Florida's Top Doctor Refuses Mask, Is told To Leave Meeting

I'm curious to see if she follows all the mask show stuff all the time or only when she can score political points.
Guess you will have to follow her around, but not for a while, as she is getting ready to start chemo for her breast cancer. That's going to knock the crap out of her, and her immune system. Don't get too close, she might puke all over you. Chemo can get gross.
 
So the man asks for a meeting with the senator. He goes to her office and refuses to put on a mask when asked to do so.

It was her office. Not his.

She has breast cancer so she has a weakened immune system and is more susceptible to serious complications or even death from the virus.

Yet he refused to put on a lousy mask for a meeting he asked her to have in her office.

So now a breast cancer patient can't even ask a person put on a mask in their office.

The anti mask people don't have a right to go to someone else's work space and put that person's life in jeopardy.

I would have asked him to leave too.


Branch Covidians. Those guys freak me out. Cult of the mask and all that.
 
This Democrat state senator's imperial wrath is hot.

I think moar elected officials should throw their constituents out of their offices because power trip/s.
Sometime with proper reason, they absolutely should. Who knows if she will want to be a state Senator again or not. We had one, a good one and a republican, actually. He got tired of it and what people thought they should be able to expect of him as a public official. He refused to run again, though he had been up there for years, done a good job and would have been a shoe in for another term.
 
Where...on youtube QAnon videos?
Actually, if you go to the CDC's website, the studies are there.

They have been there since the fifties. . . they make a caveat for COVID-19, saying something like, although there is no data that suggest masking makes any difference on the transmission of influenza, they don't have any evidence that they don't necessarily work for COVID. But this? Is clearly a political interjection, and not based on science. For in reality, a respiratory virus is a respiratory virus. There is absolutely NO REASON to believe that masking would have any different mechanism on COVID, if it is not proven to be efficacious in double blind studies for influenza.

And yet? Even now, ON TOP OF THAT, We now have empirical studies, in the form of different numbers of various mask mandates and different numbers of mask usages rates, in both Europe, and N. America, from the first wave, as a mitigation strategy, among different states and nations.

. . . and the results? THERE ARE NO STATISTICAL DIFFERENCES between nations and states that mandated their use, and ones that did not.

These are the facts.

Sorry if they don't match your political opinions.


Claiming that masking works, as a mitigation strategy? IS A LIE, it is not supported either by the majority of double blind studies conducted since the fifties, nor by clinical and empirical studies since that time either.
 
Last edited:
So the man asks for a meeting with the senator. He goes to her office and refuses to put on a mask when asked to do so.

It was her office. Not his.

She has breast cancer so she has a weakened immune system and is more susceptible to serious complications or even death from the virus.

Yet he refused to put on a lousy mask for a meeting he asked her to have in her office.

So now a breast cancer patient can't even ask a person put on a mask in their office.

The anti mask people don't have a right to go to someone else's work space and put that person's life in jeopardy.

I would have asked him to leave too.

Is she vaccinated? Did she have a mask on?

If she is that immune compromised she shouldn’t be taking meetings at all. Walking through the halls of congress or flying to DC is a far greater risk than a meeting with one guy.

Let’s all just wait for the pictures of her at dinners out and loading up on a plane to go to DC. They’re coming.
 
The doctor should have put the mask on...

...while bowing to the imperial Democrat state senator.

Otherwise, it's insurrection! :eek:
Not an insurrection. He didn't start breaking things in her Senate office and trying to occupy the place. He just got the heck out, as he knew, that meeting was over, and he didn't get whatever it was he wanted.
 
Actually, if you go to the CDC's website, the studies are there.

They have been there since the fifties. . . they make a caveat for COVID-19, saying something like, although there is no data that suggest masking makes any difference on the transmission of influenza, they don't have any evidence that they don't necessarily work for COVID. But this? Is clearly a political interjection, and not based on science. For in reality, a respiratory virus is a respiratory virus. There is absolutely NO REASON to believe that masking would have any different mechanism on COVID, if it is not proven to be efficacious in double blind studies for influenza.

And yet? Even now, ON TOP OF THAT, We now have empirical studies, in the form of different numbers of various mask mandates and different numbers of mask usages rates, in both Europe, and N. America, from the first wave, as a mitigation strategy, among different states and nations.

. . . and the results? THERE ARE NO STATISTICAL DIFFERENCES between nations and states that mandated their use, and ones that did not.

These are the facts.

Sorry if they don't match your political opinions.


