TBR
-
Posts
763 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by TBR
-
-
1 hour ago, Bison Dan said:
So how effective? 90% - 50% - 10%? I agree that they are effective in the macro droplets but do little for the micro droplets ie aerosolized spread. How else can anyone explain the spread in LCF's and the state of MN. The experts and models have been so wrong and they are hanging their hat on masks as they don't really know what to do. Yes mask help but it's not the answer. The virus will always be with us and everyone at one time will be exposed to it.
The Mayo Clinic says masks are critically important reducing spread of 0.2 micron sized (aerosol) particles. See link.
-
1 hour ago, Bison Dan said:
So how effective? 90% - 50% - 10%? I agree that they are effective in the macro droplets but do little for the micro droplets ie aerosolized spread. How else can anyone explain the spread in LCF's and the state of MN. The experts and models have been so wrong and they are hanging their hat on masks as they don't really know what to do. Yes mask help but it's not the answer. The virus will always be with us and everyone at one time will be exposed to it.
-
2 hours ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:
there are videos of this small guy named fauci that said at the beginning of this back in february NOT to wear masks....interesting.
but science
Yes...because they were in short supply and even front line medical workers were having difficulty getting them. Context is important...
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Websites of both the Mayo Clinic and Johns Hopkins University state that wearing masks effectively limits transmission of the virus responsible for covid19. Who on this forum can speak more authoritatively than these institutions, and what are their credentials?
-
1
-
4
-
The helmet color was changed from white to gray two or three years earlier than 1971 which is the conversion year indicated in the illustration above. I distinctly remember the gray helmets at a game I attended somewhere around "68 or "69 when I was in high school.
-
5 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:
Can’t wait to see the data on these masks and how effective they will be. Staying Covid negative will be a competitive advantage for teams this year.
Masks won't do much for the team wearing them if the other team isn't wearing them. I expect masks will be mandated by the league or by NCAA
-
2
-
-
Ok thanks
-
50 minutes ago, Dustin said:
I’m assuming that the move to MVFC has no effect on Midco’s right to televise home games?
Well I'm asking about television coverage relevant to those of us that don't live in the Midco broadcast footprint which in my case is Colorado. Not sure I'd assume Midco still has broadcast rights for the home games. Hopefully someone in the know will provide clarification.
-
So...I'm assuming the MVFC games including UND home games will be on espn+ , espn3, and espn2. Does that sound about right?
-
2 hours ago, Siouxphan27 said:
Yes, he is. Trump was referring to the media hysteria over the coronavirus. So was Hannity.
In that clip you refer to, Hannity starts by saying he doesn’t like the way the mainstream media is deliberately trying to scare people. He then laid out the info available at the time regarding the age and type of people most vulnerable to the coronavirus, and what percentage of those infected (1%)might die. He then followed those stats with his comment about yeah, so let’s scare the living hell out of people with this new hoax.
The ‘hoax’ he refers to is not the virus. The ‘hoax’ is the treatment of the virus by the media because of who is in office.
There's nothing in the Hannity segment under consideration to support your contention, as any objective observer can see. Indeed, the context of the discussion is whether the threat of the virus is exaggerated. There's zero content at all concerning whether Trump called the virus a hoax. Hannity explicitly refers to the virus itself as a hoax.
-
5 hours ago, Siouxphan27 said:
Wrong again. Hannity was referring to the "new hoax" Trump described in his rally speech in South Carolina I believe it was, at the end of February. You know, the one we've been talking about on here ad nauseum where the left spun Trump's words, and claimed he called the corona virus itself, a hoax.
Thanks for posting; this article is yet another perfect example of the left spinning a story, and then spinning comments made about that story. Hopefully some start to see the light; although I doubt it.
https://www.vox.com/2020/3/20/21186727/hannity-coronavirus-coverage-fox-news
Take a look at the second video. Hannity is not talking about what Trump said.
-
-
21 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said:
The side show is CNN having Sean Penn interviewed for his expert advice on fighting global viral pandemics.
