News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by alex1138 on Wednesday September 10, 2025 @07:07PM (#45205353)
Yeah - no

All (virtually all, it's not hyperbole) of the "misinformation" during covid turned out not to be that at all

There was no science behind social distancing, or masks, or the (so called, it's not an actual one) vaccine

Edit: I would like to remind people that downvotes do not, and never will, make me wrong

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by robrenaud on Wednesday September 10, 2025 @08:32PM (#45206129)
But being wrong can cause downvotes.
Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by account42 on Thursday September 11, 2025 @05:44AM (#45209619)
Popularity doesn't determine fact. If you cared about science instead of The Science you'd know that.
Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by AdieuToLogic on Wednesday September 10, 2025 @08:58PM (#45206369)
> All (virtually all, it's not hyperbole) of the "misinformation" during covid turned out not to be that at all

> There was no science behind social distancing, or masks, or the (so called, it's not an actual one) vaccine

These assertions are provably wrong. Regarding "social distancing" specifically:

  There was adequate empirical evidence for the effect of 
  social distancing at the individual level, and for partial 
  or full lockdown at the community level. However, at the 
  level of social settings, the evidence was moderate for 
  school closure, and was limited for workplace/business 
  closures as single targeted interventions.[0]
As to the science behind "masks" and "vaccines", the former can be trivially shown to limit the distance of oral particulate expulsion and the latter has enough published medical research to make verifying vaccine efficacy a matter of accepting facts.

> Edit: I would like to remind people that downvotes do not, and never will, make me wrong

It is not the downvotes which make you wrong.

0 - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9002256/