Masks

dwayneshintzy

Yes: to protect myself and others

weldoninhio wrote: »

Someones weak genes are no one else’s concern. It’s evolution. It removes the weak genes from the pool by making them weak and vulnerable to disease that others can fight off. It’s been happening for millennia. Happens in all living things.

Diabetes and asthma are some of the underlying conditions which can cause sever complications for people who contract covid..


I am absolutely certain that there are people with asthma and diabetes who are far fitter and stronger than you, and indeed most people.

Graham

weldoninhio wrote: »

Someones weak genes are no one else’s concern. It’s evolution. It removes the weak genes from the pool by making them weak and vulnerable to disease that others can fight off. It’s been happening for millennia. Happens in all living things.

Are you suggesting we euthanise those that aren't strong enough to wear a mask?

That sounds a bit harsh for someone that might only have a bit of a rash.

PowerToWait

weldoninhio wrote: »

Someones weak genes are no one else’s concern. It’s evolution. It removes the weak genes from the pool by making them weak and vulnerable to disease that others can fight off. It’s been happening for millennia. Happens in all living things.

Weak. Fcuking. Genes.

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

Saw someone wearing those expensive ffp2 face masks and it under the nose.

Seriously, why bother spending money on the best type of masks to wear it arseways.

eleventh

Graham wrote: »

Are you suggesting we euthanise those that aren't strong enough to wear a mask?

So you see mask-wearing as a sign of strength.
Did our ancestors go around wearing masks. Of course not. (The only people wore masks were slaves).
It's an obvious sign of weakness and death to be that insensitive and cut off from your body's most basic need to breathe fresh air, unobstructed and unimpeded.

dwayneshintzy

Yes: to protect myself and others

eleventh wrote: »

So you see mask-wearing as a sign of strength.
Did our ancestors go around wearing masks. Of course not. (The only people wore masks were slaves).
It's an obvious sign of weakness and death to be that insensitive and cut off from your body's most basic need to breathe fresh air, unobstructed and unimpeded.

Are you taking the piss?

Graham

eleventh wrote: »

So you see mask-wearing as a sign of strength.

Strength no, intelligence perhaps.

eleventh

Away With The Fairies wrote:

Seriously, why bother spending money on the best type of masks to wear it arseways.

Maybe their body is signalling to them it wants fresh air, not air that's compromised/contaminated by mask fabric and all the gunk that material will pick up. So there is some hope for them then.

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

eleventh wrote: »

So you see mask-wearing as a sign of strength.
Did our ancestors go around wearing masks. Of course not. (The only people wore masks were slaves).
It's an obvious sign of weakness and death to be that insensitive and cut off from your body's most basic need to breathe fresh air, unobstructed and unimpeded.

Pretty sure they wore masks during the Spanish flu, so I think our ancestors wore masks as well.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

weldoninhio wrote: »

Never heard of evolution no? Survival of the fittest?

Would you quit with the completely incorrect use of the term. The fittest refers to a species for a start and not an individual within a species. The biological concept of fitness refers to reproductive success, as opposed to survival.

You're way off the mark on every count.

odyssey06

eleventh wrote: »

So you see mask-wearing as a sign of strength.
Did our ancestors go around wearing masks. Of course not. (The only people wore masks were slaves).
It's an obvious sign of weakness and death to be that insensitive and cut off from your body's most basic need to breathe fresh air, unobstructed and unimpeded.

Most of the time our ancestors didn't go around wearing clothes, or shoes, or living in a house... or typing on a keyboard for that matter.

They didn't buy groceries in a supermarket.
Or take a bus.
(And those are the places you are being mandated to wear a mask)

So if you want to live like our ancestors, don't wear a mask, but don't buy your food in a shop or take a bus.
You don't seem to want to live as part of a modern civilised society.

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

eleventh wrote: »

Maybe their body is signalling to them it wants fresh air, not air that's compromised/contaminated by mask fabric and all the gunk that material will pick up. So there is some hope for them then.

So you would rather people breathe in air with virus particles. Sure way to get oxygen on a ventilator anyways.

odyssey06

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

So you would rather people breathe in air with virus particles. Sure way to get oxygen on a ventilator anyways.

I assume all those who object to masks because it's not how our ancestors lived... will die like our ancestors and refuse ventilation?

xhomelezz

Yes: valved

eleventh wrote: »

So you see mask-wearing as a sign of strength.
Did our ancestors go around wearing masks. Of course not. (The only people wore masks were slaves).
It's an obvious sign of weakness and death to be that insensitive and cut off from your body's most basic need to breathe fresh air, unobstructed and unimpeded.

What to say to this.. Definitely another victim of underfunded education. Just out of curiosity, did you read your post, was it just a moment of madness?

saneman

Yes: surgical

eleventh wrote: »

Maybe their body is signalling to them it wants fresh air, not air that's compromised/contaminated by mask fabric and all the gunk that material will pick up. So there is some hope for them then.

First you compare masks to smoking, and now seem to be of the belief that mask fabric contaminates the air you breath... You realise that the "gunk the material will pick up" would otherwise go in your lungs? There's a whole industry based around the fact that masks offer protection for exactly that reason.

I really hope you're just trolling at this stage because the alternative...

eleventh

xhomelezz wrote: »

What to say to this.. Definitely another victim of underfunded education. Just out of curiosity, did you read your post, was it just a moment of madness?

Didn't you admit to being a smoker a few posts back. Hardly know much about respiratory health then.

eleventh

sanemman wrote:

You realise that the "gunk the material will pick up" would otherwise go in your lungs?

