Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a really big load of crap and I would like to see your evidence that mask-wearing is what caused the death from the Spanish flu. Your post would actually be funny if it weren’t such a stupid and reckless thing to say at a time like this.
Bacterial pneumonia did cause most of the deaths but I challenge you to find any reputable source that says masks caused that, never mind the millions of deaths. What a load of garbage on forum that is already a cess pit.
Therein lies the big problem we all have .... finding a reputable source among this rather massive collection of liars wearing white coats and blue suits, along with paid trolls on message boards.
This is a really big load of crap and I would like to see your evidence that mask-wearing is what caused the death from the Spanish flu. Your post would actually be funny if it weren’t such a stupid and reckless thing to say at a time like this.
Bacterial pneumonia did cause most of the deaths but I challenge you to find any reputable source that says masks caused that, never mind the millions of deaths. What a load of garbage on forum that is already a cess pit.
Therein lies the big problem we all have .... finding a reputable source among this rather massive collection of liars wearing white coats and blue suits, along with paid trolls on message boards.
But thanks for acknowledging that it was not the virus, but actually bacteria that was responsible for most of the Spanish Flu deaths, as I accurately stated.
Now, in leu of the mask wearing being responsible for the collection and distribution point for subsequent bacterial lung infections, I’m open to consider an alternative view of the source of these bacterial infections? But frankly, it’s the most plausible conclusion, given the fact that we know that cloth can collect and harbor bacteria (it’s why it’s important to wash your underpants, and wear clean ones ), and why you might not want to wear your dirty underpants on your face or leave your head up your arse for too long .... well, the masks can indeed collect bacteria ... and continued wearing of masks which are contaminated with bacteria would logically create a situation which you were steadily breathing in bacteria. That said, I don’t believe we are going out on a skinny limb here to consider that a bacterial lung infection might result from inhaling bacteria repeatedly?
Is that me being anti-science again? Or is this just plain freaking common sense??
Don’t be silly. Any source I might cite which conflicts with your version of things would be dismissed immediately.
Nonsense ... no such testing was done in the accelerated push for emergency use authorization. There was not time for it.
Not according to health authorities in the UK ... quite the opposite.... the vaccinated have a 3.25 times the mortality of the unvaccinated, as current data suggests.
Please give the source for your "UK" data.
Yes, there are data on antibody dependent enhancement.
"Scientists designed animal studies to look for ADE. They looked for it in human trials, and they've been looking for it in the real-world data for COVID-19 vaccines with emergency use authorization. So far, they haven't seen signs of it. In fact, the opposite is happening, Lowe noted.
'[W]hat seems to be beyond doubt is that the vaccinated subjects, over and over, show up with no severe coronavirus cases and no hospitalizations. That is the opposite of what you would expect if ADE were happening,' he wrote."
Quote:
Originally Posted by RowingFiend
The ignorance is astounding. No matter what mask anyone wears, or how tight it fits, if the mask wearer can breathe then they can get infected. This is how airborne viruses work. Period, end of story.
No mask completely eliminates the risk of infection. They reduce the risk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
That to which you suggest can be easily disproven by anyone.... they need only to put on a mask ... place mirror in front of mouth and exhale. The mirror will fog ... proving the ineffectiveness of masks blocking water vapor droplets. Doesn’t matter how well fitted, or how effectively placed and worn, the vapor will pass though ... not just around, not just out of poor fitting areas ... right straight through ...
Masks will block spit .... LOL
Yes, masks reduce the amount of spit in the atmosphere. Combined with social distancing and hand hygiene they reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
This is a really big load of crap and I would like to see your evidence that mask-wearing is what caused the death from the Spanish flu. Your post would actually be funny if it weren’t such a stupid and reckless thing to say at a time like this.
Bacterial pneumonia did cause most of the deaths but I challenge you to find any reputable source that says masks caused that, never mind the millions of deaths. What a load of garbage on forum that is already a cess pit.
Therein lies the big problem we all have .... finding a reputable source among this rather massive collection of liars wearing white coats and blue suits, along with paid trolls on message boards.
The ignorance is astounding. No matter what mask anyone wears, or how tight it fits, if the mask wearer can breathe then they can get infected. This is how airborne viruses work. Period, end of story.
Listen to me right here and now, the only persons I respect who insist that masks don't work are from people who claim they always wore a mask everywhere there was people, including while at home when having visitors over, yet came down sick with COVID-19 anyway. I assume you're not one of those type persons.
"Scientists designed animal studies to look for ADE. They looked for it in human trials, and they've been looking for it in the real-world data for COVID-19 vaccines with emergency use authorization. So far, they haven't seen signs of it. In fact, the opposite is happening, Lowe noted.