No. Sean Hannity called the coronavirus a hoax a short time ago. Now he is claiming he never called it a hoax. That type of reversal epitomizes side show. Those of you that parroted Fox News, which called the pandemic an attempt by the so called liberal media to impeach Trump, need to hang your heads in shame.
-
Restricting travel from abroad was an appropriate move. But if there is any evidence that it would ever do anything other than temporarily delay the exponential rise in covid19 cases I have yet to see it. The issue of international travel restictions by all appearances is not much more than a side show.
-
47 minutes ago, MafiaMan said:
I started feeling sick on Monday with what I perceived to be influenza and have been at home since then. Must have had 20 friends and co-workers suggest that I immediately go get tested for COVID-19. Shaking my head...
I hope you feel better soon
-
2 minutes ago, yzerman19 said:
I don’t disagree that it would be incredibly useful for data analysis. The practical application of testing the universe to learn things that I believe we all know intuitively i.e it’s a highly contagious bug that is probably going to get everyone sick at some point in their lives however is moot in my opinion. Unless you are talking full blown Marshall law containment.
Well, I wasn't referencing testing for what we already know. I was alluding to gaining insight into details of the virus that we don't know.
-
I don't have a background in medicine, but I do have a background in data analysis in other scientific field. I've seen the suggestion that the significance of testing for coronavirus has been overblown. The suggestion was made in the context of a discussion of the lack of testing capacity, especially in the initial phase of the pandemic. What any experienced data analyst knows is that data analysis often leads to insights that were not anticipated prior to the analysis. Indeed, inductive reasoning is commonly underappreciated.
-
3 hours ago, MafiaMan said:
CNN interviewed Cuomo the other night - you could actually see the disappointment on her face when Cuomo said that he had a good conversation with Trump regarding how things were going in New York.
Either the CNN interviewer was disappointed as you say or you saw in her face what you wanted to see. Could be either one.
-
3 hours ago, Siouxphan27 said:
Lol. The lengths some people will go to to avoid admitting they were wrong Unbelievable.
Show me where I've been wrong.
-
12 hours ago, Siouxphan27 said:
I've finally done what I should have done a few days ago when I was first called an idiot for daring to spread the truth on the internet. Here's the entire speech. It's impossible to find a short clip of what Trump actually said, because the main stream media has edited them all to convince their followers that Trump called corona virus a hoax. Starting at the 10 minute mark, listen for about a minute of the speech. Anyone capable of reading and comprehension above a third grade level will clearly understand what he said.
And to anyone so biased due to TDS; don't bother listening to the speech, and keep claiming you know what you're talking about while the rest of us laugh at your ignorance.
Trump didn't directly call the coronavirus a hoax. He refered to Democratic criticism to his early response to the virus a hoax. Given the disconnection between Trump and the recommendations of the chief epidemiologist in his own administration, it's not a stretch at all to say Trump's downplaying of the seriousness of the virus was unwarranted. Splitting hairs between saying the significance of something is improperly minimized and calling it a hoax is also unjustified.
-
3 hours ago, Oxbow6 said:
One would think with all the "insiders" on this thread someone would know something on Wanzek but obviously that insider info only relates to the playoff bidding process but I digress.
That right there is funny!
-
Now I am arguably a moron who follows his alma mater's football team for fun rather than as an intellectual pursuit. But even I understand the difference between bidding and auctioning. And I wouldn't be at all shocked if there are those in the Nicholls fan base that are questioning why they bid so "unnecessarily " high.
-
Hopefully the guest accommodations will run our guys the "wrong" way. Being referred to as the Bison (could happen)wouldn't hurt either .
-
59 minutes ago, Boogieman said:
ESPN3
Well then I'm hoping it will also be on ESPN+, otherwise I'll have to find a sympathetic sports bar.
Dumpster fire
in Football
Posted
The reference was to masks specifically manufactured for medical purposes. Armpit sweat stained t-shirts did not fit that bill.