Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Has Dolores Cahill been debunked?

Options
12357

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    circadian wrote: »
    Do facemasks filter out oxygen or change the Chemical make up of air?

    How can you get a lungful of air, while wearing a face mask, and reduce your oxygen intake. Explain that to me. Is the facemask diluting the oxygen?

    ****ing idiots.

    If you’re still inhaling oxygen are you still inhaling the virus?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    i_surge wrote: »
    You are falling for the framing effect.

    That idiot epidemiologist in Sweden is a professor too. Book smart but supremely unwise people can become professors easily and no one is right all the time.

    So you know better than two professors anyone who questions the received message is an idiot?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Why give her the attention, she's a loon and I suspect you might not be far behind her.

    In other words, you can’t answer the question.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,377 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Can you just tell me?

    What do you want me to tell you? The names of the epidemiologists and specialists in infectious diseases that have been mainstays in the Irish media since late February?

    You haven't heard of any of them? Very surprising Madisyn Spoiled Sewer.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭i_surge


    So you know better than two professors anyone who questions the received message is an idiot?

    Yes I do, as do the many professors who disagree with them.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    If you’re still inhaling oxygen are you still inhaling the virus?

    Yes, you are. Masks offer little to no benefit to the wearer but do protect those around them from a reduced risk of the wearer passing the virus on.

    You need to list out Delores Cahill claims and what evidence she has to back each one up otherwise people here cannot point to already existing studies that debunk each claim. You ignored my previous post asking for this information.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,109 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    If you’re still inhaling oxygen are you still inhaling the virus?
    Not quite. It's two largely separate things you're discussing. It's down to filtration and type and levels of filtration. In the case of P3 level respirators the virus and the droplets that contain it are filtered out by various mechanisms(filter medium size, electrostatic capture etc) leaving the air drawn in clean of airborne particles(chemical filters use mediums like activated charcoal that binds to contaminants like gases to remove them). Different filtration gives different levels of protection. So a surgical mask would be the lowest of the commercial grade filters, but would still remove a lot of the particles otherwise inhaled.

    The higher the filtration the lower the flow of air through them which in the case of the top level filtration requires more lung effort on the part of the wearer. Something like a military NBC gas mask would be about the highest on a few fronts, both mechanical and chemical and do require more effort to breath through. However the O2 levels are not affected to nearly the degree that some of the tinfoil hat brigade are claiming and that's at the very highest filtration and something that encloses your whole face. Surgical masks restrict airflow by vanishingly little.

    I would say that any academic, or indeed anyone with a half way working cerebellum that puts any thought towards it and concludes that they do is a 24 karat blithering idiot.

    If someone who doesn't have an actual medical breathing problem claims a surgical mask leaves them breathless, then either they do have an undiagnosed medical problem, or - and this is far more likely - it's much more about what's going on between their ears than what's going on between the mask and their face.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,109 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    axer wrote: »
    Yes, you are. Masks offer little to no benefit to the wearer but do protect those around them from a reduced risk of the wearer passing the virus on.
    Not quite, but at least that misunderstanding is the better meme that people are running with. Yes wearing a mask reduces your outgoing virus load, but wearing one also reduces the incoming virus load. So with everyone wearing one the risks are very much reduced overall. However if I'm wearing something like a P3 respirator then the protection is personal. Indeed as they have one way open non filtered valves for exhalation they do little to reduce the risk for others.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,927 ✭✭✭circadian


    If you’re still inhaling oxygen are you still inhaling the virus?

    Oxygen molecules are measured in picometers. Covid is measured in nanometers. That's a huge difference.
    If you're using N95 it'll filter out 95% of particles down to a particular size. Covid-19 is somewhere near this threshold, maybe a little smaller.

    Oxygen molecules and other molecules that make up air are in order of millions of times smaller.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Not quite, but at least that misunderstanding is the better meme that people are running with. Yes wearing a mask reduces your outgoing virus load, but wearing one also reduces the incoming virus load. So with everyone wearing one the risks are very much reduced overall. However if I'm wearing something like a P3 respirator then the protection is personal. Indeed as they have one way open non filtered valves for exhalation they do little to reduce the risk for others.
    sorry, I simplified and was referring to the cloth type masks people are being asked to wear.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,109 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    So you know better than two professors anyone who questions the received message is an idiot?
    Not always no. Many if not most scientific breakthroughs have come from the fringes and were initially ignored by the mainstream. However those fringes didn't make idiotic statements, nor statements that went against all logic and they usually had some support from other scientists and actual science. Cahill has neither. The only way one could believe her is a) deferring to her appeal to authority which is bollocks and/or b) having little more than a basic grasp of science itself and basic science with it. And a lot of people have little grasp of the basics. It's one reason why even wild conspiracy stuff gains traction.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,109 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    In other words, you can’t answer the question.
    I'm afraid the far more salient point is that you don't want to listen to any answers because you've hitched your wagon to this Cahill person's train.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭i_surge


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Not quite, but at least that misunderstanding is the better meme that people are running with. Yes wearing a mask reduces your outgoing virus load, but wearing one also reduces the incoming virus load. So with everyone wearing one the risks are very much reduced overall. However if I'm wearing something like a P3 respirator then the protection is personal. Indeed as they have one way open non filtered valves for exhalation they do little to reduce the risk for others.

