@Filmnoir11 @AstorAaron There are quite a few, but here's one I've looked at: https://t.co/OgdjHtgtvi
@colorblindk1d @NPR 100% effective https://t.co/eYZupuXa7K
@pudgenet @RmwBlacksodder @MickeyMcmeans CDC STUDY 2 infected hair stylists, no spread to clients. https://t.co/78NRsaK02P https://t.co/UnsiXUp5C9 Assoc. of American Medical Colleges https://t.co/mQmYCbaRIu
@choo_ek @asosin One of the most hopeful moments of the entire pandemic was when the hair salon in Missouri opened in 2020 and got infected stylists but no known infected clients due to masking and no inside waiting. https://t.co/Je5E9lsdI7
@dillon_cordial @StymeBey @MutmasterJ @jessica_tyciak @Rap Here’s the scientific journal https://t.co/aafLnGlIwf If only your cavs were so lucky 😂😂
@RobSHarrison74 @ccwicks @Deadferrets That’s just flat false.
@RodneyCorbine @GustavineLe @WaltersMeinung https://t.co/9cDdVyefgc Wenn schlechte maskenetikette befolgt wird, weil alle nur noch den Regeln folgen anstatt es als infektionsscbutz zu betrachten, bringen die nix mehr, ja. Aber wenn man richtig trägt ist ei
@johnwadoherty @WatcherAfar @flindall_steve @robfoot Many are anecdotal - you missed the one about the hairdressers?? The CDC used that one in their initial report that recommended masking for all. https://t.co/JObWN3XoNs
@jtjG57PEu5AanQN マスクは自分の感染予防効果は薄いけど、周りへの感染を防ぐ効果はあるってのが通説ですよね。 感染してた美容師がマスク無しで接した家族と同僚は感染したけど、お互いマスクして接した客は100人以上で感染0だったとか。 https://t.co/Xj57oHJg2l
@Dave99117584 One of the very early things that moved me from being a mask skeptic to a mask believer was the Great Clips incident in Springfield, MO. Two symptomatic stylists. 139 exposed clients. Stylists and clients all masked. No transmission. CDC repo
@You3_JP マスクは水分子0.003umより大きい0.1um(ウィルスと同サイズ)で性能をテストされてるし、比較対象として不適。 他社への感染を防ぐ効果はあるってのが通説だよ。 感染者の美容師がマスク無しで接した家族同僚は感染し、お互いマスクして接した客は感染0の例。 ↓ https://t.co/Xj57oHJg2l
@kuratamagohan 効果に関しては着用者本人の感染予防はデンマークの研究で10-20%。劇的な効果はなし。 ただし感染者が拡散させるのを防ぐ効果は大きいってのが通説。 感染者の美容師がマスクを着けて接した濃厚接触者100人以上に誰も移さなかった事例。 https://t.co/Xj57oHJg2l
@LaFlemm47312772 @Ba_Serrano @OSS117_Helsinki S'il te plait, pour une fois, fait au moins semblant de les lire. https://t.co/obzrjdN4bK
@grimtryst @EMac1957 @99_redballoonz @Sandyboots2020 It's a source control measure that works very well. https://t.co/g1Sd1mFpKe
@PaulRoundy1 @JeremyFarrar @EricTopol Your back of the napkin math makes a lot of assumptions and flies in the face of actual studies about how well masks work: https://t.co/xtd8KOnJc1
@MaskBreathable1 @EricTopol @CDCMMWR There are waiting rooms, lecture halls, salons, etc. where you can observe full masking. Below is one example where everyone was wearing a mask. Are there any documented outbreaks in similar settings? https://t.co/g
@scottyd121 @johntwilcox @EricTopol @CDCMMWR The reality is fully masked settings do exist. Here is a setting where everyone was masked. Where are the documented outbreaks in similar settings? https://t.co/gLhOAw3avB
@GlennWa33737801 It could be any of those settings as long as everyone was wearing a mask the whole time. Like a salon. https://t.co/gLhOAw3avB
@LaFlemm47312772 @pamp69 Juste quelques références en faveur du port du masque : -https://t.co/4lIf1c6hw3 -https://t.co/AkTmIFb8k1 -https://t.co/P41N4IleiP -https://t.co/IuN0MBKNze -https://t.co/mkV5Grvcyk -https://t.co/4TdYJ8K3q8 -https://t.co/IlYpwpXg0
@mominbayarea Just for clarification: BOTH the hairdressers wore masks. There wasn't even a control https://t.co/IP4InLTVwO
Absence of Apparent Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from Two Stylists After Exposure at a Hair Salon https://t.co/SFsthmIskf
@Montaigne01 That's my favourite one too! https://t.co/jEZUoo7iC5
