Bombshell Study Exposes Flaws In Louisiana COVID Response
Even with a massive amount of research telling people how incorrect the COVID-19 pandemic response measures across the US were, people still seem to want to go back to them. Now a new, explosive, study that puts the central logic of the COVID response to rest.
A paper published in the medical journal The Lancet Microbe showed that the United State's COVID policies were relatively useless. The study disproved the main point of COVID responses like social distancing, lockdowns, masks, and quarantines. What we had been told early on is that asymptomatic people, or healthy people, were spreading COVID without know it.
The idea that people could be spreading the virus unknowingly was the rational behind social distancing, lockdowns, and mask wearing. Because experts told us all that if even if you weren't sick, you could infect someone else. That is the main discovery in this new medical paper...the results of the study show that people who were not ill did not spread the virus.
This study is one of the most intense that has ever been done on COVID spread. Because this research was a "challenge study", where researchers actually infected people with COVID in order to study them. These participants were infected with the virus, then put into controlled environments, and monitored. Experts at the Imperial College of London conducted the study, and put together the research piece.
The researchers tracked the symptoms, infections emissions, and biological output to find how infectious they were to others. Only 7% of their emissions were infectious prior to their symptoms kicking in. They tracked the emissions behind masks, on surfaces, in the air, and on the subjects bodies.
This means that virtually everything we had been told about lockdowns, social distancing, and quarantines didn't mean anything. Because the amount of emissions that would infect someone else were essentially nonexistent until after the person became ill. Once they started coughing onto others, the infectious emission went up (obviously), but prior to symptoms, the transmission threat was low.
Because this was a "challenge study", the research results are much stronger than modeling, projections, or viral load research. Having actually infected people, inside controlled environments, and the ability to track the infectious material they're actually putting out is some of the most comprehensive research we've seen so far on COVID-19.
Additionally, new mask research confirmed (again) that masking against COVID-19 doesn't provide much, if any, level of protection. An explosive report from Tom Jefferson and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews shows that no level of mask wearing prevented the spread of COVID-19.
The lead researcher here was Tom Jefferson, an epidemiologist at Oxford University, who told journalist Maryanne Demasi:
“no evidence that masks are effective during a pandemic. Makes no difference—none of it. There is just no evidence that [masks] make any difference, full stop.”
This wasn't the first piece of research that shows masks don't stop COVID. There were pieces done specifically in hospital settings, research from prestigious institutions, or even pointing out that any small benefits are likely offset by damage done to the wearer. None of this even includes the research on how masks helped lead to learning loss and speech disorders in school aged children.
With all of this research, and the luxury of hindsight, its becoming increasingly frustrating to see people still pushing these disproven policies. Institutions reimplementing mask policies and social distancing need to seriously consider the damage they may create versus the lack of evidence to support any benefits they may believe in.
Right now, the research points to the only people benefiting from another COVID scare are the shareholders in vaccine makers.