Face Mask

:0)

is- is that an emoji from bugsnax?

Hey, if a mask is a muzzle, why am I voluntarily wearing it? It doesn't make me uncomfortable or feel like someone's tracking me. What do you think masks do?

You are voluntarily wearing it because you do not know squat about science. Masks, as they are being used by the public, do exactly nothing. Moreover, because they are not being worn properly, they represent a risk to the wearer.

That, or you are one of those bondage freaks that enjoys being muzzled . . .

Risk to the wearer - ah, imaginary threats. Number of people killed by wearing a mask?

Smoke particles yes, but here are plenty of videos where they use heat cameras, interferometer, etc. to show how far breath travels with and without. Plus, Covid rides on droplets.

Y'all are acting like mosquito nets don't help against malaria because of how small a virus is. Stop the delivery method, stop the virus.

In the end though, it doesn't matter if it makes sense to you or me. Science relies on empirical data, and the numbers show that masks slow the spread of the virus.

https://www.ucdavis.edu/coronavirus/news/your-mask-cuts-own-risk-65-percent

I was going to reply, but you are not bright enough to understand. This was my first clue:
"Y'all are acting like mosquito nets don't help against malaria because of how small a virus is."

In case you have not heard, they finally acknowledged what we already knew- the virus is often transmitted via aerosol, so water droplets are unnecessary.

From the article: "“Studies in laboratory conditions now show the virus stays alive in aerosol form with a half-life on the scale of hours. It persists in the air,” Ristenpart said. “That’s why you want to be outdoors for any social situations if possible. The good air flow will disperse the virus. If you are indoors, think about opening the windows. You want as much fresh air as possible.”"

In other words, masks do not work.

And yes, it DOES matter if it "makes sense to you or me", as science, and the scientific process, are not some mysterious form of magic. The fact that you cite and article which makes the claim without a single bit of actual scientific data and evidence is sufficient to note that you have turned science into a blind faith. Effectively you have turned to an "argument from authority", which is the tool of the blindly faithful.

So, nothing you have said, which was next to nothing, refutes the fact that smoke particles are larger than the virus, and the meme demonstrates just how ineffective those masks are.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00869-2/fulltext

Aerosol, yes. But still droplets, the smaller droplets can remain suspended for hours, but your chance of infection is also varied based no your amount of exposure. Nobody said masks are a perfect solution. You wear them when you can't social distance.

No, it doesn't matter if it makes sense to anyone. Let me explain. If I come up with a design for something that works on paper, but not in real life, then it doesn't matter. There are many medicines that we have no idea how they work - we only know they do by trial and error.

So if transmission is slowed when people wear masks, it doesn't matter if its the mask itself, some behavioral change inspired by the mask, or something else. And the opposite would be true. Results matter.

The article I sited was an easier read, but it linked to the lancet article with the actual study. And the argument from authority does not apply.

Argument from authority is a logical fallacy when the opinion of the authority is the evidence. However, deferring to an expert is not generally considered to be an appeal to authority given that you are free to reference other experts or your own studies; get a second opinion. Deferring to an expert is a logical decision and most people do it quite frequently. A lay opinion is not the same as a doctors. If a doctor says I'm having a heart attack and my neighbor says its probably just mars in retrograde...well, I'm going to the hospital.

You know, you almost make sense, and yet: "No, it doesn't matter if it makes sense to anyone. Let me explain. If I come up with a design for something that works on paper, but not in real life, then it doesn't matter."

In essence, you just said that it does not matter what makes sense, and then refuted it by saying it does matter. In order for us to know that something 'on paper' doesn't actually work, it must be tried in real life. It is at the point of failure that it suddenly 'makes sense', and leads us to return to the drawing board to start over. When you reject the concept of absolute truth, you always find yourself running in circles. Always.

As for the study, there are others which show the contrary, as does the last 50+ years of actual mask use. Masks were not suddenly discovered in 2020, but their misuse was. And if you have not been paying attention, then you would have missed both the CDC's and Fauxci's constant flip-flops on the matter, flip-flops no doubt directed by political motivations, certainly not the "science".

