Should We Wear Masks?

Author: BearMan

Posts

Total: 83
Topic's author
#31
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@sadolite
The literal problem is that if you don't wear a mask, I will also get sick. Sure, if you didn't wear a mask and I wouldn't get sick, I wouldn't care. Just go die with the rest of the stupid people, I don't give a flying fuck.


But the problem is, it actually affects the people who try to keep themselves safe and listen to the government for once. You can believe what you want, but you are ultimately wrong.
#32
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,879
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@BearMan
The literal problem you state is complete BS. There is not one credible scientific study that shows wearing masks that do nothing to filter a virus does anything. You are told it does and you believe it. I defy you to show any scientific study that shows definitively that masks not designed to filter viruses in fact have any effect at filtering them. You walk around people without  masks all the time, if what you say was true you would have gotten sick by now. The absurdity of what you and the CDC call reducing the spread is laughable. People sitting in the same room while  others standing ten feet away, some wearing a mask  and the others not is absolutely laughable. Any virologist would just look at you like you were insane. Just because you repeat something over and over does not make it true nor does someone telling you something over and over. The real science and the real controls are in SWEDEN. Sweden's approach blows everything you say to shreds. Don't even try to dismiss Sweden. That is a control study of over 10 million people. There is no difference in infection rates and they do no lockdowns and don't require masks. Again that is a control sample of 10 million people. I will wait for your definitive scientific proof that wearing masks that do nothing to filter a virus reduces the spread of a virus. Oh and your attempts to totally dismiss Sweden.

Topic's author
#33
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@sadolite
The literal problem you state is complete BS. There is not one credible scientific study that shows wearing masks that do nothing to filter a virus does anything. You are told it does and you believe it. I defy you to show any scientific study that shows definitively that masks not designed to filter viruses in fact have any effect at filtering them. You walk around people without  masks all the time, if what you say was true you would have gotten sick by now.
The literal problem is that people still refuse to wear masks that ARE DESIGNED to filter COVID-19. They HELP, THEY DON'T HURT. Oh yeah and we walk around with people without masks ALL THE TIME. That's the reason we have OVER 200K DEATHS.

The absurdity of what you and the CDC call reducing the spread is laughable. People sitting in the same room while  others standing ten feet away, some wearing a mask  and the others not is absolutely laughable. Any virologist would just look at you like you were insane. Just because you repeat something over and over does not make it true nor does someone telling you something over and over. 
The fact that you still choose to REFUSE to wear a mask that is designed to prevent COVID-19 is the only laughable thing here fool. You could literally just search up mask studies on Google yet you choose not to, and you cherry-pick evidence. Even on OTHER THREADS in DART about masks have complete sources that prove you wrong. Yet you still want to be all unique and not wear a mask, causing other people to die. 

You're effectively using the nirvana fallacy to back up your arguments. 


Now you're talking about Sweden, where you think that the fact that there was no mandatory policy for masks in Sweden benefited them. Probably not. You see, you don't need the policy to wear a face mask. Why did Sweden do so well? Because the people there have logic and chose to take personal responsibility, instead of the government forcing them because they aren't Karens.

The thing here is clear. Personal responsibility often beats legislation. The Swedish government didn't need to force their people into wearing masks for them to wear masks. They didn't need to force them to use safety precautions to use safety precautions. "The analysis finds that nearly a third of Swedish residents voluntarily self-isolated."







#34
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
Not to veer off-topic, I think Charles Darwin would agree with what you said. He would probably wear a mask too. His view on epidemics:

"Climate plays an important part in determining the average numbers of a species, and periodical seasons of extreme cold drought seem to be the most effective of all checks. I estimated (chiefly from the greatly reduced numbers of nests in the spring) that the winter of 1854-5 destroyed four-fifths of the birds in my own grounds; and this is a tremendous destruction, when we remember that ten per cent (10%) is an extraordinarily severe mortality from epidemics with man."
     
                                                                                                                             From: The Origin of Species


#35
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@MarkWebberFan
Yep. Tonight's the night for wearing scary masks and scaring the s**t out of children begging for sweeties.

