Not Surprising

[Empidonax]

Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto

How funny you should think that's "proof!"

How funny that you think that I think this is "proof," when what I said is this:

«The NYT recently posted an interesting article on the effectiveness of masks. It probably won't resonate with the most ardent anti-maskers, and there are those who dismiss the NYT as if it were Politico or Breibart, but it's an interesting feature with some 3-D visuals»

I'm well aware of many of the advantages and disadvantages of features such as these. We've been through this many times on this subforum. In this case, the article is suggestive, but it only addresses part of the overall picture.

(And to refresh your memory, I had some positive things to say about the study you cited, but I don't see it as a paradigm-shifting, slam-dunk-kind-of-a-paper against all and every instance of mask-wearing. That study, too, only addresses a part of the overall picture.)

Way back in this thread I sited the only actual science on the subject: masks are irrelevant to the spread of the virus. Only exposure to a known source and extended time spent in restaurants & bars were positively correlated with risk of infection....Under political pressure, the authors were encouraged to publicly "qualify' their conclusions-- without any data to back that PC opinion up.

And it was pointed out that masks cannot be ruled out in other environments.

Your anti-maskerism is so great, that you're not seeing much in the way of nuance in these studies. This isn't necessarily an either/or, black/white situation.

The election is over, No need to push the false narrative anymore.

No bias from you there.

[guidoLaMoto]

Using the word "bias" implies I have a POV and then look for supporting evidence...In fact, I see the evidence-- the Dems lying about the science-- and then formed an opinion. I don't like liars.

[Empidonax]

Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto

Using the word "bias" implies I have a POV and then look for supporting evidence...In fact, I see the evidence-- the Dems lying about the science-- and then formed an opinion. I don't like liars.

All humans have biases. Some are better than others at keeping them in check when needed. If you think you're unbiased in your assessment of mask-wearing, that's great. Other informed people--including Republican immunologists and other scientists I'm acquainted with--also claim to be unbiased in their analysis and support of wearing masks. There are lots of rational and well-informed opinions out there on the matter, including opinions held by people who aren't Dems, and yours isn't the only one. I find your comments here engaging and insightful, but not necessarily definitive. My apologies.