And we wore masks in 1918 when the Spanish Flu hit. And doctors wear masks.

The reasons why they said no masks at the beginning has been explained - they were afraid of causing a shortage of critical medical supplies if people started hording.

I've played the Fauci flip-flop game before. No he doesn't. Guidance has changed, but the reasons for the change have always been explained. I'll field some examples if you want.

"Guidance has changed, but the reasons for the change have always been explained."

Having an explanation does not negate the fact that it is a flip-flop, nor does it hide the fact that they are making this up as they go.

"And doctors wear masks."
*Doctors wear masks in specific situations. Until all of this flip-flop nonsense, doctors did NOT wear masks as a routine, despite the fact that they are often treating sick people.
*Doctors and nurses wear masks in environments that are already essentially sterilized.
*Presumably doctors wear masks using proper handling procedures, which would include changing them every 30 minutes. One wonders how you can presume that there are no negative effects from long term mask wearing, then bring up the fact that doctors wear masks, but when they wear them effectively they change them frequently. I wonder why doctors that wear masks change them?
*Just because one group of "scientists and doctors" (I am not assuming that matters) change the guidance, does NOT mean that the eminent "Dr." Fauxci needed to. Is he unable to think for himself? Does he not have access to data and information? Was he not trained in medicine?
*The famous interview with Fauxci laughing off the need to wear masks in public HAD NOTHING TO DO with a supply issue, unless you are more convinced that he is a state sponsored liar than I do. Very convincing if so. Explaining something AFTER the fact is just spin control when coming from a politician.
*"We" didn't wear masks in 1918, unless you are very, very old. And the masks they wore were far more useless than today's masks.

Explanation does not change the flip flop. I guess you accuse the weather channel of flip flopping too? If there is a reason for a change, there is a reason. Flip flopping is arbitrary.

Surgeons change masks every two hours. Other doctors...maybe each patient. Its a fair point. It won't be as effective, but again, perfect isn't the goal. Any decrease is a win.

Surgeons change masks because as they become wet they become less effective.

The masks were likely far less effective. But the point remains, it isn't something new.

When new information comes out, when new studies come out, the CDC will work to determine if they warrant a change in policy. I assume based on how conclusive the study is and what the impact is. Changing guidance based on new information isn't weakness. Especially not in science.

You are right, "it isn't something new."

If the CDC needs to change *anything* based on "new information" regarding the wearing of masks, which have been in routine medical use for more than 50 years, one wonders what could possibly be discovered after all that time. If what you are assuming were true, then we would have been instructed to wear masks at least during every flu season since 1918. Regardless that a few countries made routine mask wearing a norm, we have never seen such direction. Do you really believe that they discovered something new that refutes all previous studies and experiments from the last 50 years? You are foolish if you do.

As for the weatherman, the only fault I would find with their constant changes would be if they state that they do not constantly change their predictions. They may come close, but they miss one of the prime drivers of the weather- they will often get it wrong. This is not an equivalent to something much more granular and specific, though both camps get more wrong than they get right.

I love how anti-God liberals, and when it comes down to it, most are eventually discovered to be liberal that deny God, are willing to allow for complete reversals in science, while ignoring the veracity and steadfastness of the Word of God. Human nature is depicted with complete accuracy in the Bible, and long before the development of the "science" of psychology happened.

Bottom line- if something you hold steadfastly to is completely reversed tomorrow, then what you believed was completely false, the new theories notwithstanding.

You rightly call the argument from authority a fallacious form of argument, without realizing that you are effectively living your life based on it.

It isn't something new, by which I meant that 'masks are a reasonable deterrent/countermeasure' has been known for a long time. I was taught to cover my mouth when I cough or sneeze. Its the same.