@KielnotKiel @Ciccio_87XX @alisat22 @VPrasadMDMPH That's first-hand data that I've seen duplicated with other relatives who were vaccinated - far more pepole than the 2 that the CDC relied on for its "proof" that masks work https://t.co/w65im3y67G
@gabrielmalor @Patterico the CDC’s first published study on masks showed masks were 100% effective. https://t.co/eYZupuXa7K
@CJFG39711118 @anitambyrne @CMOIreland Time for a new computer. https://t.co/3o6qgXMShJ https://t.co/gYsyyW5d0j https://t.co/9Geo0jUerR This is a nice case study: https://t.co/8kELf8xTgG
@helper409 @CureLiberalism1 @c0nc0rdance 7. https://t.co/qeBdi65RYO 8. https://t.co/AVT3IVQv4x 9. https://t.co/L9prL8pWOg 10. https://t.co/jIj8d5u5Y1 11. https://t.co/2ths2Gbj3R Now, please dispute my peer-review, published references or provide your alle
@alexisderoode @koopmanswil @Nieuwsuur >>3. Dát was 2020 de stand v kennis. Daarna geleidelijk verschuiving naar meer nadruk op aerosole route, door meer onderzoek, nieuwe waarnemingen. Belangrijk keerpunt: deze studie uit VS. Juli 2020. https://t.co
@grave_acid @thatsnotmine125 maybe here? https://t.co/aN7X0ifMQf
@drmikehart @birb_k But were they hairdressers? We should only base our policies on hairdressers. https://t.co/AreIoIUGI3
@rwjdingwall @LucyGoBag @whippletom All of what CDC published on masks in the last ~two years has been garbage. As an aside, and not to say it's guarantee of quality or lack of bias, MMWR is not peer-reviewed. One of CDC's early, key articles was the fa
@igotnuthin @dianaberrent Riiiiiight... https://t.co/dabnQNkUtg
@pablogonzalezt @FelipeMiguelBA Yo no soy nadie para "explicar". Solo confío más en aportes científicos que en políticos que acomodan las medidas sanitarias a las encuestas. https://t.co/ptqdkuAchi https://t.co/n7uTFVkstC https://t.co/DDDdDzwfsz https://t
@angrybklynmom @CDCMMWR The Missouri salon study on masking should make everybody dubious of anything the CDC says. A real doozy. https://t.co/mw9U5foVpu
@therealrthorat @Listen49698651 @gregggonsalves You're misrepresenting that pretty hard. A couple quick looks at the title of the report and the limitations section will set you straight. https://t.co/Cp9QhDJ9No They didn't say anything nearly as cut and
@Sup_Chain_Rick @trianglman @MaureenLSFD @HotlineJosh @mkhammer @michelleinbklyn They didn't cherry pick though. They didn't even intentionally create the study. It just randomly occured. It does follow the rules of a double blind randomized trial though.
@AndrewBowdenSm1 @mtylermartin @MARINE52485750 @DrAseemMalhotra The CDC recommended masks in part using a "study" where 2 stylists didn't infect customers. No control group, never tested for asymptomatic infection. The CDC published and used a "study" s
@neontaster https://t.co/eYZupuXa7K this cdc study shows they are 100% effective. wonder if it has ever been replicated?
RT @AbraarKaran: Preparing for an upcoming talk I am giving at Stanford Came across this old publication-- lack of transmission from infec…
RT @AbraarKaran: Preparing for an upcoming talk I am giving at Stanford Came across this old publication-- lack of transmission from infec…
RT @AbraarKaran: Preparing for an upcoming talk I am giving at Stanford Came across this old publication-- lack of transmission from infec…
RT @AbraarKaran: Preparing for an upcoming talk I am giving at Stanford Came across this old publication-- lack of transmission from infec…
RT @AbraarKaran: Preparing for an upcoming talk I am giving at Stanford Came across this old publication-- lack of transmission from infec…
Oldies but goodies.
Preparing for an upcoming talk I am giving at Stanford Came across this old publication-- lack of transmission from infected hair salon workers to clients while wearing face masks May 2020 https://t.co/yLVbP0mdZE
Blow dryer graphics.
