infections per day in Israel, and that BA.20 now accounts for about half of all new cases.

“The infection statistics are, it seems, the tip of the iceberg,” Zarka said. “I estimate that there are between 15 and 000 people infected every day. »

“The BA.5 variant has taken the place of Omicron, and it will be the dominant variant. »

“The new ba.5 variant now accounts for almost 50% of infections. This variant leads to relatively mild cases in young people, but we are seeing an increase in hospitalizations. It is important that we protect high-risk groups and people over 60. »

Zarka warned there was "clear evidence of rising infection rates", adding that the Health Ministry may reinstate the indoor mask mandate.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/354937
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15995
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5189

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by Remundo » 16/06/22, 00:15

the Israeli coronavirus czar?

that's a concept!

afterwards, wearing the mask to limit the spread of respiratory infections makes sense. But don't let it get ridiculous...
0 x
Image
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by izentrop » 16/06/22, 00:31

Gogole translation
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by izentrop » 16/06/22, 01:37

Christophe wrote:: Mrgreen:
The double mask is not that...

0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by Christophe » 16/06/22, 08:49

Telling the truth of the facts is a torrent of mud? : Shock: : Shock: : Shock:

The provax, you are more simply idiots, you are real bastards! : Mrgreen:
1 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15995
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5189

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by Remundo » 16/06/22, 09:00

they are in the sophistic dialectic, the rhetoric of anticipated indignation.

They are insipid and useless, even evil beings.

Fortunately, the abundance of energy feeds them unconditionally to think and write bullshit on the internet. At other times, their bowls would be empty and they would scrape the ground, just a return to the real world they so richly deserve.
1 x
Image
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15995
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5189

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by Remundo » 16/06/22, 09:04

izentrop wrote:Gogole translation

imagine that I checked the article in English

there is indeed written "czar", so no ambiguity.

and you, you are the French tsar of disinformation... but be careful, others aspire to your hegemony and are not far from the putsch... : Lol:
0 x
Image
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by Obamot » 16/06/22, 09:55

When The implicated testify under oath in front of the American Congress, it is “conspi” or not for Iziment the Taliban?

NIH funded gain-of-function at P4 lab in Wuhan
Under oath, Fauci lied to Congress

Source: US Congress website:
New documents attest that Fauci was not honest with Congress about research done at the Wuhan lab.

BY ED BROWNE ON 9/9/21

The National Institute of Health (NIH) had [initially] denied funding studies that would make a coronavirus more dangerous to humans after being accused of doing so following the publication of research proposals.

The documents had been obtained and published by “The Intercept”, after he launched a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act.

[Antonio] Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is part of the NIH, […] had told Congress in May [2021] that: "the NIH had never and at the time was not funding gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology."

Richard Ebright, professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and lab director at the Waksman Institute for Microbiology, told Newsweek that the papers were the result of research […] and showed "without equivocal" than the NIH-Fauci claims that “NIH had not supported “gain-of-function” research or amelioration of potential pandemic pathogens in Wuhan” were false.

Gain-of-function [GOF] research involves modifying a biological agent, such as a virus, so that it becomes more active. For obvious reasons, GOF research on influenza or coronavirus viruses had come under scrutiny, by the NIH's own admission, because it made the virus potentially more dangerous to humans.
Not all GOF research is so dangerous. Some types, for example, modify bacteria to produce insulin to treat people with diabetes.

What the NIH said it refused was to fund GOF research that would make a coronavirus more dangerous, such as by improving its lethality or transmissibility.

[Except] in 2014, the NIH said it had halted funding for GOF research that was "reasonably expected to confer attributes on influenza, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), or SARS"which would make them more transmissible to humans.

At Newsweek, Ebright had therefore declared that this seemed false according to his interpretation of the documents published by The Intercept.
"Multiple sections of the grant proposals and progress reports clearly show that the grants funded gain-of-function research of concern in Wuhan"he had said.

"Two sections of particular interest are page 28 and figure 35 of the fourth year" (he pointed out).

