Is this how masks "protect" you? / Így "védenek" a maszkok?

2021.12.18.
https://t.me/vilaghelyzete/1289

--

Így "védenek" a maszkok?
Ez az, ahogy a maszkok valójában működnek A szabadban, nagyon alacsony hőmérsékleten felvett szemléletes videó a lehelet alapján mutatja be, hogy a maszkok valójában mennyire nem akadályozzák meg a lélegzet, a pára, pláne a vírusok kijutását!

Még az orvosok körében is van már jogos ellenállás emiatt:
Osztrák orvosok nyílt levele: 👇

https://tagesformat.wordpress.com/2021/12/15/osterreichische-arzte-verfassen-offenen-brief-gegen-autoritaren-arztekammer-prasidenten-szekeres/

--

Is this how masks "protect" you?
This is how masks really work A graphic video, shot outdoors at very low temperatures, shows how masks don't actually prevent breath, mist, let alone viruses, from escaping!

Even among doctors, there is now legitimate opposition to this:
Open letter from Austrian doctors 👇

https://tagesformat.wordpress.com/2021/12/15/osterreichische-arzte-verfassen-offenen-brief-gegen-autoritaren-arztekammer-prasidenten-szekeres/

--

Austrian doctors draft open letter against authoritarian medical association president Szekeres

Published on 15 December 2021 by veibzvideos

36 medical professionals in Austria are responding to an internal letter from the Medical Association on the Corona vaccination with an open letter. The doctors demand that Medical Chamber President Thomas Szekeres revoke the letter or resign immediately.

There is ferment in the Austrian medical profession. According to a letter from Austria's Medical Chamber President Thomas Szekeres, doctors are threatened with disciplinary proceedings if they advise patients against Corona vaccinations and do not follow the recommendations of the national vaccination panel in Vienna. This is reported by the Tagesstimme from Graz. The letter contradicts "all medical ethics and the basic principles of patient-centred, evidence-based medicine", find the 36 signatories of an open letter and justify their displeasure with various studies on the Corona vaccination. With the letter from the Medical Association, Szekeres has caused "lasting damage to the reputation and self-image" of the medical profession. The doctors further emphasise that they do not want to be "intimidated".
The full text of the open letter:

"Dear Mr. President,
With your circular 325/2021 of 2.12.2021, which was not addressed to the public but is now publicly available, you have violated the basic principles of evidence-based medicine and medical freedom of treatment and threatened conscientiously working colleagues with blanket disciplinary sanctions. You have dictatorially determined how, in your opinion, medical professional duty is to be defined. When a medical association president acts in this way, we lose our credibility and trustworthiness with our patients. You write without citing any sources for your assertion: 'In connection with the current pandemic, it may be made clear that, based on the available data, from a scientific point of view and with reference to the relevant recommendations of the National Vaccination Panel, there is currently no reason in principle to advise patients against vaccination against COVID-19.

The data on the effectiveness and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines available in Austria is by no means uniform and unambiguous and is also subject to permanent change. Whereas until a few weeks ago it was assumed that the basic COVID-19 vaccination provided protection against the disease, it has now been scientifically proven that this protection is firstly only relevant with regard to severe courses of the disease and secondly loses statistical significance after six to seven months at the latest (see e.g. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3949410). Furthermore, it has been scientifically proven that vaccinated and non-vaccinated persons can pass on the infection equally (see e.g. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00648). The argument that vaccination can achieve "herd immunity" is therefore obsolete. Whether booster vaccination can achieve further protection is uncertain. The studies available so far on this subject only cover a few weeks and make it clear that the absolute effects are marginal at best and will certainly not change the course of the pandemic as a whole (see e.g. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114255). This is particularly evident from the fact that no correlation between vaccination rate and incidence can be demonstrated (see e.g. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7 ). In addition, SARS-CoV-2 is highly susceptible to mutation. A reduced and rapidly diminishing effect of vaccination has already been shown against the currently still predominant delta variant (see e.g. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114228). Whether there is any protection at all against the omicron variant that is currently spreading is unknown. The protective effect of the COVID-19 vaccinations is - if at all - only relevant for people at high risk for a severe course of COVID-19. About 98% of those severely affected by COVID-19 have at least one relevant pre-existing or concomitant disease. The average age of those affected is over 80 years. Healthy people under 65 years of age without risk factors are usually not affected by a severe course of COVID-19 (with hospitalisation, intensive care or death). In these people, therefore, the risks from vaccination very likely outweigh the potential benefits. At the very least, these people must be granted a free vaccination decision after honest and comprehensive medical information. The number of reported side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines can only be described as frightening (see e.g. https://dap.ema.europa.eu/analytics/saw.dll?PortalPages -alone 607,283 reports for Comirnaty only, as of 9.12.2021), even if the causality for the individual case remains unverifiable. So far, nine Red Hand Letters have already been sent out, warning of serious side effects and even deaths. The blanket declaration of vaccines as 'safe' by the medical association, politics and the media thus reveals itself to be unscientific, inhumane propaganda. Doctors must not only be allowed to point out a possible disproportion between the benefits and harms of COVID-19 vaccinations, but they are also obliged by medical ethics and the Geneva Vow to inform their patients about the numerous possible side effects and risks of vaccination. The medical profession, and thus of course the Medical Association, is committed to evidence-based medicine. In addition to the pillar of available study evidence, evidence-based medicine includes the equally important pillars of 'medical, clinical expertise' and 'patient values' (see https://www.bmj.com/content/312/7023/71).

