amercer said:
You mean places without a lot of NPI had a flu season, and ones with lockdowns, social distancing and masks didn't? That is interesting.
It's not exactly surprising that interventions that had a marginal effect on Covid could have a huge effect on a less transmissible disease (or one we already have some immunity against). What's more surprising is why some people would be so pissed about that fact.
It's more that it's a region that wasn't hit with COVID and thus still had a flu season.
It IS surprising that interventions that had little effect on COVID would nearly eradicate the flu and some, but not all other respiratory viruses. If there was some real evidence that the interventions had even a decent impact on stopping Covid then I'd be more inclined to agree they stopped the flu. But the fact is that decades of research has concluded that masks have little, if any effect on stopping the flu and you're suggesting it all just... was wrong. Empirical evidence shows that masks have little effect on stopping the flu. So you can't point at masks and say HA that's it!
So take masks out of the equation and then explain why the flu is equally gone in Florida and California. Explain why the flu disappeared in the UK with their strict interventions but also Sweden that didn't do much outside of restrict international travel.
Nobody is "pissed" about the flu disappearing this year. Some people just disagree on why it happened and don't think NPIs are a strong argument. Just because it really seems like that would work doesn't mean it does.
A well known but not well understood phenomenon of "viral interference" does a much better job of explaining it.
" 'People that read with pictures think that it's simply about a mask' - Dana Loesch" - Ban Cow Gas
"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Dr. Ron Paul
Big Tech IS the empire of lies
TEXIT