We haven't had an experience quite like this for 100 years. SARS was more deadly (case fatality rate was around 9%, i think), but COVID has been far more contagious. So there actually haven't been all that many reasons to study the spread of a respiratory disease and the effectiveness of masks. Though based on how bad we kicked the Flu's ass over the last two years, maybe there should have been. I know its been the standard in a lot of Asian countries that if you feel ill, you wear a mask for quite some time, but it never quite made it over here. And, to my knowledge, it wasn't studied.

To simplify, I don't think they discovered anything new. I think they were desperate and decided to try things that they'd never bothered with before. Science is often trying things to see if they work and then trying other things as well.

Diseases have different profiles. Masks have been judged effective against COVID, but they might not have been. A virus that could spread more easily with a smaller load might me much easier to catch from those aforementioned aerosol droplets. Or if it survived better on surfaces. In which case, social distancing would have been pretty much the only mitigation.

The bible has wisdom in it. It also has some things that make me glad we have the first amendment and separation of church and state. Deuteronomy 22:28 for instance. Rape a virgin; pay her father; now your married.

I'm a skeptic. I always have been. My grandpa always said I should be from Missouri, because its the 'show me' state. I think your issue is you think I'm talking about Truth when I'm talking about facts. People can be mistaken about facts. People with wrong facts can reach bad conclusions. You look at it as abandoning Truth, but it is in fact the ongoing search for truth. My personal identity and politics aren't tied to any of this.

I do have principles that are unchanging. People are people and must be judged as such. History is complicated, and anyone who tells you differently is selling something. I could probably list more.

You think that the earth is flat and climate change doesn't exist. Also, what do you think masks do?

The Earth is not flat.

Climate change has ALWAYS existed. Anthropogenic global warming does not.

My comments and meme already answered that last question. Turn off the feELz and try some reading comprehension . . .

Please read a book. What do you think carbon dioxide is? It's a greenhouse gas made by HUMANS. Do you really think that we aren't doing anything to the enviornment?

CO2 is a greenhouse gas that was once much higher in concentration than it is today.
It amounts to 0.0004% of our atmosphere.
The more CO2 there is in the atmosphere, the more green plants there are as CO2 is plant food.
The planet has been warmer in the past, prior to the Industrial Revolution.
There was once a mini Ice Age that gave way to warmer temps, without mankind adding any additional CO2 to the environment.

You have not thought this through. You have believed the soundbites which provide no proof whatsoever. You assume that mankind has the ability to have a major impact on the environment because "how could it not?", but without a shred of evidence in your possession.

That is called blind faith, something that is never good.

As for the original topic, that being you having no rational reason to continue wearing a mask: https://bongino.com/fauci-admits-to-masking-after-vaccination-solely-for-optics/?fbclid=IwAR16DsejXTtdhHNUuRf5uuCDzVuWY8cGF6MQCUGRa3Af7vPC0towUJR3Nyc

nice!

You would kill the world’s plants and then you’ll be in really deep sh)t!

Look, please just wear a mask for god's sake.

I'm not an octogenarian with multiple degenerative conditions ...you know, like the people this virus is killing :)

I now imagine you rolling down the interstate drunk driving a tank "I'm nOt In A vUlnErAbLe cAr, sO wHy sHoUlD I WoRrY?" Who cares about anyone else or the shutdown economy?

why, is that what octogenarians with multiple degenerative conditions do?

"Look, please just wear a mask for god's sake."

That's a joke, right? You cannot be so seriously delusional!

You can't be so tinfoil hatted you think that masks don't help us.

But don't believe your lying eyes: https://www.breitbart.com/health/2021/05/17/texas-reports-zero-coronavirus-related-deaths-after-joe-biden-criticized-reopening/?fbclid=IwAR2_guhuCL45cJrWU44Lgbz6Genr_QLk0ZGLbC-mRc3yk4lVOZeUoWCTevs

It's called science, dunderhead. Observational science.