    It blows my mind that such basic common sense stuff has to be explained to adults.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    axer wrote: »
    Yes, you are. Masks offer little to no benefit to the wearer but do protect those around them from a reduced risk of the wearer passing the virus on.

    You need to list out Delores Cahill claims and what evidence she has to back each one up otherwise people here cannot point to already existing studies that debunk each claim. You ignored my previous post asking for this information.

    Why do I need to list out anything, I haven’t made any claims?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭i_surge


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Not always no. Many if not most scientific breakthroughs have come from the fringes and were initially ignored by the mainstream. However those fringes didn't make idiotic statements, nor statements that went against all logic and they usually had some support from other scientists and actual science. Cahill has neither. The only way one could believe her is a) deferring to her appeal to authority which is bollocks and/or b) having little more than a basic grasp of science itself and basic science with it. And a lot of people have little grasp of the basics. It's one reason why even wild conspiracy stuff gains traction.

    It seems that just because some mavericks had great breakthroughs while defying their peers throughout history that any breed of lunacy must now be accepted.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    Why do I need to list out anything, I haven’t made any claims?
    you asked has she been debunked and implied that she has been wronged. I am asking which claims are you referring to that she had made that you are asking about?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,109 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    i_surge wrote: »
    It seems that just because some mavericks had great breakthroughs while defying their peers throughout history that any breed of lunacy must now be accepted.
    That's a large part of it alright and Hollywood hasn't helped with fostering the idea of the maverick that changes everything. This meme is a strong one. It's like the "artists are usually mad and usually unsung" idea which originally stems from VanGogh* and it's an appealing idea, but largely bunkum. For the vast majority of history, the vast majority of artists(including VanGogh's peers) were respectable middle class working professionals who did pretty well for themselves thanks very much. A few might have found themselves in debtors prison, but vanishingly few ended up in loony bins.




    *if the poor divil had lived another twenty years he would have seen his stuff sell by the truckload as interest had just started to kick off.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,927 ✭✭✭circadian


    Starting to think OP is that lad on YouTube who had his interview with Dolores removed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    circadian wrote: »
    Dolores Cahill, as far as I can tell, has stopped producing journals the last few years. This coincides the beginning of her political career and venture into quackery.

    I do not believe, for one minute, that she believes the "science" she has begun promoting. I see this as nothing more than a cynical use of credentials to push pseudo-science to the fringe parties who believe in conspiracies for personal, political gain.

    Yes. She has been debunked because people have debunked these theories that have been promoted elsewhere. Just because someone hasn't addressed her directly, it doesn't mean her ideas haven't been addressed and debunked already.

    An opportunist. A charlatan.
    Mental illness most likely


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,109 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Still not debunking
    Good Christ, what will you accept as a debunking? Though I strongly suspect like the faithful in all conspiracy theories any facts will be rejected no matter what, because instead of an opinion based on facts you hold an article of faith.

    However, if this is what this Cahill person has said:

    Lockdown and social distancing is not needed to stop the spread of the virus Oh really, so how has it in fact worked?

    People who recover are then “immune for life” after 10 days We have no idea how long immunity lasts with this virus. Immunity varies between viruses, only the completely ignorant on the matter think otherwise. Some viruses trigger a lifetime immunity, some don't. This is a fact.

    deaths and illnesses could have been prevented by extra vitamins, she claimedAh yeah. Vitamins. The facebook and quackery cure for all ills.

    People with underlying health conditions, such as cystic fibrosis, could freely engage in society during the pandemic after spending a few weeks building up their immunity in this manner Jesus, now that's truly dangerous stupidity at work there.

    Opposing vaccinations annnnd that's all you needed to say right there.

    I really don't know what to say to that nonsense. It would be daft coming from the man in the street, but insane coming from someone in the medical field. Though we have the anti vaxxer stuff outa the gate so you know what tends to follow is ignorance and fear mongering aimed at the gullible.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 36,235 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    But what are your credentials Wibbs and cite your sources for those points and blah blah blah ad infinium.

    It’s a wonderful circular argument. ‘Show me where she was debunked’...chip away at the quality of same until you return to ‘show me where she said that thing you’re debunking’...back to her credentials back to arguing down your credentials back to ‘show me where she was debunked’

    It’s great really, slippery like an eel.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Good Christ, what will you accept as a debunking? Though I strongly suspect like the faithful in all conspiracy theories any facts will be rejected no matter what, because instead of an opinion based on facts you hold an article of faith.

    However, if this is what this Cahill person has said:

    Lockdown and social distancing is not needed to stop the spread of the virus Oh really, so how has it in fact worked?

