Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Blabbering about "the science" that says you can get covid from breathing the air at your local supermarket. In all that time, would you think that maybe an actual "scientist" would decide to, you know, actually do experiments to discover if there is any covid in the (shared) air we breathe? Interestingly enough, there have been a few. So why do you suppose we haven't heard of any of these experiments from the mainstream media that has been pushing covid fear porn 24/7 throughout?
If you guessed "because they couldn't find any evidence of viable virus in them" - go to the head of the class. Surprise - the "science" behind masking isn't as "settled" as you are told by the techno-elites who are now in full control of every aspect of our lives, thanks to the left-wing maskscist movement. Yes, they are either that evil or stupid - your call.
The "evidence" they always point to for "proof" of "airborne" transmission is anecdotal evidence, such as choir practice or church service, where it is entirely possible the infected people either ate (or drank) something that could have been prepared by an infected person, or touched each other in some way (such as clasping hands) which then led ingestion of the virus by a healthy person, who ended up infected.
The few actual scientific studies that have made the light of day (if you can call totally ignored by the press and buried in academic papers on obscure web sites "light of day") were done in health care settings (hospitals and nursing homes) and one also included readings from a prison. All but one were "unable to find viable virus" in any of their samples. The one that claims it did used a PCR test with a (ridiculous) 45 cycle standard that amphlifies the virus particles in a way that I might suggest is "grotesque" over kill.
What I find fascinating is that one of these studies said the highest concentration of airborne (non-viable) virus RNA they found was around the nurses' station, which may (or may not) be due to them breathing through masks saturated with covid virus particles. That's hard to say without a deeper dive, but suffice it to (safely) say that it's not because they are carrying the virus (at least not internally). It could also simply be the virus "off-gassing" from their clothes.
Which brings me to the experiments that are touted as "proving" the airborne transmissability of covid virus - which involve placing animals in cages and pumping air from one cage to the other via ducts. First of all, if there is some possibility of passing the virus from one person's exhale to another's inhale - putting them side by side and pumping air directly from the one's space to the other's for 12 hours straight, well, lets just say I'm not completely ruling out that, under certain circumstances, the virus can be inhaled in an infectuous state. But you aren't forced to breathe another's exhalings in a confined space for hours on end (except, of course, in your home where, lets face it, no one is wearing masks). Interestingly, even the ferret experiment admitted that they couldn't actually prove that the route of transmission was "airborne" virus, and that it might simply have been the case that the virus particles (fomites) traveled through the duct and landed on the uninfected ferret's fur, which was then ingested through "self grooming."
So, unless you are licking your clothes when you get home from the grocery store, the chances of you getting covid merely by passing by an infected person, even in a confined space, approaches zero. Remember that the next time one of these "maskholes" claims they "saved your life" by making you wear a mask. Always keep in mind that the highest concentration of (non-viable) airborne covid RNA the scientists found was near the nurses station, where they were all (presumably) wearing the damn masks!
Oh, and a coda - there was an announcement made back in February of a study that was going to be doing the same sort of air sampling in shopping malls, grocery stores and other (public) common areas. Not a damn word since about this study, and one at this point should wonder why - is it because it (like the medical facility studies) found exactly zero evidence of infectious material in any of their air samples? MMmmmmmmm, could be...
If you guessed "because they couldn't find any evidence of viable virus in them" - go to the head of the class. Surprise - the "science" behind masking isn't as "settled" as you are told by the techno-elites who are now in full control of every aspect of our lives, thanks to the left-wing maskscist movement. Yes, they are either that evil or stupid - your call.
The "evidence" they always point to for "proof" of "airborne" transmission is anecdotal evidence, such as choir practice or church service, where it is entirely possible the infected people either ate (or drank) something that could have been prepared by an infected person, or touched each other in some way (such as clasping hands) which then led ingestion of the virus by a healthy person, who ended up infected.
The few actual scientific studies that have made the light of day (if you can call totally ignored by the press and buried in academic papers on obscure web sites "light of day") were done in health care settings (hospitals and nursing homes) and one also included readings from a prison. All but one were "unable to find viable virus" in any of their samples. The one that claims it did used a PCR test with a (ridiculous) 45 cycle standard that amphlifies the virus particles in a way that I might suggest is "grotesque" over kill.
What I find fascinating is that one of these studies said the highest concentration of airborne (non-viable) virus RNA they found was around the nurses' station, which may (or may not) be due to them breathing through masks saturated with covid virus particles. That's hard to say without a deeper dive, but suffice it to (safely) say that it's not because they are carrying the virus (at least not internally). It could also simply be the virus "off-gassing" from their clothes.
Which brings me to the experiments that are touted as "proving" the airborne transmissability of covid virus - which involve placing animals in cages and pumping air from one cage to the other via ducts. First of all, if there is some possibility of passing the virus from one person's exhale to another's inhale - putting them side by side and pumping air directly from the one's space to the other's for 12 hours straight, well, lets just say I'm not completely ruling out that, under certain circumstances, the virus can be inhaled in an infectuous state. But you aren't forced to breathe another's exhalings in a confined space for hours on end (except, of course, in your home where, lets face it, no one is wearing masks). Interestingly, even the ferret experiment admitted that they couldn't actually prove that the route of transmission was "airborne" virus, and that it might simply have been the case that the virus particles (fomites) traveled through the duct and landed on the uninfected ferret's fur, which was then ingested through "self grooming."
So, unless you are licking your clothes when you get home from the grocery store, the chances of you getting covid merely by passing by an infected person, even in a confined space, approaches zero. Remember that the next time one of these "maskholes" claims they "saved your life" by making you wear a mask. Always keep in mind that the highest concentration of (non-viable) airborne covid RNA the scientists found was near the nurses station, where they were all (presumably) wearing the damn masks!
Oh, and a coda - there was an announcement made back in February of a study that was going to be doing the same sort of air sampling in shopping malls, grocery stores and other (public) common areas. Not a damn word since about this study, and one at this point should wonder why - is it because it (like the medical facility studies) found exactly zero evidence of infectious material in any of their air samples? MMmmmmmmm, could be...