COVID-19 vaccination - masking,

"The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) spent $911 million of taxpayer money on a massive COVID-19 vaccination promotion campaign that lied about masking, vaccines and boosters — and “consistently overstated” the risk of the virus to children, according to a shocking House committee report.

The GOP-led House Energy and Commerce panel released a scathing, 113-page document Wednesday about the most significant public health missteps, fibs and cover-ups from HHS and its subagency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“CDC’s guidance, which the Campaign relied on, went beyond the terms of FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to state, without evidence, that COVID vaccines were highly effective against transmission,” the report states. “This ultimately had a negative impact on vaccine confidence and the CDC’s credibility when proven untrue.”" 

It also states that the CDC “had inconsistent and flawed messaging about the effectiveness of masks,” “consistently overstated the risk of COVID-19 to children” and still “continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccines for all Americans ages six months and older, which has made the United States a global outlier in COVID-19 policy.”

https://nypost.com/2024/10/23/us-news/hhs-spent-911m-on-covid-vaccine-messaging-consistently-overstated-virus-risk-to-kids-damning-house-report-finds/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky had overruled her agency’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in September 2021 and unilaterally approved booster shots without their input.

 

 

*** 

verify its sources and scientific truth of "前幾日，美國眾議院冠狀病毒大流行監督和問責委員會特別小組發布了調查報告《2019冠狀病毒病大流行的行動後回顧：經驗教訓和前進道路》，竟然稱在美國，戴口罩對防範新冠沒有任何作用！

我將對此開展嚴厲的批判。

當然，這是針對美國人的調查，主要的內容是反思和問責美國政府的責任和問題。考慮到其他人種起源於東非大裂穀，而我們這個人種是從山頂洞獨立起源的，跟他們不同文不同種，因此口罩對他們無效，並不能天然地推導出對我們也無效的結論。本文內容僅限於美國的情況，與國內無關，僅供參考。舉報我的，請勿反對毛主席的指示：讓人說話，天塌不下來。

報告：三年口罩，戴了個寂寞

直到現在，國內還有些防疫愛好者將自己嚴實包裹起來，第一裝備當然是口罩。
advertisement

freestar

而美國的研究結果幾乎推翻了世界範圍內絕大部分國家對疫情的判斷。

 

上圖兩條線，橫軸是時間，縱軸分別是從未強製要求佩戴口罩11個州，和其餘強製要求戴口罩的州的感染率，兩條線幾乎是重疊的，即沒有任何區別。

2023年1月的科克倫研究也發現，佩戴任何一種口罩對減少呼吸道疾病的傳播「可能幾乎沒有區別」。該研究回顧了15項試驗，比較了在大流行期間在醫院和社區環境中佩戴外科口罩與不戴口罩以及與N95口罩的結果。結論是，戴口罩的價值約為零。
advertisement

freestar

數字是不會騙人的，我傾向於相信這個結論。

報告特別提到，長期佩戴口罩甚至產生了強烈的副作用。2歲以下的兒童因為口罩阻隔而在語言習得過程遇到障礙。許多戴著口罩的孩子說話更加猶豫，進一步增加了交流中的不安全感。

想想2022年底前，我們漂亮的空姐化身大白穿過國外機場時所迎來的灼熱目光，令人腳底發麻。

有幅漫畫我不敢放出來，一桌大佬吃飯，隻有一人戴口罩抱胸獨坐。
advertisement

freestar

既然口罩沒用，可見「物理隔離」是沒有科學效果的，隻有心理安慰作用，那麽封控居家隔離、保持適當社交距離當然也是無效的。

美國人當時定了個六英尺的社交距離，但這是個拍腦袋的決策，並無科學依據，且同樣導致了嚴重後果。

報告第214頁稱，封鎖來自於對「阻止疾病和拯救生命賦予了無限的價值」，實質上破壞了所有人的正常生活。2024年3月的《自然》研究發現，2019年至2020年間，精神健康障礙增加了22%。

那些實際上受疫情影響較小的人，反而因為封鎖而遭受嚴重的精神痛苦，2019年7月至12月至2021年7月至12月，青少年月非意外死亡人數增加了109%！
advertisement

freestar

而2020年8月的研究發現，40%的美國成年人報告與精神健康或物質作鬥爭。

記得三天一核酸的政策剛出來，我一位堅決支持封控的朋友說，他抑鬱了。

我說我也是，但我隻有10分鍾。因為我馬上想明白了，碰到檢測點就捅一下，等到財力耗完，他們自然收兵。

後來的事實果然如此。
advertisement

freestar

報告第3頁第七條明確寫道：處方不能比疾病更嚴重，比如嚴格和過於廣泛的封鎖，導致可預測的痛苦和可避免的後果。

至於疫苗，在大流行期間，沒有注射疫苗的普通民眾簡直寸步難行。所謂自願也成為強製手段，不斷逼迫民眾必須注射。

報告認為，疫苗護照為未接種疫苗的美國人創造了一種新型的封鎖，是不適當的，政府誇大了疫苗的威力。"
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
您提到的內容主要來自美國眾議院冠狀病毒大流行監督和問責委員會特別小組發布的報告《2019冠狀病毒病大流行的行動後回顧：經驗教訓和前進道路》。 該報告對美國在新冠疫情期間的防疫措施進行了回顧和反思。

關於口罩效用的討論：

報告中提到，有研究顯示，在美國，強製佩戴口罩的州與未強製佩戴口罩的州的感染率差異不大。 此外，2023年1月的科克倫研究回顧了15項試驗，發現佩戴任何一種口罩對減少呼吸道疾病的傳播可能幾乎沒有區別，結論是戴口罩的價值約為零。 
BOTAN WANG

關於封鎖措施的影響：

報告指出，嚴格和過於廣泛的封鎖措施可能導致可預測的痛苦和可避免的後果。 例如，2019年至2020年間，精神健康障礙增加了22%。 此外，青少年非意外死亡人數也有所增加。 
BOTAN WANG

關於疫苗的討論：

報告認為，疫苗護照為未接種疫苗的美國人創造了一種新型的封鎖，可能是不適當的，政府可能誇大了疫苗的威力。 
BOTAN WANG

需要注意的是，這些結論主要基於美國的研究和數據，可能不適用於其他國家或地區。此外，科學研究是不斷發展的，新的證據可能會改變當前的認識。因此，在解讀這些結論時，應結合當地的實際情況和最新的科學研究成果。

源

 

 

You said:
verify the sources and scientific truth of the above Chinese using English sources to counter-argue for 
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
The statements you've referenced suggest that measures such as mask-wearing, lockdowns, and vaccines were ineffective during the COVID-19 pandemic. To provide a balanced perspective, let's examine the scientific evidence regarding these interventions:

1. Mask Effectiveness:

Scientific Evidence Supporting Mask Use:

Reduction in Transmission: A comprehensive review published in Clinical Microbiology Reviews analyzed over 400 studies and found strong evidence that masks and respirators effectively reduce the transmission of respiratory infections like COVID-19. 
PHC OXFORD

Laboratory Findings: Research from the University of Maryland demonstrated that N95 masks can block up to 98% of COVID-19 particles in the breath of infected individuals, indicating high efficacy in preventing viral spread. 
UMD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH

Contrary Findings:

Cochrane Review: A January 2023 Cochrane review assessed multiple studies and concluded that wearing masks might make little or no difference in reducing the spread of respiratory viruses, including COVID-19. However, this review has been critiqued for including studies with low compliance and varying mask types, which could influence the outcomes.
2. Lockdown Measures:

Effectiveness in Reducing Transmission:

Positive Impact: Studies indicate that lockdowns were effective in reducing human mobility and controlling COVID-19 transmission during critical periods. For instance, research published in Scientific Reports found that lockdown measures significantly decreased movement in public spaces, aiding in virus containment. 
NATURE

Economic and Social Costs: While effective in controlling virus spread, lockdowns also had substantial economic and social repercussions, including increased mental health issues and economic downturns. A report from Econofact discusses these trade-offs, highlighting the complexity of implementing such measures. 
ECONOFACT

Studies Questioning Effectiveness:

Minimal Impact Findings: Some analyses suggest that lockdowns had a limited effect on reducing COVID-19 mortality. A meta-analysis by Herby et al. concluded that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average, questioning the efficacy of such stringent measures. 
KRIEGER SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES
3. Vaccine Efficacy:

Effectiveness in Preventing Severe Outcomes:

Clinical Trials and Real-World Data: COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be highly effective in preventing severe illness, hospitalization, and death. Data from various health organizations indicate that vaccinated individuals have a significantly lower risk of severe outcomes compared to unvaccinated individuals.
Concerns and Critiques:

Adverse Events and Overstated Benefits: Reports have emerged criticizing health agencies for overstating vaccine efficacy and underreporting potential side effects. For example, a House report found that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services spent $911 million on a vaccination campaign that allegedly misrepresented data on masking and vaccine effectiveness, potentially undermining public trust. 
NEW YORK POST
Conclusion:

The effectiveness of public health interventions like mask-wearing, lockdowns, and vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic has been the subject of extensive research and debate. While many studies support their efficacy in reducing transmission and preventing severe outcomes, other analyses highlight limitations and unintended consequences. It's essential to consider the context, study design, and evolving nature of scientific evidence when evaluating these measures.

Recent Discussions on COVID-19 Measures and Public Trust
New York Post
HHS spent $911M on COVID vaccine messaging, 'consistently overstated' virus risk to kids, damning House report finds
58 days ago

News.com.au
UK professor rips Aussie Covid 'madness'
26 days ago

Sources