To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

weldoninhio

odyssey06 wrote: »

If a member of the general public is caring for an infected person in their own household, and wearing a mask to try to protect themselves - which is what the guidance was originally drafted for. That document has evolved over time.

This is a dead end argument for you as it was the last time.

If you're going to quote the document, it is also the document that states:
"There is evidence that wearing a surgical mask reduces the amount of droplets scattered from the nose and mouth."

Nowhere does it say, unless you follow every and exact guideline to the letter including:
"Children under 13 years of age are generally advised against wearing a face covering."

Just as your tyres don't stop functioning if you don't follow the manufacturer's optimal care guidelines, nor do masks.

You are spreading very dangerous misinformation.

Wibbs

weldoninhio wrote: »

This is no plague.

Bubonic plague it is not, thank christ, because the percentage of the truly stupid and self involved that this virus has exposed in the wider community on all sides of debate would mean something like yersinia pestis going rogue would land us back in the medieval. Though Anne off Facebook(devoted housewife, DH, three kids, all angles, likes unlit candles, IQ of 80) would be left talking to a potato so there are positives in everything.

brianhere wrote: »

Its a plague of shocking arbitrary state power and tyranny though. Which needs to be resisted.

"Deep state" and NWO and Soros pulling the levers no doubt. And China. You linked and posted an "article" by a moron from a site that is chock full of same where the facts were even less in evidence than many articles out there and by god that's a low bar these days, so pardon me for not taking your warning too seriously. Never mind this "tyranny" you speak of seems to be remarkably powerless. I've yet to be stopped going through an checkpoint and the Guards haven't darkened my door to clap me in irons.

odyssey06

weldoninhio wrote: »

You are spreading very dangerous misinformation.

Cop on. Wear a mask. Its easier than the campaign of lies and disinformation you have engaged in against masks.

You are still putting up quotes from april about masks as PPE. I dont know if you just dont understand the difference between masks as barrier v PPE.
Or if it just suits your agenda to sow confusiin.

Masks arent going away anytime soon. Their use will only expand until such time as we have practicable vaccination.

Guy:Incognito

weldoninhio wrote: »

Has it? A lot of countries, Ireland included, have said that they have overstated Covid deaths. I wonder what the final score will be.

I bet you have "6%" in your twitter handle, dont you.:rolleyes:

weldoninhio

odyssey06 wrote: »

Cop on. Wear a mask. Its easier than the campaign of lies and disinformation you have engaged in against masks.

You are still putting up quotes from april about masks as PPE. I dont know if you just dont understand the difference between masks as barrier v PPE.
Or if it just suits your agenda to sow confusiin.

Masks arent going away anytime soon. Their use will only expand until such time as we have practicable vaccination.

How is such disinformation allowed on this site? Don’t you feel the least bit culpable?

weldoninhio

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I bet you have "6%" in your twitter handle, dont you.:rolleyes:

How much you wanna bet?

saneman

weldoninhio wrote: »

Has it? A lot of countries, Ireland included, have said that they have overstated Covid deaths. I wonder what the final score will be.

weldoninhio wrote: »

How much you wanna bet?

Well I'll bet this, I'll bet that if you have a loved one pass away due to this coronavirus, or indeed any other reason, you wouldn't want it tallied as some type of fcuking score

Tork

You declared a page or two ago "the plague killed 25m people, you'd be lucky to get 25m people with a blocked nose from this bug"
If a comment like that isn't dangerous misinformation, I don't know what is.

perrito caliente

It's basically a little worse than the regular flu.

gmisk

perrito caliente wrote: »

It's basically a little worse than the regular flu.

Your basing that on what?...

weldoninhio

saneman wrote: »

Well I'll bet this, I'll bet that if you have a loved one pass away due to this coronavirus, or indeed any other reason, you wouldn't want it tallied as some type of fcuking score

I'd want them tallied as what they died of, not used as propaganda for months, then reclassified.

pjohnson

saneman wrote: »

Well I'll bet this, I'll bet that if you have a loved one pass away due to this coronavirus, or indeed any other reason, you wouldn't want it tallied as some type of fcuking score

Likely wont be an issue tbf.

Guy:Incognito

perrito caliente wrote: »

It's basically a little worse than the regular flu.

Except for all the dead people(and the ones with lasting issues and the ones that were in ICU) .......


Flu in the us kills up to ( that's up to, not the amount it definitely kills every year) 61,000.

Remind us of the death toll so far in 8 months of covid......*




*Spoiler , it's north of 225,000

Sconsey

weldoninhio wrote: »

How is such disinformation allowed on this site? Don’t you feel the least bit culpable?

weldoninhio wrote: »

You are spreading very dangerous misinformation.

Very high and mighty from the guy that openly admits to getting a fake doctors letter and lying about having a mental illness for his own personal benefit.

robinph

weldoninhio wrote: »

You are spreading very dangerous misinformation.

If people advocating for mask wearing are wrong then what are the downsides? Fabric manufacturers make a bit more money, some people get their glasses steaming up a bit on walking into shops and a couple of people with extreme sensitive skin get a scratchy nose.