@JamesSurowiecki one of the first cdc studies on masks showed masks were extremely effective https://t.co/eYZupuXa7K
@hansel21_ @Kathryn78917961 @TigressEllie @DrHoenderkamp Et alors, voila https://t.co/gGJyAoQAtF
@SenRandPaul @FoxNews Mr Paul- is this what Fauci uses for his insistence of the mask. Where is a study of with or with out https://t.co/03eY9ml6iq
@yukasekiguchi57 【ミズーリ州にある美容院で働く2人の美容師が新型コロナに感染した。 この2人の美容師に濃厚接触したと考えられる139人の客は全員マスクをつけており、それぞれ15分以上この美容師と濃厚暴露していたと考えられたが、誰も新型コロナには感染していなかった。】https://t.co/VFbW6UrGGy
@michaelnorth @ScottAdamsSays I’ll bet a dollar it’s one of these: 1) a study of studies 2) uncontrolled experiment 3) retrospectively chosen time period 4) cherry-picked data CDC based its masking guidelines on two infected masked barbers because their c
@Kent_in_Utah @btbarnes11 @Laceydentist @BravesCoug @RonDC27 @BYU I'm talking about a case study of two hair stylists interacting with clients for ~15 minutes and them not finding cases among their clients. No chili m control group, so attributing it to ma
Check out this idiot
@lsprogress Cloth worked for ALPHA, but you fuckwads ignored that as well.. https://t.co/9MByjaBM1f
RT @DropletsAreFake: @VPrasadMDMPH I think maybe my favorite part of this paper is how this reference is entirely hand–waved away. Really b…
@VPrasadMDMPH I think maybe my favorite part of this paper is how this reference is entirely hand–waved away. Really brilliant bit of writing, if you enjoy finding ways to count low–quality evidence in your favor but discount the same when it's against you
@AgnesWold @SvD Hela avdelningen hade covid och ingen var vaccinerad? Det kan man väl inte dra ngr slutsatser kring, eller? Igen, jag är för vaccinering, vad jag är emot är konstigt dragna slutsatser. Detta är tex ett bra exempel på konstig slutledning. ht
@noz_bert @OglyFederico Here’s your proof that masks work https://t.co/1ZFZRz3uXd
@writehanded @luckyappricot @CoClarified @doctormaxine We are only allowed to accept the “right” science. I seem to remember the CDC and “experts” justifying mask mandates with the following study. With a sample size of TWO people! BTW, it’s discredited
It has been 2 1/2 years since this story came out and I’ve known masks work https://t.co/1ZFZRz3uXd
@noz_bert @RandalRauser Here’s one about the indication from two summers ago that first let me know any mask is better than none https://t.co/1ZFZRz3uXd
@drdeblk @lycaeon55 @mtracey https://t.co/3pSX0jdyhe Right here. On the CDC site. You are completely ignorant of what is science and what constitutes the scientific process. Youre a member of a religious cult. Seek de-programing.
@MinneapolsTruth @farid__jalali Sure I'll watch that. Plz skim this one in mean time. https://t.co/9VMOOcvLKK
@k_urb1 Well, I didn’t wear them for that reason and had studies that showed otherwise, experiments that count particles after exhalation, and the famous case of the hairdressers who did not pass it to any clients while working sick. But they’re definitely
@thor173 Good morning to you! It was early in the pandemic. It’s an easy story to tell, but the stats are ridiculous. Clear example of politics over science. https://t.co/L8Z2lXTo9a
@Fuqial @AliAbunimah @DavidRotous Bruh, THIS is the “study” the CDC used to justify is recommendation for masking. Two damn stylists. This isn’t even a study, none the less an RCT https://t.co/huzuVxwCii
@15poundstogo @HeyTammyBruce @directorblue @reason In his new book, Atlas said that Birx was convinced masks worked after reading the *hairdresser study* 🙄 https://t.co/1jMWFzLalu
@AbsentVote @crabbykitten @SDECoxHealth AbsentVote cite your claims! Masks work! A Spld hair salon proved it in 2020 https://t.co/VT7L5R9byS
@sheeee63660239 @t141421356m @3iQDXqGxaLzMTlL @74el4Un5zLDWevf 【ミズーリ州のにある美容院で働く2人の美容師が新型コロナに感染した。 この2人の美容師に濃厚接触したと考えられる139人の客は全員マスクをつけており、それぞれ15分以上この美容師と濃厚暴露していたと考えられたが、誰も新型コロナには感染していなかった。】https://t.co/VFbW6Ur8R0
https://t.co/P6OyNXxf3A Masks stop COVID transmission!! This study was one of the landmark studies proving masks work! https://t.co/arlGqZGr9F 15 min., facing away from stylists, half them were never even tested, and the non-masked exposure transmission ra
@GovDanMcKee Masks work. https://t.co/2fSF9W1XSV
@BrianCNewberry Masks work. https://t.co/2fSF9W1XSV
@joshtpa @shugckb9 @DrCarleeSimon That article also references https://t.co/itfZcjMqsQ Have you had the chance to look at that?
@fqxixnkHlAd6aHZ @k7yNUeAt25bSOVO @MHLWitter 【ミズーリ州のにある美容院で働く2人の美容師が新型コロナに感染した。 この2人の美容師に濃厚接触したと考えられる139人の客は全員マスクをつけており、それぞれ15分以上この美容師と濃厚暴露していたと考えられたが、誰も新型コロナには感染していなかった。】https://t.co/VFbW6U9xsq
@chrislhayes @maddow From 2020. Hair salon is in Missouri. https://t.co/2fSF9W1XSV