It doesn't work like that. The gunk from down the street would still be there up the street so you are repeatedly breathing in unwanted debris, it's a cumulative effect.

There's a whole industry based around the fact that masks offer protection for exactly that reason.

There's a whole industry based around vaping, nicotine etc. Doesn't mean it's good.

Sconsey

No: other

eleventh wrote: »

It doesn't work like that. The gunk from down the street would still be there up the street so you are repeatedly breathing in unwanted debris, it's a cumulative effect.
There's a whole industry based around vaping, nicotine etc. Doesn't mean it's good.

LOL you're spouting such nonsense and trying your best to make it sound rational. Keep it up, good for a laugh at this stage.

weldoninhio

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Graham wrote: »

Are you suggesting we euthanise those that aren't strong enough to wear a mask?

That sounds a bit harsh for someone that might only have a bit of a rash.

Are you unable to read? I didn’t mention anything in the ballpark of euthanasia.

Graham

eleventh wrote: »

It doesn't work like that. The gunk from down the street would still be there up the street so you are repeatedly breathing in unwanted debris, it's a cumulative effect.

I'd love to know the medical journal you're quoting. :pac:

weldoninhio

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

Would you quit with the completely incorrect use of the term. The fittest refers to a species for a start and not an individual within a species. The biological concept of fitness refers to reproductive success, as opposed to survival.

You're way off the mark on every count.

Charles Darwin popularized the concept of survival of the fittest as a mechanism underlying the natural selection that drives the evolution of life. Organisms with genes better suited to the environment are selected for survival and pass them to the next generation.

saneman

Yes: surgical

eleventh wrote: »

It doesn't work like that. The gunk from down the street would still be there up the street so you are repeatedly breathing in unwanted debris, it's a cumulative effect.
There's a whole industry based around vaping, nicotine etc. Doesn't mean it's good.

Okay, now you're just being wantonly ignorant, and pulling another comparison out of your arse that has no bearing on what's being discussed.

odyssey06

weldoninhio wrote: »

Charles Darwin popularized the concept of survival of the fittest as a mechanism underlying the natural selection that drives the evolution of life. Organisms with genes better suited to the environment are selected for survival and pass them to the next generation.

I assume then, following your interpretation of Darwinian principles, that you then decline antibiotics, vaccination, chemotherapy... should they be recommended to you by medical professionals.
How do you fancy the chances of your genes facing off unaided against measles, diptheria, tetanis, TB, hepatitis B, blood poisoning, cancer without any of the above?

Darwin would have recognised that the vast majority of the people dying from this virus are no longer of reproductive age, and likely any of their offspring are past the age of dependency ... their genes have already been passed or - or not. Their deaths have negligible selection effect.

So your argument is not only a red herring to whether in a modern civilised society we should be wearing masks in a pandemic...
It's fundamentally flawed even on the basis you thought you were making it.

saneman

Yes: surgical

weldoninhio wrote: »

Charles Darwin popularized the concept of survival of the fittest as a mechanism underlying the natural selection that drives the evolution of life. Organisms with genes better suited to the environment are selected for survival and pass them to the next generation.

Yeah, thanks for that quick rundown on evolutionary biology, it in no way could possibly derail a discussion on mask use.

That fact that human society has moved beyond that concept in terms of survivability may irk you somewhat, I dunno. Maybe you'd also like to see the end of neonatal care, antibiotic use, or indeed any form of medical intervention. I'd hate to see your own "fitness" come into doubt.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

weldoninhio wrote: »

Charles Darwin popularized the concept of survival of the fittest as a mechanism underlying the natural selection that drives the evolution of life. Organisms with genes better suited to the environment are selected for survival and pass them to the next generation.

Thanks. I know exactly what Darwin proposed only too well and in great depth. You, I'm afraid, have a completely erroneous digested understanding of it. Organisms refers to a species, not traits of lone individuals. You're clutching at very weak straws.

GT89

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Nobody is wearing them where the public can’t see them. Same in my place of work. It’s all for show. Go down the factory floor and not one person wears one. It’s far too much to expect of people to wear a mask for 12 hour shifts. I do about 30-35k walking per shift, absolutely no way in hell im wearing one.

Exactly everyone takes them off in the stockroom

robinph

No: I don't care enough

weldoninhio wrote: »

Someones weak genes are no one else’s concern. It’s evolution. It removes the weak genes from the pool by making them weak and vulnerable to disease that others can fight off. It’s been happening for millennia. Happens in all living things.

I ran 46 miles non stop this morning before most of you will have finished your breakfast. Whose got the weak genes?

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Diabetes and asthma are some of the underlying conditions which can cause sever complications for people who contract covid..

I am absolutely certain that there are people with asthma and diabetes who are far fitter and stronger than you, and indeed most people.

Hello. Tick on both boxes there.

weldoninhio

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

robinph wrote: »

I ran 46 miles non stop this morning before most of you will have finished your breakfast. Whose got the weak genes?




Hello. Tick on both boxes there.

Anyone vulnerable to the virus has weak genes. The majority won’t even know they’ve caught the bug.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

weldoninhio wrote: »

Anyone vulnerable to the virus has weak genes. The majority won’t even know they’ve caught the bug.

You can keep reciting that tosh all day but it doesn't make it any more sensible an argument against wearing masks.

There are no such things as weak genes. Dominant and Recessive perhaps but there are no strong or weak genes.

You really don't have a clue about all this, do you?

robinph

No: I don't care enough

weldoninhio wrote: »

Anyone vulnerable to the virus has weak genes. The majority won’t even know they’ve caught the bug.

So you belive that I should be culled because you don't feel like wearing a mask. Delightful.