Image 01 Image 03

Biden the Only Leader on Climate Change Call Wearing a Mask

Biden the Only Leader on Climate Change Call Wearing a Mask

Is that mask surgically attached to his face or did his handlers not tell him you cannot transmit the virus through a screen?

Do we need more proof President Joe Biden is virtue signaling by wearing that dang mask all the time?

Biden joined a call with Russian President Joe Biden, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and EU leaders Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel about climate change.

Biden is the only one with a freaking mask because I guess you can transmit it through a computer screen?

Oh, look. The others in the room with him also wore masks. This is so ridiculous.

Then again, if you look in the lower right corner, you’ll see my beloved Italy *literally* missing. I cannot believe these people want us to take them seriously.



Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: a controlled study

Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses

In some quarters, the mask is regarded as a magical talisman that wards off evil spirits. Some people believe it is a means to signal virtue. A mask is a device to hide human expression and deception.

    mark311 in reply to n.n. | April 24, 2021 at 1:37 pm

    Have you actually read what those links state? I’ve already told you they don’t really support your conclusion that masks don’t work in previous posts. Seems like j need to spell it out.

    In reverse order.

    The Cochrane study’s conclusion is “There is a need for large, well‐designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, especially in those most at risk of ARIs. ” because it’s search criteria was from April 2020.

    The second link:

    Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both.

    To assess whether recommending surgical mask use outside the home reduces wearers’ risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a setting where masks were uncommon and not among recommended public health measures.

    Randomized controlled trial (DANMASK-19 [Danish Study to Assess Face Masks for the Protection Against COVID-19 Infection]). ( NCT04337541)

    Denmark, April and May 2020.

    Adults spending more than 3 hours per day outside the home without occupational mask use.

    Encouragement to follow social distancing measures for coronavirus disease 2019, plus either no mask recommendation or a recommendation to wear a mask when outside the home among other persons together with a supply of 50 surgical masks and instructions for proper use.

    The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection in the mask wearer at 1 month by antibody testing, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or hospital diagnosis. The secondary outcome was PCR positivity for other respiratory viruses.

    A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.

    Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others.

    The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.”

    The conclusion in essence is that it wasn’t a particularly good trial but was “compatible with lesser degrees of self protection”. In other words as part of a package of measures it’s useful. No one is expecting it to be some kind of magic bullet, that’s never been how any professional has characterised mask wearing.

    Your first link is in relation to the surgical setting so isn’t really relevant as a preventative measure for air borne viral infections.

    As I’ve sent to you previously in other threads other links with up to date trial and data regarding mask use which explicitly shows the efficy of mask wearing. Perhaps instead of sending the same links you should actually look at the research rather than clearly cherry picking the result youve set your heart on.

      DaveGinOly in reply to mark311. | April 26, 2021 at 12:17 pm

      Facemasks are not only ineffective, they are not necessary when dealing with infected, but asymptomatic, person. Note this was published by the NIH, the outfit for which Dr. Fauxi works.

      Efficacy of facemasks

      The physical properties of medical and non-medical facemasks suggest that facemasks are ineffective to block viral particles due to their difference in scales [16], [17], [25]. According to the current knowledge, the virus SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of 60 nm to 140 nm [nanometers (billionth of a meter)] [16], [17], while medical and non-medical facemasks’ thread diameter ranges from 55 µm to 440 µm [micrometers (one millionth of a meter), which is more than 1000 times larger [25]. Due to the difference in sizes between SARS-CoV-2 diameter and facemasks thread diameter (the virus is 1000 times smaller), SARS-CoV-2 can easily pass through any facemask [25]. In addition, the efficiency filtration rate of facemasks is poor, ranging from 0.7% in non-surgical, cotton-gauze woven mask to 26% in cotton sweeter material [2]. With respect to surgical and N95 medical facemasks, the efficiency filtration rate falls to 15% and 58%, respectively when even small gap between the mask and the face exists [25].

      Clinical scientific evidence challenges further the efficacy of facemasks to block human-to-human transmission or infectivity. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 246 participants [123 (50%) symptomatic)] who were allocated to either wearing or not wearing surgical facemask, assessing viruses transmission including coronavirus [26]. The results of this study showed that among symptomatic individuals (those with fever, cough, sore throat, runny nose ect…) there was no difference between wearing and not wearing facemask for coronavirus droplets transmission of particles of >5 µm. Among asymptomatic individuals, there was no droplets or aerosols coronavirus detected from any participant with or without the mask, suggesting that asymptomatic individuals do not transmit or infect other people [26]. This was further supported by a study on infectivity where 445 asymptomatic individuals were exposed to asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carrier (been positive for SARS-CoV-2) using close contact (shared quarantine space) for a median of 4 to 5 days. The study found that none of the 445 individuals was infected with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by real-time reverse transcription polymerase [27].

      DaveGinOly in reply to mark311. | April 26, 2021 at 12:36 pm

      From the study cited by mark311:

      Although the difference observed was not statistically significant

      How was this published in a scientific journal? Because they managed to squeeze a recommendation for mask-wearing out of results that were “not statistically significant”? Everybody gets a prize these days.

How do we spell LOSER? Mr. shoot a shotgun on the porch joe.

    JOHN B in reply to bear. | April 24, 2021 at 1:24 pm

    The idiotic mask makes people not notice that the other countries show their flags, while the USA flag is not shown by Biden. Hate the USA.

Without the mask, people would notice Biden’s lips aren’t moving.

I thought Rich Little and Frank Gorshin passed away, but SOMEBODY’s doing a spot-on impression of Flatline.

