Search Results for INFOWARS

Masks are effective at reducing COVID-19 primary transmission through respiratory droplets; the CDC acknowledges airborne transmission via aerosols can also occur

Current epidemiological data indicates that COVID-19 primarily spreads through respiratory droplets that are released when an infected person sneezes, coughs, or talks. Growing evidence suggests that smaller aerosol particles may also play a role in the transmission of COVID-19. Wearing face masks and cloth face coverings are effective measures for reducing the spread of COVID-19 because they reduce the transmission of large respiratory droplets. In contrast, some aerosol particles may leak through the fabric pores and around the mask. To reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection, wearing face masks must be combined with other transmission control measures, such as physical distancing, good hand hygiene, and avoiding crowded and poorly ventilated spaces.

Altered image falsely suggests that restaurant staff in Maine are required to wear dog cone-style face visors to protect against COVID-19

Restaurant staff in Maine are not required to wear dog cone-style visors as part of COVID-19 precautionary measures. The updated prevention checklists issued by Maine Governor Janet Mills’ administration only require staff who have opted to use face shields instead of face masks to wear them upside down. A photo of a restaurant staff member appearing to wear a dog cone-style face visor at work is altered.

Baseless speculations underpin a retracted editorial claiming spontaneous generation of SARS-CoV-2 in skin cells exposed to 5G waves

The proposed mechanism of action described in the claim that 5G millimeter waves can generate SARS-CoV-2 in human cells violates fundamental principles of biology. Scientific evidence does not support a causal relationship between 5G and COVID-19. Many of the regions with the highest COVID-19 infection rates, such as Brazil, do not have 5G coverage, providing further evidence that 5G is not associated with the pandemic.

Did the COVID-19 virus originate from a lab or nature? Examining the evidence for different hypotheses of the novel coronavirus’ origins

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak in December 2019, many hypotheses have been advanced to explain where the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) actually came from. Initial reports pointed to the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan, China, as the source of infection, however later studies called this into question. Given the uncertainty, many have suggested that … Continued

Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier inaccurately claims that the novel coronavirus is man-made and contains genetic material from HIV

Genomic analyses of the novel coronavirus shows that it has a natural origin and was not engineered. The claim that the virus has genetic material from HIV is based on a preprint with significant flaws in study design and execution that was later withdrawn by the authors. As it turned out, the so-called “HIV insertions” identified by the authors could also be found in many other organisms apart from HIV, refuting the claim that genetic material from HIV was inserted into the novel coronavirus.

Scientific evidence indicates virus that causes COVID-19 infection is of natural origin, not the result of human engineering

Multiple published scientific studies, based on genomic and phylogenetic analyses, show that the virus that causes COVID-19 has the strongest genetic similarity to coronaviruses isolated from bats living in the wild, pointing to its natural origin in wildlife. No evidence supports the claim that the COVID-19 outbreak is the result of a bioweapons leak from a Chinese laboratory.

Viral New York Post article perpetuates the unfounded claim that the virus that causes COVID-19 is manmade

Overall, Mosher’s argument is based on unfounded speculation and scientific inaccuracies. Such claims, which continue to be perpetuated even by public officials, have real-world repercussions. Peter Daszak, epidemiologist and president of the EcoHealth Alliance who has collaborated with WIV researchers, warned during an interview with the journal Science: “These rumors and conspiracy theories have real consequences, including threats of violence that have occurred to our colleagues in China.”

No, “HIV insertions” were not identified in the 2019 coronavirus, contrary to claims based on questionable bioinformatics study

The claim is based on a study which compared extremely short gene and protein sequences between the 2019 novel coronavirus and HIV, a practice likely to give false positives. The study’s authors also overlooked checking for potential similarities between 2019-nCoV and other organisms. As it turned out, similar regions could also be found in many other organisms, not just HIV, meaning that these similarities are not unique to 2019-nCoV and HIV.