Live data from Hacker News

The great Covid and smoking cover-up?

spiked-online.com

1–10 of 248 posts

Re: The great Covid and smoking cover-up?

#4
As this article points out, there was a lot of correct information being posted that was flagged as misinformation because the officially correct information was incorrect, even though much of it was extremely obviously true (such as n95 masks reducing the chance of infection). In fact it was simultaneously a crisis that n95 masks were in short supply for medical workers and disputed that n95 masks could be useful to protect people from covid infection.

Before you have a knee-jerk reaction to this, look it up, what I am saying is easy to verify for yourself to be accurate.

Re: The great Covid and smoking cover-up?

#5
I think to call it a "cover-up" is a bit silly. One important thing to call out is that former smoker status does seem to result in an increased risk. Only current status MAY be a reduced risk.

It seems more study is needed but I'm obviously not as invested in this as the author of this article is.

Re: The great Covid and smoking cover-up?

#6
If this were actually true we would see elites and politicians constantly smoking, since it would be keeping them safer and they have access to infinite resources, knowledge, etc. Instead we see them getting vaccinated (sometimes in secret or with no acknowledgement like Trump did) and guzzling Paxlovid courses (multiple times like Fauci did) if they do get sick. I'm sticking with the pharmaceutical interventions that the elites seem to love...

Re: The great Covid and smoking cover-up?

#8
I immediately check out whenever someone says "Google it and see what comes up" as "evidence" proving some conspiracy. Also, this is weird hill to die on. This dude has amassed a mega-blog post with a ton of aggregated studies - it's not a small amount of work.

Anecdotally my only family member who regularly smokes just got COVID.

Re: The great Covid and smoking cover-up?

#9

As this article points out, there was a lot of correct information being posted that was flagged as misinformation because the officially correct information was incorrect, even though much of it was extremely obviously true (such as n95 masks reducing the chance of infection). In fact it was simultaneously a crisis that n95 masks were in short supply for medical workers and disputed that n95 masks could be useful to…

I remember that, it was a funny Catch-22- stop buying masks, the doctors need them- but masks don't protect you from covid. In retrospect, though, I think the narrative that they weren't effective only lasted about as long as the shortage, so probably was intended to relieve that situation.

Re: The great Covid and smoking cover-up?

#10
[Snopes](https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/05/07/does-nicotine-protect...) - from 2020, but unbiased, at least

> The researchers have proposed nicotine attaches to the ACE2 receptors, thereby preventing the virus from attaching and potentially reducing the amount of virus that can get into a person’s lung cells.

As for potential bias: > Further, around 60% of the hospitalised patients in the study were ex-smokers (similar to the national prevalence). Some may have given up smoking very recently in response to the WHO declaring smoking as a risk factor for COVID-19. But they were classified as non-daily smokers in the study. > Second is what we call “social desirability bias”. COVID-19 patients may be more likely to deny smoking when asked about their smoking status in hospital, wanting to be seen by medical professionals as doing the right thing.

*Keep in mind this snopes article is referencing one study from mid-2020, and may not be accurate*

Post reply on HN