Ebright had said that: "these sections of the documents showed that NIH grants had supported the construction of SARS-related mutant coronaviruses that involved the mixing of different types. The result was a lab-generated virus that could infect human cells., he had said, adding “that at least three of the lab-generated viruses "showed >10x to >100x higher viral loads in humanized mice."

A humanized mouse is a mouse that has been modified to mimic certain human-like biological characteristics, such as the immune system, so that it can be tested in the laboratory as a human surrogate. They are commonly used in research.

Figure 35 from the Fourth Year Progress Report, to which Ebright referred, is shown below, along with the associated legend.

___________________

The two documents published by The Intercept

BFF95E93-DD57-47C4-9976-9DCF559E66FC.jpeg
BFF95E93-DD57-47C4-9976-9DCF559E66FC.jpeg (384 Kio) Consulté 879 fois
071C78FF-32EA-488A-99CA-388C431EC0A3.jpeg

___________________

The question is whether this work on humanized mice constitutes GOF research on a coronavirus that would make it more dangerous for humans. Ebright answers in the affirmative.
Newsweek contacted the NIH for comment from Fauci and received this statement: “The NIH has never approved research that might make a coronavirus more dangerous to humans.”

[but this is de facto the case, Fauci played on words, he went so far as to modify the definition of “GOF” by also making these modifications on his own site, after having his hand caught in the jam pot. Oba.]
"The research we supported in China, where coronaviruses are prevalent, aimed to understand the behavior of coronaviruses circulating in bats and likely to cause widespread disease. The body of science produced by this research demonstrates that coronavirus sequences of bats published from this NIH-supported work were not SARS-CoV-2


NOTES
Obviously not since SARS-CoV-2 is only a 'variant' of the initial virus modified previously in Wuhan. Then the genetic manipulation triggering the covid can only be demonstrated when updating the phylogenetic tree would make it possible to establish a chronology (the simple fact that this update was not made, is also not proof of concealment, and for once, we wouldn't care about the dangerousness of the type of manipulation that would have been done, but... motus), and besides, it doesn't matter, since the simple fact of asking the question also implies that genetic manipulation has taken place.

The health agency issued a statement in May [2021] in which it explicitly denies having "never approved any grant" that would have supported GOF research aimed at making coronaviruses more dangerous to humans.
The NIH did not immediately respond to a request for confirmation of its refusal to fund the GOF research in light of the recently released documents.

Rand Paul, the U.S. senator from Kentucky, saw Mr. Ebright's interpretation of the documents on Twitter as justification for his criticism of Mr. Fauci.
He tweeted: "I was right about his agency's funding of novel coronavirus research in Wuhan."

Paul has repeatedly claimed that the United States has funded gain-of-function research. The pair had a public spat during a Senate health committee in July, with Paul suggesting that Fauci lied to Congress about whether the NIH was funding gain-of-function research.
Fauci said he had "never lied to Congress" and stood by his assertion that the NIH does not fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. He said, "Senator Paul, you don't know what you're talking about, quite frankly."

In reality, the NIH has funded the GOFs well, Fauci's statements catching up with the branches and his manipulations aimed at making revisionism of the definition of the GOFs prove it. It is understood that the only residual stumbling block is on the intensity of genetic manipulations on men.

The 6 million deaths from covid give us the answer.

Trial to follow (surely but when...)
1 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by Obamot » 16/06/22, 18:16

ERRATUM & supplement (last sentence should read): “We understand that the only residual stumbling block concerns the intensity of genetic manipulation aimed at making SARS-cov-X more or less pronouncedly dangerous against humans! (And not a possible doubt about manipulations, because that is admitted, admitted, established and proven, and there have been many).”

: Arrowd: Link to the PDF in English on the US Congress website (good luck) : Arrowd: https://www.congress.gov/117/meeting/ho ... -SD004.pdf

Link on the article of “The Intercept” (who had to file a complaint to obtain the documents compromising:
https://theintercept.com/2021/09/06/new ... inese-lab/
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974

Re: Coronavirus: effectiveness of types of masks and manufacture of a homemade respiratory mask




by Christophe » 23/06/22, 23:17



Patrick Pelloux: "We must put the mask back on transport" in a "compulsory" way
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Health and Prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental risks "

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Bing [Bot] and 123 guests