If those advocating for the not wearing of masks are wrong then what are the downsides? Lots more people get infected, and then lots more people die.

Which of the two sides are potentially spreading the dangerous disinformation now?

weldoninhio

robinph wrote: »

If people advocating for mask wearing are wrong then what are the downsides? Fabric manufacturers make a bit more money, some people get their glasses steaming up a bit on walking into shops and a couple of people with extreme sensitive skin get a scratchy nose.

If those advocating for the not wearing of masks are wrong then what are the downsides? Lots more people get infected, and then lots more people die.

Which of the two sides are potentially spreading the dangerous disinformation now?

Downsides

*Dr Kim Roberts of the Trinity College virology department told The Irish Times that while there was some evidence suggesting face masks when worn correctly can have “a modest effect” on reducing transmission of Covid-19, “if not worn correctly, masks can pose as a hazard and can potentially increase the risk of transmission of the virus”.


* US Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams not only wants people to stop buying facemasks to prevent the novel coronavirus, but warns that you actually might increase your risk of infection if facemasks are not worn properly.

"You can increase your risk of getting it by wearing a mask if you are not a health care provider," Adams said during an interview.

"Folks who don't know how to wear them properly tend to touch their faces a lot and actually can increase the spread of coronavirus," Adams said.


*Using a mask incorrectly however, may actually increase the risk of transmission, rather than reduce it.
https://www.who.int/csr/resources/pu...ityrevised.pdf


*Acting Chief Medical Officer Ronan Glynn says while the level of compliance is encouraging, there are huge risks if people do not wear a mask properly.

"If we can just take the opportunity to remind people that if you are wearing them to wear them properly.

"We are seeing far too many people walking around with them under their chin.

"We are seeing many people wearing them but with their nose exposed.

"Neither of those things provide any protection and indeed may increase the risk."

moonage

robinph wrote: »

If people advocating for mask wearing are wrong then what are the downsides? Fabric manufacturers make a bit more money, some people get their glasses steaming up a bit on walking into shops and a couple of people with extreme sensitive skin get a scratchy nose.

If those advocating for the not wearing of masks are wrong then what are the downsides? Lots more people get infected, and then lots more people die.

Which of the two sides are potentially spreading the dangerous disinformation now?

The claim that "lots more people get infected, and then lots more people die" doesn't hold up, as the evidence that face coverings stop transmission is very weak. The "they might help a small bit" argument isn't strong enough for them to be mandatory.

The fact that they were made mandatory in the middle of summer when deaths had bottomed out for months says it all really.

Clearly they were introduced to maintain a level of fear that wasn't and isn't warranted and as a symbol of compliance with the government's draconian restrictions.

Sconsey

weldoninhio wrote: »

Downsides

*Dr Kim Roberts of the Trinity College virology department told The Irish Times that while there was some evidence suggesting face masks when worn correctly can have “a modest effect” on reducing transmission of Covid-19, “if not worn correctly, masks can pose as a hazard and can potentially increase the risk of transmission of the virus”.


* US Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams not only wants people to stop buying facemasks to prevent the novel coronavirus, but warns that you actually might increase your risk of infection if facemasks are not worn properly.

"You can increase your risk of getting it by wearing a mask if you are not a health care provider," Adams said during an interview.

"Folks who don't know how to wear them properly tend to touch their faces a lot and actually can increase the spread of coronavirus," Adams said.


*Using a mask incorrectly however, may actually increase the risk of transmission, rather than reduce it.
https://www.who.int/csr/resources/pu...ityrevised.pdf


*Acting Chief Medical Officer Ronan Glynn says while the level of compliance is encouraging, there are huge risks if people do not wear a mask properly.

"If we can just take the opportunity to remind people that if you are wearing them to wear them properly.

"We are seeing far too many people walking around with them under their chin.

"We are seeing many people wearing them but with their nose exposed.

"Neither of those things provide any protection and indeed may increase the risk."

So to summarise, if you are too stupid to wear a mask properly there is a chance that you might make things worse. That is a lot of if's and but's versus the science that masks reduce the spread of the virus.

odyssey06

weldoninhio wrote: »

Downsides

* US Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams not only wants people to stop buying facemasks to prevent the novel coronavirus, but warns that you actually might increase your risk of infection if facemasks are not worn properly.

Oh look it's another garbage post with deliberately chosen out of date data designed to create a deliberately misleading impression.

It's such an obvious canard it is already been completely and utterly debunked.

What's True
In public statements in early 2020, the surgeon general had recommended against the general public buying or wearing masks.

What's False
However, in light of new evidence from the CDC, he changed his views and has since argued in favor of people wearing cloth facial coverings in public settings.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/surgeon-general-against-masks/

moonage

Sconsey wrote: »

So to summarise, if you are too stupid to wear a mask properly there is a chance that you might make things worse. That is a lot of if's and but's versus the science that masks reduce the spread of the virus.

Decades of studies showed that the evidence was weak that masks stop viral transmission.

