I'd love to talk to her, actually.

The cure shouldn't be worse than the virus and for healthy people under the age of 60 it seems to be.

You and I have different interpretations on the definition of the word "worse". I'd rather have a tiny minority of people faint than have a tiny minority of people die, no matter the age group of the people affected.

This virus is not a danger to healthy people under the age of 60 and the lockdowns and vaccine seem to be worse than just getting the virus.

The lockdowns didn’t help lower the number of infected in California and they have the strictest lockdown in our country alongside NY. Texas is doing better then both and we are still up there in infections

And masks don’t help, they actually hurt you. We as humans aren’t built to breath on through fabric. Everyday you go outside you breath little bit of harmful substances that your body slowly grows immune to. If you cover your month your just preventing your body from releasing toxic waste.

Please post a link to a formal study or research result that agrees with your claim, or else this is just meaningless conjecture.

Didn’t know I had to post a link to common sense but I’ll get you on my break

How is it common sense? There are literally dozens of formal studies in the past few months that completely, unanimously disagree with you. Making a personal conclusion and calling it "common sense" is not knowledge; that's arrogance.

And, unlike you, I *have* posted links to research papers that corroborate my claim. I've done it before, and I'll do it again right now:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html

oh really KTB its not common sense that destroying peoples livelihood is horrible

Here is a brief summary of the conclusions found by said studies. Notice that every single claim made on this page is backed up with a citation at the bottom of the page, including links to papers going into excruciating detail on how each study was conducted, including the methods of how the research was conducted.

You're free to criticize the methods described, but to just say "nah it's common sense" is an invalid rebuttal.

Did I not say I’ll get you a link on my break? are you that impatient?

is that from the same cdc that told people not to wear a mask?

I'm just criticizing your statement about it being common sense, I understand you're busy at the moment.

God damn 😂 the cdc has been going back on their word this whole year KTB

First the day lockdowns and mask work, then they change their minds, then they go back to saying it works and then change their minds again

Uh... read my message again, maybe? The CDC themselves aren't the ones who conducted those studies, the CDC page I linked is just an archive of links to actual studies conducted by third-party research institutions that are unaffiliated with the CDC directly.

Additionally, I don't see why it matters if they backpedaled a few times. That's just how science works: we advise the public based on what we currently know, and if enough studies contradict our current knowledge, then we update what's being advised to the public based on the new knowledge. It would be far more suspicious if the CDC was giving the same advice that it was back then. *That* would be bad science.

It's also how knowledge in general works. You shouldn't stick with old knowledge when new evidence is contradictory.

I'm saying the lockdowns have been worse than the virus for almost the entire population.

655,000 Americans die from heart dieses every year why don't we make a big deal out of that.

Because shutting down non-essential businesses won't prevent heart disease?

This whole pandemic has been almost completely political.

okay why don't we just shut down every unhealthy restaurant?

That would take away people's freedoms!

What if I want to get heart disease!

EXACTLY

There is inherent danger in life and destroying millions of small businesses isn't worth it to combat a virus with an extremally low death rate like covid.

I understand what you're saying, but the reason why your comparison is not very good is because there's an element of choice involved with most other **preventable** illnesses. If I decide to increase my risk of a heart attack by going to McDonald's, that's something that will affect me alone. If I think I may have Covid and I go to the store, suddenly other innocent, unknowing people around me are at risk despite that not being what they signed up for. It's unfair. There's a world of difference between that and your heart disease analogy.

What about when the swine flu hit us? No one issued lockdowns or told us to wear masks yet the swine flu infected 30 times as many people as covid has? I want to know what you think of that

If swine flu had the same death rate as covid, we would have had millions dead, under Obama and Biden

If you look at the total number of Swine Flu cases, then yeah, there were more Flu cases. On the other hand, **total** cases is not really what mattered when the Covid panic started. At the time the *lockdowns* started, Covid had only been a thing for a couple months, and had already infected and killed far more people than the Swine Flu had killed during *its* first couple months.

The claim that the Swine Flu was far worse than Covid is a common claim, but it's fallacious because it's entirely based on an intellectually dishonest data comparison, comparing the total number of Swine Flu cases over the course of the year to the number of Covid cases over the course of a few months.

Just a question, what masks do you think work the best KTB

@K.T.B. getting heart disease is a personal choice just like going out during corona virus.

@K.T.B. hold up but I thought you stayed informed did you not know about the vaccine causing facial paralysis

@swiggityswooty oh yeah btw vaccine causes facial paralysis

Yeah I saw that, and it’s unfortunately common with vaccine so far