Trick or treat mister?

Trick please.

Naaa.....just give us some sweets mister.

F**k of you greedy little brats, or I'll spew coronavirus into your eyes.
#36
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
The literal problem you state is complete BS. There is not one credible scientific study that shows wearing masks that do nothing to filter a virus does anything. You are told it does and you believe it. I defy you to show any scientific study that shows definitively that masks not designed to filter viruses in fact have any effect at filtering them. You walk around people without  masks all the time, if what you say was true you would have gotten sick by now. The absurdity of what you and the CDC call reducing the spread is laughable. People sitting in the same room while  others standing ten feet away, some wearing a mask  and the others not is absolutely laughable. Any virologist would just look at you like you were insane. Just because you repeat something over and over does not make it true nor does someone telling you something over and over. The real science and the real controls are in SWEDEN. Sweden's approach blows everything you say to shreds. Don't even try to dismiss Sweden. That is a control study of over 10 million people. There is no difference in infection rates and they do no lockdowns and don't require masks. Again that is a control sample of 10 million people. I will wait for your definitive scientific proof that wearing masks that do nothing to filter a virus reduces the spread of a virus. Oh and your attempts to totally dismiss Sweden.
Well stated.
#37
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
The literal problem is that people still refuse to wear masks that ARE DESIGNED to filter COVID-19.
I am very interested in purchasing a mask specifically DESIGNED to filter COVID-19.

Please let me know where I can find one.

This is urgent.
Topic's author
#38
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
#39
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan

Surgical masks are made in different thicknesses and with different ability to protect you from contact with liquids. These properties may also affect how easily you can breathe through the face mask and how well the surgical mask protects you.

If worn properly, a surgical mask is meant to help block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter that may contain germs (viruses and bacteria), keeping it from reaching your mouth and nose. Surgical masks may also help reduce exposure of your saliva and respiratory secretions to others.

While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures. Surgical masks also do not provide complete protection from germs and other contaminants because of the loose fit between the surface of the mask and your face.
Topic's author
#40
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
And almost every source besides that says it does.
#41
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
And almost every source besides that says it does.
Citation please.
Topic's author
#42
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
and the main point isn't even to protect you, it's to protect others.
Topic's author
#43
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't want to get into this discussion again, it's just too obvious that we should wear masks.
#44
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
I don't want to get into this discussion again, it's just too obvious that we should wear masks.
Simply claiming that something is "obvious" does not magically make it "fact".
#45
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
and the main point isn't even to protect you, it's to protect others.
Until when?

Why don't we wear masks all the time in order to prevent the 10,000+ seasonal flu deaths every year?

Why don't we outlaw all (non-essential) scented deodorants and perfumes and air-fresheners that can trigger life threatening asthma attacks?
#46
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,879
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
"and the main point isn't even to protect you, it's to protect others." Lets all put our critical thinking caps on and analyze this statement. If it wont protect you it wont protect others. It's as though people think the mask works in one direction and not the other. Mind boggling.

Topic's author
#47
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@sadolite
"and the main point isn't even to protect you, it's to protect others." Lets all put our critical thinking caps on and analyze this statement. If it wont protect you it wont protect others. It's as though people think the mask works in one direction and not the other. Mind boggling.
Ok lets try the piss test.

First, both of us are naked, I pee on you, you get the full pee.

Second, you have pants on, I pee on you, you get pee on your pants, and some on you.

Last, both of us have pants on, I pee on you, the pee bounces back on me, and doesn't even touch you.


Boom.
#48
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,879
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@BearMan
Your attempt to equate pee to a virus is laughable.  Good luck with your  fashion mask made of cloth with holes the size of the grand canyon compared to a corona virus https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=mcafee&p=how+small+is+a+virus#id=2&vid=745eb389b2e43e11b058d6c853eaf7f0&action=view

Topic's author
#49
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@sadolite
Viruses always travel together, there is no such thing as a singular virus infecting you. Masks help.
#50
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
It's as though people think the mask works in one direction and not the other. Mind boggling.
Nice.
#51
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
Viruses always travel together, there is no such thing as a singular virus infecting you. Masks help.
A virus particle is smaller than a smoke particle.

Does your mask protect you from smelling smoke?

Well then, your mask CAN'T protect you from a virus.
#52
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,879
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@BearMan
Prove they help showing irrefutable science.

#53
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
Ok lets try the piss test.

First, both of us are naked, I pee into a vaporizer and then vaporize the pee, you smell the full pee and you choke because you're allergic.

Second, you have a mask on, I pee into a vaporizer and then vaporize the pee, you can still smell the full pee and you still choke because you're still allergic.

Last, both of us have masks on, I pee into a vaporizer and then vaporize the pee, you can still smell the full pee and you choke because you're allergic.


Boom.
#54
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
Prove they help showing irrefutable science.
Let's start with ANY science.
#55
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,112
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@BearMan
The coronavirus drifts through the air in microscopic droplets.
Respiratory infections can be transmitted through droplets of different sizes: when the droplet particles are >5-10 μm in diameter they are referred to as respiratory droplets, and when then are <5μm in diameter, they are referred to as droplet nuclei.  According to current evidence, COVID-19 virus is primarily transmitted between people through respiratory droplets and contact routes. There is  a 1.5% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier and a non-carrier both wearing masks
#56
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@FLRW
There is  a 1.5% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier and a non-carrier both wearing masks
I'd love to see some data comparisons.

Do you have any links?
#57
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,112
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@3RU7AL
This is from an interview with  Dr Trilok Chand, respiratory medicine specialist at Burjeel Hospital Abu Dhabi, and Dr Arun Arya, head of pulmonology and internal medicine at NMC Royal Hospital, Khalifa City

Wearing a face mask is [crucial] to prevent the transmission of the COVID-19 from one person to another. When two people are talking, the chances for the spread of infection is very less if both are wearing masks. This risk becomes very high if neither is wearing a mask.
For instance, when both people are masked, the chance of COVID-19 being transmitted decreases to 1.5 per cent. On the other hand, when neither is wearing a mask, this risk increases to 95 per cent.
The risks are also higher when one of the two people is not wearing a mask. For instance, if a person with COVID-19 is not wearing a mask, the chance of transmitting the infection to the masked, healthy person is around 70 per cent. On the other hand, the risk of the healthy person contracting COVID-19 from a masked, infected person is 5 per cent.
There are also laboratory studied of respiratory droplets, and the ability of various masks to block them. An experiment using high-speed video found that hundreds of droplets ranging from 20 to 500 micrometers were generated when saying a simple phrase, but that nearly all these droplets were blocked when the mouth was covered by a damp washcloth. Another study of people who had influenza or the common cold found that wearing a surgical mask significantly reduced the amount of these respiratory viruses emitted in droplets and aerosols.

#58
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,283
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@FLRW
On the other hand, the risk of the healthy person contracting COVID-19 from a masked, infected person is 5 per cent.
The diagram in the illustrations makes the following claims: There is a 70% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier not wearing a mask and a non-carrier wearing a mask; a 5% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier wearing a mask and a non-carrier not wearing a mask; and a 1.5% contagion probability between a COVID-19 carrier and a non-carrier both wearing masks.

This claim is not substantiated. Although some health authorities recommend the use of masks to help limit the spread of COVID-19, Reuters could not find any evidence to back up these percentages.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) told Reuters via email that wearing masks is recommended as a way of strengthening social distancing, but they do not have data to measure how this affects the risk of transmission.

“CDC can’t confirm the accuracy of the numbers reflected in this image. Currently we are not finding any data that can quantify risk reduction from the use of masks”, a CDC spokesperson told Reuters.

The CDC has publicly said that cloth face coverings are “not intended to protect the wearer, but **may** prevent the spread of virus from the wearer to others” ( here ). [LINK TO SOURCE]
#59
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,879
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
You still don't get what a micron is.
#60
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,879
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
No, see, I want the actual research  and the conditions and methods used to conduct the research. Not CDC quotes and one persons opinion. Does anyone know what science is anymore?