Claiming that masking works, as a mitigation strategy? IS A LIE, it is not supported either by the majority of double blind studies conducted since the fifties, nor by clinical and empirical studies since that time either.

ostherholm openly admits this too

fauci did at the start

these fuckers are all in denial
 
Sometime with proper reason, they absolutely should. Who knows if she will want to be a state Senator again or not. We had one, a good one and a republican, actually. He got tired of it and what people thought they should be able to expect of him as a public official. He refused to run again, though he had been up there for years, done a good job and would have been a shoe in for another term.
I consider you a generally reasonable person, so we can agree to disagree in this case.
 
One that has studied that science behind the effectiveness of masking a healthy individual.


You mean trump's head of the CDC?

Dr Redfield?

The man who said a mask is the best defense from the virus?

 
Guess you will have to follow her around, but not for a while, as she is getting ready to start chemo for her breast cancer. That's going to knock the crap out of her, and her immune system. Don't get too close, she might puke all over you. Chemo can get gross.

So is she on Chemo, or about to start it? If she hasn't started it yet why would the story claim her immune system is compromised?
 
You mean trump's head of the CDC?

Dr Redfield?

The man who said a mask is the best defense from the virus?



He didn't say it was the best defense he said it was better than the vaccine....lol

The best defense is living in a bubble

That very much comes off as shitting on the vaccine more than pushing masks. He's basically saying vaccines are worthless hahahaha

0 reliability in his mind
 
Actually, if you go to the CDC's website, the studies are there.

They have been there since the fifties. . . they make a caveat for COVID-19, saying something like, although there is no data that suggest masking makes any difference on the transmission of influenza, they don't have any evidence that they don't necessarily work for COVID. But this? Is clearly a political interjection, and not based on science. For in reality, a respiratory virus is a respiratory virus. There is absolutely NO REASON to believe that masking would have any different mechanism on COVID, if it is not proven to be efficacious in double blind studies for influenza.

And yet? Even now, ON TOP OF THAT, We now have empirical studies, in the form of different numbers of various mask mandates and different numbers of mask usages rates, in both Europe, and N. America, from the first wave, as a mitigation strategy, among different states and nations.

. . . and the results? THERE ARE NO STATISTICAL DIFFERENCES between nations and states that mandated their use, and ones that did not.

These are the facts.

Sorry if they don't match your political opinions.


Claiming that masking works, as a mitigation strategy? IS A LIE, it is not supported either by the majority of double blind studies conducted since the fifties, nor by clinical and empirical studies since that time either.
Yup.
 
So the man asks for a meeting with the senator. He goes to her office and refuses to put on a mask when asked to do so.

It was her office. Not his.

She has breast cancer so she has a weakened immune system and is more susceptible to serious complications or even death from the virus.

Yet he refused to put on a lousy mask for a meeting he asked her to have in her office.

So now a breast cancer patient can't even ask a person put on a mask in their office.

The anti mask people don't have a right to go to someone else's work space and put that person's life in jeopardy.

I would have asked him to leave too.



Was he sick?

.
 

Source Control to Block Exhaled Virus​

Multi-layer cloth masks block release of exhaled respiratory particles into the environment,3-6 along with the microorganisms these particles carry.7,8 Cloth masks not only effectively block most large droplets (i.e., 20-30 microns and larger)9 but they can also block the exhalation of fine droplets and particles (also often referred to as aerosols) smaller than 10 microns ;3,5 which increase in number with the volume of speech10-12 and specific types of phonation.13 Multi-layer cloth masks can both block up to 50-70% of these fine droplets and particles3,14 and limit the forward spread of those that are not captured.5,6,15,16 Upwards of 80% blockage has been achieved in human experiments that have measured blocking of all respiratory droplets,4 with cloth masks in some studies performing on par with surgical masks as barriers for source control.3,9,14

Filtration for Wearer Protection​

Studies demonstrate that cloth mask materials can also reduce wearers’ exposure to infectious droplets through filtration, including filtration of fine droplets and particles less than 10 microns. The relative filtration effectiveness of various masks has varied widely across studies, in large part due to variation in experimental design and particle sizes analyzed. Multiple layers of cloth with higher thread counts have demonstrated superior performance compared to single layers of cloth with lower thread counts, in some cases filtering nearly 50% of fine particles less than 1 micron .14,17-29 Some materials (e.g., polypropylene) may enhance filtering effectiveness by generating triboelectric charge (a form of static electricity) that enhances capture of charged particles18,30 while others (e.g., silk) may help repel moist droplets31 and reduce fabric wetting and thus maintain breathability and comfort. In addition to the number of layers and choice of materials, other techniques can improve wearer protection by improving fit and thereby filtration capacity. Examples include but are not limited to mask fitters, knotting-and-tucking the ear loops of medical procedures masks, using a cloth mask placed over a medical procedure mask, and nylon hosiery sleeves.31-35

Top of Page

Human Studies of Masking and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission​

Data regarding the “real-world” effectiveness of community masking are limited to observational and epidemiological studies.

  • An investigation of a high-exposure event, in which 2 symptomatically ill hair stylists interacted for an average of 15 minutes with each of 139 clients during an 8-day period, found that none of the 67 clients who subsequently consented to an interview and testing developed infection. The stylists and all clients universally wore masks in the salon as required by local ordinance and company policy at the time.36
  • In a study of 124 Beijing households with > 1 laboratory-confirmed case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, mask use by the index patient and family contacts before the index patient developed symptoms reduced secondary transmission within the households by 79%.37
  • A retrospective case-control study from Thailand documented that, among more than 1,000 persons interviewed as part of contact tracing investigations, those who reported having always worn a mask during high-risk exposures experienced a greater than 70% reduced risk of acquiring infection compared with persons who did not wear masks under these circumstances.38
  • A study of an outbreak aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, an environment notable for congregate living quarters and close working environments, found that use of face coverings on-board was associated with a 70% reduced risk.39
  • Investigations involving infected passengers aboard flights longer than 10 hours strongly suggest that masking prevented in-flight transmissions, as demonstrated by the absence of infection developing in other passengers and crew in the 14 days following exposure.40,41
At least ten studies have confirmed the benefit of universal masking in community level analyses: in a unified hospital system,42 a German city,43 two U.S. states,44, 45 a panel of 15 U.S. states and Washington, D.C.,46, 47 as well as both Canada48 and the U.S. 49-51 nationally. Each analysis demonstrated that, following directives from organizational and political leadership for universal masking, new infections fell significantly. Two of these studies46, 47 and an additional analysis of data from 200 countries that included the U.S.51 also demonstrated reductions in mortality. Another 10-site study showed reductions in hospitalization growth rates following mask mandate implementation 49. A separate series of cross-sectional surveys in the U.S. suggested that a 10% increase in self-reported mask wearing tripled the likelihood of stopping community transmission.53 An economic analysis using U.S. data found that, given these effects, increasing universal masking by 15% could prevent the need for lockdowns and reduce associated losses of up to $1 trillion or about 5% of gross domestic product.47

Actually, if you go to the CDC's website, the studies are there.

I did

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.
www.cdc.gov
www.cdc.gov
 
There oughta be a law!

He should have his hands surgically removed for refusing to follow the orders of a petty Democrat martinet!!!

Maybe this heroic Democrat lady can introduce a bill to this effect. :)
Or maybe a doctor with no common sense or compassion shouldn't be a doctor in the first place.
 
So is she on Chemo, or about to start it? If she hasn't started it yet why would the story claim her immune system is compromised?
Said she was starting in 2 or 3 days. That means she just got the diagnosis in the last few days. It is or can be some scary sh#t. PJ had it. That said, they told me if infected, I could show symptoms within 3 1/2 to 10 days. If not symptomatic by then, probably in the clear, but the average being 4-6 days. You don't want to catch in on Monday and start getting symptomatic on Friday after starting chemo on Thursday or Friday, as the chemo screws your immune system. I kind of suspect if over a certain age, you developed Covid before chemo, they might put off the chemo, to avoid killing you. If you start chemo, then develop Covid, you might be in so serious sh#t. Think of Colin Powell. He was being treated for a cancer of his blood plasma which is where the antibodies are made and carried. He had taken the vaccine months ago, but due to the cancer and the treatment, his immune system was not able to resist the covid infection, and it caused complications that killed him.
 
So is she on Chemo, or about to start it? If she hasn't started it yet why would the story claim her immune system is compromised? If she is on chemo or about to start it that means she has Cancer, which also compromises ones'. immune system.
 
If she is on chemo or starting chemo that means she has cancer; cancer also affects ones' immune system. I know a woman who was on chemotherapy and had zero antibodies so she got the booster shot 2 months ago.
 
Sometime with proper reason, they absolutely should. Who knows if she will want to be a state Senator again or not. We had one, a good one and a republican, actually. He got tired of it and what people thought they should be able to expect of him as a public official. He refused to run again, though he had been up there for years, done a good job and would have been a shoe in for another term.
Sounds like he was an a****** who didn't care about his constituency.
 

Forum List

Back
Top