A virus attaches itself to an aerosol particle in order to be transported out of the human body and into the environment. The aerosol is composed mainly of evaporated water molecules with other human particles within them. Here it's worth noting that water molecules are among the smallest molecules there are, and aerosol particles are defined as solid and liquid particles suspended in a gas (air), with size range of 0.003 microns to 100 micron in diameter. The N95 filter indeed is claimed to be physically in the 0.3-0.5 micron size. Which means that by definition the smallest aerosols are 100 times smaller than the gaps in the mask fibers. The virus itself is around 0.1 micron, therefore 3 to 5 times smaller than the gaps in the mask filter itself. My conclusion is that the argument that small viruses only spread through large aerosols is misinformation: aerosols are clearly defined to be much smaller than even SARSCoV2 particles.

"most particles (87%) with influenza viral RNA were found to be smaller than 1 μm.

Further developments enabled detection of so-called fine versus coarse particles (ie, ≤5 μm vs >5 μm).

 Influenza viral RNA was detected in the exhaled breath of 34 (92%) of 37 adults.

 The fine particles contained 8·8-times (95% CI 4·1–19·0) more viral copies than did the coarse ones. Respiratory viruses have been found in both coughs (82% of participants) and exhaled breath (81% of participants).

Similarly, influenza virus was found in similar amounts in coughs (53% of participants) and breath (42% of participants).

Human rhinovirus was collected more frequently in exhaled breath than in cough aerosols using a filter method.

Findings from two studies with comparable particle size data showed that influenza virus in exhaled breath is contained in smaller particles than influenza virus in cough (figure 3).

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30323-4/fulltext

THE NOSE: "Particles larger than 3μm have a maximum deposition in the anterior part of the nose (nasal valve). Particles smaller than 3μm & larger than 0.5μm are filtered by the nasal mucosa and transported by cilia propulsion to the nasopharynx."
THE N95 MASK: The filtration material itself of N95's average pore size ~0.3−0.5 μm [larger average pore size is just like the human NOSE] does not block finer aerosol laden with virions penetration, not to mention surgical masks. For example, see Balazy et al. (2006).
CONCLUSION: THE HUMAN NOSE is as good a filter as an N95 mask given the N95 mask has many pores which are equal in size to the filtration capacity of the nose of 0.5μm. HOWEVER breathing mouth to mask NEBULIZES aerosols making them more infectious to other people's lung alveoli.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9432080/

Masks may increase mortality because breathing through them can nebulize aerosols into smaller ones which bypass mucosal immunity & reach all the way into the alveoli, leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). "The size of droplets smaller than 120 µm cannot be reliably measured..note the decrease of large and the increase of smaller particles numbers for the neck gaiter. We attribute this to the breakup of large droplets into several smaller ones when passing through the material. "Aerosols..within the most breathable size range between 0.5 & 5 μm, can carry SARS-CoV-2 deep to the terminal alveoli..if this transmission pathway does exist, it would bypass the mucociliary clearance & incubation period of the virus in the upper airways
https://t.co/08qchqI7ag
The filtration material itself of N95's average pore size ~0.3−0.5 μm does not block finer aerosol laden with virions penetration, not to mention surgical masksr
Explainer thread/s
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1349997185006497793.html

Back to Bayes Theorem: the main reason we are getting potentially ~ 90% false positive results when we test asymptomatics. Preprint out for peer review:
https://zenodo.org/record/4459271#.YA1lOU8XadP

Always remember that the WHO faked/exaggerated a pandemic before. They use two tools to fool politicians:
1 "Cases" defined by PCR tests with high ct values & no symptoms
2 Mass testing asymptomatic which through #BayesTheorem leads to 90% false positives
https://www.forbes.com/2010/03/10/swine-flu-world-health-organization-pandemic-opinions-contributors-henry-i-miller.html?sh=ac636fc16170

NEW: VITAMIN D:
Autumn COVID-19 surge dates in Europe correlated to latitudes, not to temperature-humidity, pointing to vitamin D as contributing factor

Stephan Walrand


"As already evidenced by previous correlation studies10, a low 25(OH)D concentration should be considered a contributing factor to COVID-19 severity.
Europe and the northern USA are starting a long COVID-19 crisis this autumn, as they will return to a level above the October sun UV daily dose only at the end of March 2021.
Measures to reduce the pandemic severity during the coming winter using controlled preventive vitamin D supplementation should be considered"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-81419-w

NEW: Prior Immunity from exposure to other common coronaviruses:
"Our findings highlight sites at which the SARS-CoV-2 response appears to be shaped by previous CoV exposures and which have the potential to raise broadly neutralizing responses."
https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(20)30244-5

⬆️ Why this is important: prior immunity reduces herd immunity thresholds, can be as low as 10-20% of new natural infections. We may have it already. This does not mean no new ill people but a normal winter coronavirus peak in cases of illness as there is every winter. Random testing of asymptomatics and vitamin D deficiency, plus unavailable treatment kits in pharmacies to be given as soon as a confirmed positive develops symptoms remain the main problems:
THE #MONOTTIPROTOCOL
HOW TO END THE PANDEMIC
1 Stop testing asymptomatics, PCR & lateral flow protocols confirmed by international scientists without conflicts of interest, not WHO or SAGE
2 Take vitamin D in winter minimum 2,000 IUs
3 Early treatment kits in pharmacies

UK govt quietly extends councils' lockdown powers until July 17
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN29S0PW

SARS‐CoV‐2‐induced remission of Hodgkin lymphoma
"We hypothesise that the SARS‐CoV‐2 infection triggered an anti‐tumour immune response..The putative mechanisms of action include cross‐reactivity of pathogen‐specific T cells with tumour antigens and natural killer cell activation by inflammatory cytokines."
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bjh.17116

#IOpen #UK 30th January 2021 #TheGreatReopening #UKisOpen #YouOpen #AllTogether.

⬆️ The discussion on my Bayes Theorem thread of 9th December continues.

Red brain: you think through this, read the science, come to your own conclusions
Blue mask: you muzzle up and do exactly as you are told.

#BayesTheorem in simple terms: when medical mass testing includes asymptomatics & the disease affects a minority of the population, as some of you commented, below 10% although valid for up to 30% a very small margin of error in the testing process will mathematically result in the false positives being many times more than the real true positives. What prevalence is being estimated currently, including random testing of asymptomatic people travelling? COVID19 PREVALENCE: No factoring of #BayesTheorem on the mass testing of asymptomatics (eg travel) to define it, means it's much lower than this: "Riley - presenting his latest data covering 7 January to 16 January - said prevalence rates were at 1.58%"
https://amp.rnz.co.nz/article/cd458731-3085-4e00-bd03-9898ee0b41c2

How the plutocracy rules us all:
-TRILATERAL COMMISSION
-GROUP OF THIRTY
-COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
-WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM
And last but not least
-THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION
https://t.co/BbSdhCYyW3

WEF's "Great Reset": an attempt to put a techno-progressive gloss on the neoliberal world of austerity, exploitation, dispossession, & destruction imposed by the globalized oligarchy on the people & ecologies of our planet' https://t.co/lncDgRlr1o

Effect of changing case definitions for COVID-19 on the epidemic curve and transmission parameters in mainland China: a modelling study


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(20)30089-X/fulltext

How the statistical hoax began: when WHO said that in China only a PCR test on asymptomatics is required for a case. Note the date. Later China wisely stopped listening to the WHO.
https://twitter.com/PenguinSix/status/1227262277344165895?s=19