'[W]hat seems to be beyond doubt is that the vaccinated subjects, over and over, show up with no severe coronavirus cases and no hospitalizations. That is the opposite of what you would expect if ADE were happening,' he wrote."
No mask completely eliminates the risk of infection. They reduce the risk.
Yes, masks reduce the amount of spit in the atmosphere. Combined with social distancing and hand hygiene they reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
Few will read this, or even be able to extrapolate out the data, but you asked and here it is. I won’t cite the source that provided the detailed commentary, because you’d just attack that.
Frankly, this isn’t surprising to me or anyone else that has studied the topic of vaccines ... we’ve seen this before in certain flu vaccines where persons vaccinated for a certain group of strains were far more susceptible to infection from another, due to a weakened immune system unable to fend off another virus. But that’s an entirely different matter than ADE.
But this Uk data showing that the vaccinated are over 3 times more likely to die from exposure to the delta variant coincides with previous warnings from several sources about the dangers of ADE. It fits the warnings PRECISELY... that is, in a nutshell what those warnings were claiming ....
Your mask will not protect you from a virus, but your willingness to wear one will guarantee additional requirements to obey. Thats how tyranny works … you don’t lose all freedom all at once … you lose it all, piece by piece.
Thats why we are not minding our own business, because this IS OUR BUSINESS.
Ah, what happened to you in GuyNTexas? Did you wear a mask everywhere there was people, but came down sick with COVID-19, anyway? If so, maybe wearing the mask made you less sick, so you didn't have to end up in the hospital.
So I wonder how many people can claim they wore a mask everywhere there was people, but came down so sick with COVID-19 that they had to be admitted to the hospital. Seriously, folks I want real world evidence that wearing masks don't do a damned good bit of good. Or is that just too much to ask for?
Few will read this, or even be able to extrapolate out the data, but you asked and here it is. I won’t cite the source that provided the detailed commentary, because you’d just attack that.
Frankly, this isn’t surprising to me or anyone else that has studied the topic of vaccines ... we’ve seen this before in certain flu vaccines where persons vaccinated for a certain group of strains were far more susceptible to infection from another, due to a weakened immune system unable to fend off another virus. But that’s an entirely different matter than ADE.
But this Uk data showing that the vaccinated are over 3 times more likely to die from exposure to the delta variant coincides with previous warnings from several sources about the dangers of ADE. It fits the warnings PRECISELY... that is, in a nutshell what those warnings were claiming ....
There is nothing in the link you gave that states "the vaccinated are over 3 times more likely to die from exposure to the delta variant".
That to which you suggest can be easily disproven by anyone.... they need only to put on a mask ... place mirror in front of mouth and exhale. The mirror will fog ... proving the ineffectiveness of masks blocking water vapor droplets. Doesn’t matter how well fitted, or how effectively placed and worn, the vapor will pass though ... not just around, not just out of poor fitting areas ... right straight through ...
Masks will block spit .... LOL
Don't know what you were testing, but early on, wondering about this, all I had were a few surgical masks.
Turned one upside down and filled it with water. It didn't leak.
I am 100% in favor of your freedom of choice to wear a mask. The problem arises from your hypocrisy in not respecting everyone else’s freedom to choose not to wear one, while promoting lies justifying your double standard. That’s the reason for the pushback. You want to be a sheep, have at it. Just don’t try to be a herder. In other words, be willing to respect the rights of others you demand for yourself.
Quote:
Masks DO protect you from respiratory viruses. If you fail to select the proper mask and wear it properly, then no, it will not protect you. That is your own ignorance or laziness. There are plenty of easily available resources online that explain what to wear and how to wear it.
Do I agree with lockdowns? No. I think businesses should have been able to stay open.
I have enough faith in masks/respirators (KN95 N95 P100) that people should have been able to continue their lives as normal. A N95 respirator will sufficiently protect me from your virus. If infection in my area was bad enough, I might even break out the eye protection and P100.
No, sorry, not true. I understand that there are so many “expert” sources out there making many erroneous and false claims, that it’s quite difficult for folks to get to the truth. In fact, I just read a very concise and well written piece by a physician at Loma Linda University Health, which would be otherwise quite convincing, if one were not overly keen in reading comprehension or critical analysis. In this piece, she basically “debunked” every “myth” that comprises my argument on the matter, yet at the same time, providing proof of the validity of those very points she’s trying to debunk, apparently believing nobody will notice.
Bare with me .... this is a little educational exercise in reading comprehension and logical analysis OK?