    People who recover are then “immune for life” after 10 days We have no idea how long immunity lasts with this virus. Immunity varies between viruses, only the completely ignorant on the matter think otherwise. Some viruses trigger a lifetime immunity, some don't. This is a fact.

    deaths and illnesses could have been prevented by extra vitamins, she claimedAh yeah. Vitamins. The facebook and quackery cure for all ills.

    People with underlying health conditions, such as cystic fibrosis, could freely engage in society during the pandemic after spending a few weeks building up their immunity in this manner Jesus, now that's truly dangerous stupidity at work there.

    Opposing vaccinations annnnd that's all you needed to say right there.

    I really don't know what to say to that nonsense. It would be daft coming from the man in the street, but insane coming from someone in the medical field. Though we have the anti vaxxer stuff outa the gate so you know what tends to follow is ignorance and fear mongering aimed at the gullible.

    I haven't supported anything she said. I simply asked what is it that she said that is so at odds with the scientific community. What I heard her say in summary is:

    Vitamin D and a good diet improve the immune system

    Social distancing is not required

    Face masks reduce oxygen levels

    Hydroxi can be taken as a preventative measure against corona

    Vitamin D point seems reasonable

    Social distancing - yes social distancing can be effective but to what extent? We could also implement social distancing for flu season and shut down the country and we would also see a reduction in flu cases

    Face masks - I'm agnostic about, wear them if you want I expect they're uncomfortable after a few hours

    Hydroxi - I can't comment I don't know enough about it

    Btw, who said anything about vaccinations?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,566 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Wibbs wrote: »
    People who recover are then “immune for life” after 10 days We have no idea how long immunity lasts with this virus. Immunity varies between viruses, only the completely ignorant on the matter think otherwise. Some viruses trigger a lifetime immunity, some don't. This is a fact.

    Absolutely.

    In her advocation to 'let the virus run rampant' this was by far the most significant and serious claim. Two of the more similar viruses to COVID-19 (albeit much safer diseases) namely the common cold and influenza provide no such immunity. To be more precise, they provide an immediate immunity which is rendered moot when the virus evolves.

    COVID-19 seems to evolve very quickly (such that there are already several strains). Consequently I think her claim is, at best, on very shaky grounds.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,566 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Face masks reduce oxygen levels



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,197 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    The three Hydroxi studies were halted as there was, 'no benefit' Dr Fauci.

    His opinion is good enough for me.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,109 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Vitamin D and a good diet improve the immune system
    Vague and simplistic and as I pointed out earlier s strong immune system can actually be a negative in some trajectories of disease. IE its your immune system over reacting that actually kills you.
    Social distancing is not required
    It is if you want to reduce the spread of an infection. This has been known for many many centuries and social distancing was public policy in many epidemics in human history.
    Face masks reduce oxygen levels
    Which is a complete bloody nonsense, unless someone is wearing the highest level of filtration respirators and even then it's not the reduction in O2 levels, but the simple breathing effort involved in overcoming the the high levels of filtration over time.
    Hydroxi can be taken as a preventative measure against corona
    The jury is very much still out on this. Some trials show promise as a treatment with other therapies, some show less promise, none show value as a preventative.
    Vitamin D point seems reasonable
    Seems being the operative word here.
    Social distancing - yes social distancing can be effective but to what extent? We could also implement social distancing for flu season and shut down the country and we would also see a reduction in flu cases
    So you're saying it does work, but the negatives outweigh the positives? Plus and jaysus knows how many times this needs to be repeated; covid19 is not a seasonal flu. Its fatality rate is much higher and seasonal flu doesn't threaten to overwhelm medical services.
    Btw, who said anything about vaccinations?
    The subject of this thread did. She's anti vaccination.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,582 ✭✭✭✭banie01



    Btw, who said anything about vaccinations?

    Wibbs has addressed most of your drivel.
    But just on the above, if you are going to hold someone up as a beacon of truth.
    A campaigner against the Corona virus "hoax"?

    At least be aware of what they have said, what stances they take and what they have put on record.
    Opposing vaccinations, Ms Cahill said “politicians and the media” are using Covid-19 “as a fear-mongering propaganda tool to try and take away rights from people and to make them more sick and to force vaccinations on us.”

    Your whole "questioning" demeanour is a hallmark of the contrarian.
    The whole "I'm only asking" shtick is tiresome.
    Seeking to present wilful, harmful and quite deliberate ignorance as curiousity.

    You have previously waffled regarding being asked to prove a negative!
    You weren't, you were asked to provide the scientific basis for the nonsense you are parroting.
    Rather than do that? You repeat the nonsense with a "but why?"
    It's the debate of a child or a simpleton!
    I don't think you are either? So it's instead a deliberate stance of ignorance and laziness.

    In all the time you have spent on here seeking an interview to be "debunked"?

    Have you spent any time looking for actual evidence in support of the nonsense you are parroting?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,927 ✭✭✭circadian


    Would Computing Forever be willing to host a peer who will debunk or even debate her claims? Since it was his interview that got pulled that seems to have kicked this off.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement