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.
Masks were never intended to protect the wearer from covid. What they do, and do well, is severely restrict the chance that if the wearer is infected he will spread it further. If it also offers 5-11% protection for the wearer, that is a bonus.
The study has not been peer reviewed, BTW. Until it is, it is considered anecdotal.
And all the non-RCT studies out there are not also "anecdotal"?
Anything 10% is standard statistical error. Not worth paying attention to.
Personally, I don't care, even if it's 99%. I have to move and talk, at work. If I have mask on for more than 10 minutes, I start loosing breath and develop headache. Without mask, I have ZERO issues. I still BP 200lb 6 times and biceps curl 60lb each at 66 yo, so don't try to blame it on my health. I have LARGE chest, LARGE lungs and I need LARGE air volumes to be moved. Not to suck on my own exhaust.
Typical old school Boomer American mentality "Bigger is Better"
Your lung size doesn't matter, only the efficiency of your nodules and that your immune system can keep the alveoli clear and unimpeded under duress.
I concur that masks reduce o2 absorption efficiency but that has nothing to do with your lung size, it doesn't impact your spO2 but could impact your vo2 max, so you should not exert yourself in an aerobic capacity wearing a mask.
An effective mask provides resistance, which means air intake flow/speed is reduced. If you don't feel resistance, the mask is ineffective.
And combined with vaccination, social distancing --- a good way to mitigate the spread.
You have to weigh 'mitigating the spread' against the damage done to society. Social distancing and masks are a massive disruption in the way humans communicate and behave, which have evolved to promote social cohesion. These measures disrupt social cohesion. Disrupting that isn't a small thing, especially at developmentally sensitive stages like childhood.
Since they never bothered to find out the long term damage of masking kids, forcing them to have 'silent lunches,' rewarding anti-social behavior, punishing them for hugging each other, hiding human facial expressions, and other 'mitigation measures' that would never pass an IRB if done as a psych experiment....we can't know if the risks outweigh the benefits. We might be raising an entire generation of kids with attachment disorders, phobias, compulsions, and anti-social traits.
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.