The pillar of 'medical, clinical expertise' is absolutely necessary for evidence-based medical action, because study evidence and guidelines (the first pillar of evidence-based medicine) are always obtained from and oriented towards patient or subject populations, and not towards individual patients. Transferability to the individual patient is never 100% given and requires the careful assessment of an experienced physician. For this reason, medical guidelines are not legally binding for the treatment of individuals. The third pillar, the patient's values, is just as indispensable as the first two pillars, because each person is entitled to the final say on which medical measures are carried out on his or her body, soul and spirit. For this purpose, there is, among other things, the personal living will, which puts individual patient decisions above all else, beyond any science.
We call on you, Mr President, as the highest representative of the Austrian medical profession, to respect the basic principles of evidence-based medical treatment and to protect the individual freedom of treatment that underlies all medical activity. This applies in particular to vaccination with conditionally approved vaccines, about whose effectiveness and side effects a final judgement is not yet possible, otherwise the approval would not have been granted only conditionally. As doctors, we have vowed to give our patients - whether they are sick people seeking help or healthy people coming for advice - comprehensive and balanced advice to the best of our knowledge and belief. This counselling takes into account both the available scientific findings, which in the field of medicine are never so unambiguous that they can be applied across the board to all patients, as well as our own clinical experience gained through studies and many years of professional experience and the wishes of our patients. The result of the consultation is always individual and has been covered by medical freedom of treatment for thousands of years. So, conversely, medical malpractice must always be analysed on an individual basis. Malpractice occurs when a medical measure is carried out or omitted without appropriate information and the patient is harmed as a result. Each case of malpractice must be examined and proven with regard to these criteria.
It contradicts all medical ethics and the basic principles of patient-centred, evidence-based medicine when a chamber president threatens a blanket disciplinary review and sanction for a specific, individual consultation result between doctors and patients.
Mr. President, you have caused lasting damage to the reputation and self-image of the medical profession by your letter of 2.12.2021.
We hereby call upon you to revoke your letter of 2.12.2021 or to resign as President of the Chamber immediately.
Furthermore, we announce that we will not be intimidated by you or by other Chamber officials with similar attitudes. With reference to the Geneva Vow and the freedom of medical treatment, we will continue to treat our patients to the best of our knowledge and belief and will decide individually with each patient, also taking into account psychiatric contraindications, whether or not vaccination against COVID-19 makes sense.

Prof. Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen, Specialist for Internal and General Medicine, Vienna, Salzburg
Dr. Walter Wührer, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Salzburg
Dr. Maria Hubmer-Mogg, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Graz
Dr. Christian Fiala, Facharzt für Gynäkologie, Wien
Dr. Regina Ehrenberger, Fachärztin für Psychiatrie, Dornbirn
Dr. Katharina Anderhuber, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Landesschulärztin, Salzburg
Dr. Walter Lintner, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Dornbirn
Dr. Anna Vouk-Zdouc, Fachärztin für Gynäkologie, Klagenfurt
Dr. Marco Spicker, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Arbeitsmediziner, Laakirchen
Dr. Werner Pohl, Facharzt für Innere Medizin, Vöcklabruck
Dr. Ingo Wachernig, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Völkermarkt
Dr. Lukas Trimmel, Facharzt für Physikalische Medizin und Rehabilitation, Wien
Dr. Terezia Novotna, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Notärztin, Wiener Neustadt
Dr. Christine Valentiny, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Egg
Dr. Fatma Gürel, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Salzburg
Dr. Gerlinde M. Akmanlar-Hirscher, Fachärztin für Gynäkologie, Salzburg
Dr. Sabine Wipfinger, Fachärztin für Kinder- und Jugendheilkunde, Hallein
Dr. Silvia Zeilinger, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Pasching
Dr. Wolfgang Grabner, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, St. Georgen im Attergau
Dr. Wilhelm Reisenzein, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Hallein
Dr. Michael Hübl, Facharzt für Psychiatrie, Kufstein
Dr. Günther Lehenauer, Facharzt für Chirurgie und Vizeralchirurgie, Bad Dürrnberg
Dr. Nikolaus Hübl, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Feldkrich
Dr. Helmut Glück, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, St. Peter am Hart
Dr. Sandra Höss, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Mattsee
Dr. Sharon Tagwerker, Fachärztin für Kinder- und Jugendheilkunde, Bludenz
Dr. Ursula Mayer-Zuchi, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Straßwalchen
Dr. Erich Fritsch, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Pischelsdorf
Dr. Günther Beck, MMA, Arzt für Allgemeinmedizin, Aspach
Dr. Bettina Allgaier-Zalto, Fachärztin für Gynäkologie, Kuchl
Dr. Klaus Zalto, Facharzt für Gynäkologie, Kuchl
Dr. Andrea Rotheneder, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Mondsee
Dr. Ludwig Koch, Facharzt für Anästhesie, Salzburg
Dr. Claudia Riedelberger, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Seeham
Dr. Petra Wasenegger, Ärztin für Allgemeinmedizin, Thalgau
Dr. Berit Decker, Fachärztin für Zahn-, Mund- und Kieferheilkunde, Anif“