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 "前几日，美国众议院冠状病毒大流行监督和问责委员会特别小组发布了调查报告《2019冠状病毒病大流行的行动后回顾：经验教训和前进道路》，竟然称在美国，戴口罩对防范新冠没有任何作用！

我将对此开展严厉的批判。

当然，这是针对美国人的调查，主要的内容是反思和问责美国政府的责任和问题。考虑到其他人种起源于东非大裂谷，而我们这个人种是从山顶洞独立起源的，跟他们不同文不同种，因此口罩对他们无效，并不能天然地推导出对我们也无效的结论。本文内容仅限于美国的情况，与国内无关，仅供参考。举报我的，请勿反对毛主席的指示：让人说话，天塌不下来。

报告：三年口罩，戴了个寂寞

直到现在，国内还有些防疫爱好者将自己严实包裹起来，第一装备当然是口罩。
advertisement

freestar

而美国的研究结果几乎推翻了世界范围内绝大部分国家对疫情的判断。

 

上图两条线，横轴是时间，纵轴分别是从未强制要求佩戴口罩11个州，和其余强制要求戴口罩的州的感染率，两条线几乎是重叠的，即没有任何区别。

2023年1月的科克伦研究也发现，佩戴任何一种口罩对减少呼吸道疾病的传播「可能几乎没有区别」。该研究回顾了15项试验，比较了在大流行期间在医院和社区环境中佩戴外科口罩与不戴口罩以及与N95口罩的结果。结论是，戴口罩的价值约为零。
advertisement

freestar

数字是不会骗人的，我倾向于相信这个结论。

报告特别提到，长期佩戴口罩甚至产生了强烈的副作用。2岁以下的儿童因为口罩阻隔而在语言习得过程遇到障碍。许多戴着口罩的孩子说话更加犹豫，进一步增加了交流中的不安全感。

想想2022年底前，我们漂亮的空姐化身大白穿过国外机场时所迎来的灼热目光，令人脚底发麻。

有幅漫画我不敢放出来，一桌大佬吃饭，只有一人戴口罩抱胸独坐。
advertisement

freestar

既然口罩没用，可见「物理隔离」是没有科学效果的，只有心理安慰作用，那么封控居家隔离、保持适当社交距离当然也是无效的。

美国人当时定了个六英尺的社交距离，但这是个拍脑袋的决策，并无科学依据，且同样导致了严重后果。

报告第214页称，封锁来自于对「阻止疾病和拯救生命赋予了无限的价值」，实质上破坏了所有人的正常生活。2024年3月的《自然》研究发现，2019年至2020年间，精神健康障碍增加了22%。

那些实际上受疫情影响较小的人，反而因为封锁而遭受严重的精神痛苦，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数增加了109%！
advertisement

freestar

而2020年8月的研究发现，40%的美国成年人报告与精神健康或物质作斗争。

记得三天一核酸的政策刚出来，我一位坚决支持封控的朋友说，他抑郁了。

我说我也是，但我只有10分钟。因为我马上想明白了，碰到检测点就捅一下，等到财力耗完，他们自然收兵。

后来的事实果然如此。
advertisement

freestar

报告第3页第七条明确写道：处方不能比疾病更严重，比如严格和过于广泛的封锁，导致可预测的痛苦和可避免的后果。

至于疫苗，在大流行期间，没有注射疫苗的普通民众简直寸步难行。所谓自愿也成为强制手段，不断逼迫民众必须注射。

报告认为，疫苗护照为未接种疫苗的美国人创造了一种新型的封锁，是不适当的，政府夸大了疫苗的威力。"
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
您提到的内容主要来自美国众议院冠状病毒大流行监督和问责委员会特别小组发布的报告《2019冠状病毒病大流行的行动后回顾：经验教训和前进道路》。 该报告对美国在新冠疫情期间的防疫措施进行了回顾和反思。

关于口罩效用的讨论：

报告中提到，有研究显示，在美国，强制佩戴口罩的州与未强制佩戴口罩的州的感染率差异不大。 此外，2023年1月的科克伦研究回顾了15项试验，发现佩戴任何一种口罩对减少呼吸道疾病的传播可能几乎没有区别，结论是戴口罩的价值约为零。 
BOTAN WANG

关于封锁措施的影响：

报告指出，严格和过于广泛的封锁措施可能导致可预测的痛苦和可避免的后果。 例如，2019年至2020年间，精神健康障碍增加了22%。 此外，青少年非意外死亡人数也有所增加。 
BOTAN WANG

关于疫苗的讨论：

报告认为，疫苗护照为未接种疫苗的美国人创造了一种新型的封锁，可能是不适当的，政府可能夸大了疫苗的威力。 
BOTAN WANG

需要注意的是，这些结论主要基于美国的研究和数据，可能不适用于其他国家或地区。此外，科学研究是不断发展的，新的证据可能会改变当前的认识。因此，在解读这些结论时，应结合当地的实际情况和最新的科学研究成果。

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