I suspect the reason the puppet-masters have Joe wearing a mask all the time is to hide the odd facial expressions and blank look that are a result of his advanced dementia.

The Friendly Grizzly | April 23, 2021 at 6:07 pm

What a pathetic sight.

There’re more viruses than Covid, you know. There are all kinds of computer viruses he could catch. Can’t be too safe these days.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Indigo Red. | April 26, 2021 at 12:20 pm

    I once had to ship a desktop CPU. To keep the weight, and therefore the cost, down, I deleted all the files from the computer.

rustyshamrock | April 23, 2021 at 6:24 pm

As I recall, the presumptive president signed an EO that everybody in federal buildings were required to wear masks ar all times. PPOTUS lives in a federal building, therefore he should be wearing a mask 24-7. Sleeping, eating, bathing, staring at the ceiling, all should be while wearing.

    henrybowman in reply to rustyshamrock. | April 23, 2021 at 6:45 pm

    Right. I’m surprised more of y’all didn’t remember that. He signed one of the usual Democrat stupid one-size-fits-all orders, then took a crapload of flak over it when he was caught disobeying his own order several times immediately afterward. So he probably realized it was damaging his social credit, and now he has to wear his mask all night while he’s sleeping in the White House. Write stupid orders, win stupid prizes.

      Christopher B in reply to henrybowman. | April 23, 2021 at 10:49 pm

      I assume the WH press briefings are in a federal building so why doesn’t Psaki the press bimbo wear one?

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Christopher B. | April 24, 2021 at 9:30 am

        Good point. Why do we not demand she wear a mask! She is a spreader endangering us ALL!!!!!!! Is she trying to kill the White House press corps and putting everyone in the White House at risk, to include Joe Biden and Anthony Fauci.

        Her refusal to wear a mask in defiance of a federal executive order is insurrection against the government and a direct assaults on our democracy! If anyone dies of COVID in DC, anywhere in the world actually, it’s HER fault. Even if she did not directly transmit the virus, her reckless example inspired someone else to not wear a mask and thus allow transmission of the virus to someone else, so she might as well be directly responsible as a spreader!

        This evil mask denier MUST be made to comply. MUST be! The fake of humanity depends upon it!

      nordic_prince in reply to henrybowman. | April 24, 2021 at 9:16 am

      I don’t think Pedo PuddingBrain realizes anything. That would require cognitive thought.

Truly an utterly profound dipsh*t.

What an embarrassment.

“Biden the only leader on climate change call not wearing a mask”

Headline should be changed to read, “Biden is the only person to attend climate change call who is not a leader.”

Whether he wears a mask or doesn’t wear a mask, a mentally impaired individual who is manipulated to the extent that he has to be told what to say, even to the point where must read off a card most of the time, should not be referred to as a “Leader.”

Biden confirms to world leaders he’s weak and a moron and not to be taken seriously. Not that they didn’t already think that.

This cannot, and will not, end well.

    henrybowman in reply to JHogan. | April 23, 2021 at 7:46 pm

    You know it’s bad when it’s been over three months, and they haven’t had to change the “kick me” sign on his back even once.

Maybe it’s not really Joe Biden behind the mask

Well, why not? Masks have replaced the hammer-and-sickle as the Communist logo.

The world knows the score: Biden is an addled fool, and an easy to manipulate, mildly intelligent slut awaits in wings.

Also no USA Flag….. but then the Dems despise it.

He had to wear a mask, that way no one could see if his lips were moving or a lip reader could not catch it what he said agreed with the words you heard, the puppet masters at work

only thing missing is his aviator sunglasses, then we know we are in “Weekend at Biden’s” mode (weekend at bernie’s)

What the hell happened to people such that they are so easily fooled by politicians and their media lapdogs that wouldn’t know their ass from a hole in the ground?

Everybody is asking the wrong question. What changed between Dec of 2017 and now where a peer reviewed study was published that found that cloth and paper masks are not effective against SARS viruses?

The study specificity found that N95 and medical masks are 95% effective. These are medical masks.

Specifically: “Our analysis confirms the effectiveness of medical masks and respirators against SARS. Disposable, cotton, or paper masks are not recommended.

The confirmed effectiveness of medical masks is crucially important for lower-resource and emergency settings lacking access to N95 respirators. In such cases, single-use medical masks are preferable to cloth masks, for which there is no evidence of protection and which might facilitate transmission of pathogens when used repeatedly without adequate sterilization [8].”

There are reasons why cloth and paper masks are not recommended. First, SARS viruses are anywhere from 7 to 200 nanometers in size while the masks have holes nearly 1000 times larger when properly sealed. Additionally most people with covid aren’t sneezing large droplets that might get stopped by a large cloth mask.

Cloth masks art best are simply a feel good virtue signaling gesture. That doesn’t weigh in the negative effects from long term use.

People should be angry about what politicians are doing.

Here’s the reference on my citation from the 2017 Clinical of Infectious Disease:

    DaveGinOly in reply to Trip. | April 26, 2021 at 12:29 pm

    A more recent paper says the opposite. The study you cited was almost certainly a mechanistic study. The study cited in the paper is an RCT (randomized clinical trial), the gold standard for medical studies.

    See my comment above with two paragraphs from the paper. Note the efficiency of cloth and medical masks (very low, compared to N95s at 58% effective)(mechanistic), and note the RCT (gold standard) showing mask ineffectiveness in a test of actual transmission in a clinical setting.

Looks like somebody got baked recently, and amused himself by hitting every downthumb on the page. At 25¢ a thumb, that’s nearly enough for another nickelbag. Ante up, George!