Suddenly in 2020 that's all reversed. Strange.

weldoninhio

moonage wrote: »

Decades of studies showed that the evidence was weak that masks stop viral transmission.

Suddenly in 2020 that's all reversed. Strange.

Careful, the big guns will be out soon, including the debunked cartoon so beloved of the zealots.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-coronavirus-mask-efficacy-idUSKCN2252T6

odyssey06

moonage wrote: »

Decades of studies showed that the evidence was weak that masks stop viral transmission.
Suddenly in 2020 that's all reversed. Strange.

How many of those studies were about masks as use as barriers versus masks as PPE?
So it's entirely misleading to talk about decades of studies, when the studies were for a different purpose.

The stakes are higher now, as we deal with an unquestionable more serious threat to public health than cold or flu. Therefore the benefits of masks takes on a new importance.

So masks are an important public health measure, not part of some conspiracy theory agenda nonsense about tyranny and "maintaining a sense of fear".

robinph

moonage wrote: »

The claim that "lots more people get infected, and then lots more people die" doesn't hold up, as the evidence that face coverings stop transmission is very weak. The "they might help a small bit" argument isn't strong enough for them to be mandatory.

The fact that they were made mandatory in the middle of summer when deaths had bottomed out for months says it all really.

Clearly they were introduced to maintain a level of fear that wasn't and isn't warranted and as a symbol of compliance with the government's draconian restrictions.

My scenario wasn't making the claim that "lots more people die", that prospect is based on the downside of you being wrong. If you are wrong then "lots of people die" due to lack of mask wearing. That claim is entirely based on you being wrong in the hypothetical scenario.

But if you are right and masks are ineffective we have the downside of ...well, not a lot of downside. Except for someone who isn't wearing a mask correctly might scratch their nose immediately after being coughed on by a non mask wearing infectious person and then catch it that way.

Not wearing a mask correctly doesn't make the virus able to seek you out and specifically target you. If the majority of people are wearing them correctly then how does the one person not wearing it correctly cause infections to rise?

Also, not wearing a mask correctly is irrelevant to this discussion as that is not what anyone is advocating for. People are saying to wear masks, not to wear masks and sneeze on each other before scratching each other noses.

robinph

weldoninhio wrote: »

Careful, the big guns will be out soon, including the debunked cartoon so beloved of the zealots.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-coronavirus-mask-efficacy-idUSKCN2252T6

Did you even read the article, the first words are "partly false", not debunked?

The false bit being that the claimed percentages have not actually been researched.

weldoninhio

robinph wrote: »

Did you even read the article, the first words are "partly false", not debunked?

The false bit being that the claimed percentages have not actually been researched.

You mean the parts that were completely made up?? :rolleyes:

robinph

weldoninhio wrote: »

You mean the parts that were completely made up?? :rolleyes:

The percentages? Yes, well done for understanding the reason for the "partly false" tags.

Now where are your percentages to back up the claim that wearing masks increases the number of people who scratch their noses after being coughed on and the only reason for them being coughed on was because they were not wearing a mask properly?

Sconsey

moonage wrote: »

Decades of studies showed that the evidence was weak that masks stop viral transmission.

Suddenly in 2020 that's all reversed. Strange.

Overwhelming scientific research has concluded that masks can reduce the risk of the spread of the virus. The strange part is that you choose to ignore it.

weldoninhio

robinph wrote: »

The percentages? Yes, well done for understanding the reason for the "partly false" tags.

Now where are your percentages to back up the claim that wearing masks increases the number of people who scratch their noses after being coughed on and the only reason for them being coughed on was because they were not wearing a mask properly?

Partly false hahahahaha. Tomorrow’s Euromillion numbers are 14, 23, 25, 37, 42. And if none of them come out, it’s only partly false hahahaha

robinph

weldoninhio wrote: »

Partly false hahahahaha. Tomorrow’s Euromillion numbers are 14, 23, 25, 37, 42. And if none of them come out, it’s only partly false hahahaha

The claim on the cartoons was that transmission was reduced by wearing of masks. That has not been disputed.

All that has been disputed is the claim of specific percentage reduction in transmission.

So "partly false" is correct.



Now, about the increase in risk from people wearing masks under their nose. Explain how that works?

robinph

moonage wrote: »

Clearly they were introduced to maintain a level of fear that wasn't and isn't warranted and as a symbol of compliance with the government's draconian restrictions.

Didn't mean to let this one go.

Have we ever had any explanation for the this masterplan of getting the world population to comply with something because they have been forced to wear face masks?

What is the end game here? Why do all national governments of every flavour want their populations wearing masks? How is this helping them if it isn't anything to do with slowing transmission of a virus? What is to be gained by the government instilling fear from asking people to wear masks?

Is the world actually run by a secret cabal of little old ladies with sewing machines churning out facemasks they they sell for a couple of euros a time on Etsy and they have been waiting for their moment to strike for years before they could finally force us all to wear masks with pretty flowers and rainbows on as the final part of their master plan for world domination?