The best mask most commonly worn is the so-called 'surgical mask'. The fibers it is composed of are more tightly wound than the cloth masks even more people are wearing, and yet the gaps in that mask are such that it would be akin to trying to filter half particles of dust with a chain link fence. Even then, the dust would still be too large to be an exact correlation, but you get the point. And yet, we do see back pressure build up in the surgical masks. This causes 'air jets' to occur around the sides and top and bottom, which propels the Covid laden breath (if the wearer is even infected) at a higher rate of speed.

You are a thoughtless, mindless drone:
- the perfect liberal
- the perfect Democrat supporter.

You liberal fools cry, "fOLLoW tHe scIENce!!!", and yet ignore it when the facts are plain to see. And while I do not recommend following a government funded bureaucracy like the CDC, they have since dropped the mask recommendations.

For now. One of the hallmarks of liberalism is finding enjoyment in tormenting other people.

And btw- why bother invoking God, Someone you essentially hate, as evidenced by your liberal worldview?

Are you so tinfoil hatted that you believe those vaccinated somehow have an edge on those of us who actually contracted Covid, and our immune systems took care of it?

No edge in immunity, Genius. But considering the ~2% case fatality rate of COVID, it means 1 in 50 people don't die.

What's more fun that a moron using the word 'genius' to insult someone, while displaying his "moronity". The point of the information is simple- if someone has had it and their immune system defeated it, then there is no DISADVANTAGE when contrasted with the vaccine. Yet idiotic liberals continue to insist that this is somehow inferior, despite the fact that all a vaccine does is the exact. same. thing.

Maybe you need a nap . . .

I always need a nap. That doesn't change the fact that more people die in the exposure based immunity than in the vaccine approach.

Good one!

People wearing a mask when they don't need to - doesn't hurt people.

People not wearing a mask when they needed to - the virus spreads more

I wonder what would have happened in the election if people had masked up. The only demographic that supported Trump more than Biden was people over 50 and they constituted ~95% of the COVID deaths.

people wearing a mask when they don't need to are hurting themselves. have a look into hyperventilation and see for yourself why it's such a serious condition

I thought it was Black people who were suffering most from covid?

It’s not either or. Brace yourself. Old people can be black.

<<The only demographic that supported Trump more than Biden was people over 50 and they constituted ~95% of the COVID deaths.>>

...and Trump supporters?

Of course. Last I looked they were his worst category, but I haven’t looked in a while.

"People not wearing a mask when they needed to - the virus spreads more"

This is one of those things that simply cannot be proven without the ability to time travel and change to constants. The State I live in had mask mandates, and it was clear that there was 99%+ compliance. Nonetheless, the virus continued to spread, as masks are unable to prevent the spread of infectious disease- so says the manufacturer of the masks. Cloth masks are an utter joke.

But if we are going to use anecdotal evidence, which is all ultimately the so-called studies are, then we have whole states, and whole countries, that did not do have the mandates and lock downs, and yet had as good or better numbers than those that did.

Did you see that once the WHO changed how the PCR tests were used this resulted in an immediate 40% drop in cases? If you understand how the PCR tests work, and how that test has been abused, you will understand that the ONLY place Covid is a true pandemic is "on paper". People have been dying of other things than Covid, but that is not reflected in the 'official' numbers.

The PCR test has limits which were far surpassed for the purposes of creating a narrative. So says, in theory, the inventor of the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nem2GmzalaA

This doctor has much to say about the arbitrary uselessness of 'social distancing', etc. I recommend watching more of her videos on the subject.

Can't be proven. Not 100% but again, there have been studies and those studies explain their methods.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/masking-science-sars-cov2.html

PCR - No. They did put out guidance on being consistent with cycles to avoid false positives. I've seen no source that shows that this resulted in fewer false positives. The thing is they stated in one release that they expected that countries with better equipment wouldn't be affected by this - it was mostly going to affect countries that aren't us...but I'll always read a source if you want to point me.

Seal of Approval - 4z05qo.jpg (click to show) Upvoted!

Face masks aren't liberal.

No- how they are being misused IS liberal . . .

They're not.

Well, there you go! The expert has spoken . . . you're wrong, but keep on being you- you're so "special".