The Doctor begins by stating facts about the pore size of the n95 masks, (ranging from 100-300 nanometers) and particle sizes of corona virus particles (120 nanometers), oxygen and CO2 molecules (.120 and .232 nanometers, respectively). (I will add what she left out - water vapor is .1 nanometers, or roughly the same size as oxygen) Ok? Are the red flags not waving already? If not, they certainly should be, because this enormous range in pore size of an n95 mask appears to vary wildly with a tolerance factor of 300%, but more importantly, it defeats her own point of the mask effectiveness right out of the gate. I suppose, in this Doctor’s estimation, you aren’t smart enough to solve this 2+2 equation, but it’s really quite simple .... in the absolute optimal scenario of 100 nm, the mask could possibly block a virus (theoretically), however, anything less than that renders the mask ineffective, while on the high side of 300, or even dead center middle of the 100-300 nanometer pore size range, the mask is physically incapable of blocking the smaller 120 nm virus particle. And that’s the n95 .... it’s even worse news for the VAST MAJORITY who are wearing their Chinese made, designer cloth masks which have now become a new fashion trend for the trendy mask wearer. These masks are doubly useless in protecting the wearer from viruses, as common cotton weave might have a pore size twice that of the n95, or larger. On the down side, they may provide a false sense of security, with a net negative effect. But let’s not allow facts to get in the way of a good story, right? Of course, you don’t need to search long before finding very scientific sounding dialog claiming that these cotton masks can also reduce virus transmission by varying percentages of 60-80%, which sounds like a worthwhile gain, but is really just more double talk. I know it’s confusing, but that’s part of their tactics, as they understand that the more confusion that exists, the more likely people will be to defer to their authoritative opinions.
Then, she goes on to use the opposite argument when “debunking” the “myth” that the masks restrict oxygen levels and increase CO2 levels by citing sizes of the mask pores, relative to the much smaller size of the oxygen and CO2 molecules, which she then claims to allow oxygen and CO2 to enter and escape freely. This is what is commonly referred to as a straw man argument, because nobody is claiming that a mask will prevent oxygen flow in, or CO2 exiting ... if that were the case, you couldn’t wear a n95 mask for more than 5 minutes before dying of asphyxiation. No, the masks restrict volume flow of oxygen and CO2 (common sense/face value assessment), and the optimal flow levels required for healthy breathing will obviously vary depending on a person’s level of activity. I don’t think you need an expert to explain to you how you need much more oxygen flow when running a marathon, compared to sitting on the sofa watching Family Guy, do you? Facts are facts, and common sense is common sense .... masks do indeed decrease oxygen and and increase CO2 saturation. That is a measurable fact.
I’m not going to torture the point here .. the bottom line is, folks like you will read a piece like this written by a Physician, and regurgitate it as if it were the gospel truth, and serving as scientific proof that masks indeed work. Yet, if carefully analyzed, the piece actually proves the exact opposite.
Quote:
That being said, a business is a private entity. It has the legal authority to restrict what you do (or wear) on that property. "No shirt No Shoes No Service" and "No firearms" have been upheld. If they want you to cover your mouth to use their establishment, I have no problem with that. If they want to restrict the number of people inside at one time, I am fine with that too. They have a moral obligation to protect their employees. If that means you wear a mask to protect them, I am fine with that.
Now, we have the circular reasoning ... you claim the masks sufficiently protect you from infection, yet you are fine with people being required to wear them to protect others (businesses requiring masks to protect employees). Which is it? Oh I get it, freedom to choose is for thee, not for me. And as I began this response, I cited the reason pushback is necessary .... the hypocrisy when it comes to freedom of choice .... we’ll guess what, none of us have the freedom to not eat ... if we don’t eat, we die ... not exactly a choice. Most need to work to generate income to pay for basic necessities of life, so we don’t have a choice there either. So when employers, grocery stores, and virtually everywhere else one acquires those necessities of life require mask wearing, the freedom to choose is gone.
Quote:
You are exaggerating the closing of the country. In my area, I could travel from town to town and I could wander the streets unmasked. No stores were closed. Most businesses moved to carry-out only, but there were still people lined up inside not socially distanced. I watched kids play in the park unmasked, not socially distanced. I watched the neighborhood parents chat without masks while sitting at the picnic tables together. They stopped in-school lessons in the Spring, but by the Fall, parents had the option of in-person or online learning.
If you were experiencing that in your area, you were free to protest or move somewhere else. If the businesses were closed, what else did you have to do?
Love this last part .... if you don’t like my version of freedom, you are free to leave HAHAHAHA. NOT IF TRAVEL IS ALSO RESTRICTED?? Huh?
Now to address the rest of this peeing on my leg and claiming it’s rain .... everyone knows your watered down version of reality is bull. While it’s true that certain regions, towns and cities did impose varying severity levels of oppressive lockdowns (depending on whether controlled by communist democrats or liberty minded republicans) .... the impact to local, national and global economies have been devastating and unprecedented. No need to expound on that further... whatever level of credibility you may have enjoyed at the beginning, you lost at the end here with this claim that the impact of lockdowns is exaggerated.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
