People who Don't Wear Masks in a Pandemic are Absolute Morons

Author: BearMan

Posts

Total: 152
#61
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@MisterChris
The judiciary even periodically suggested that public health regulation was immune from constitutional review. [LINK]
Imagine for a moment that I secretly wish to impose a police state on a "free" society.

(1) DECLARE AN EMERGENCY

Preferably something indistinguishable from common experience, like "no symptoms".

It's almost as good as declaring someone a "secret commie" except with the added benefit that you can "test for it with science".

Immediately shut down businesses you disapprove of, the threat of shut-down will encourage businesses to declare their support.

(2) CENSOR ALL DISSENTERS

Make sure to enrage the sheeple so they lash out blindly at anyone who doesn't toe the official line, this will save you tons of money.

(3) MANDATE A SHOW OF LOYALTY

Traditionally this would be a badge of some sort, or an arm band, but a (pointless) mask also accomplishes the same ends.
#62
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
Wearing a mask to go into a restaurant to be seated and then taking it off to eat  is the same as a pissing section in a swimming pool
Well stated.
#63
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
A mask barely helps protect you. It protects other people from you.
The recommended N95 masks have an open valve for outbound air, so NO, no, they absolutely do NOT "protect others".
#64
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Preponderance
? One Google search later, ah I see.

Maintaining government credibility is a fools-errand after of a century of lies. [LINK]
I only glanced at video. Lying is a commonheld trait of humans, 'and their governments. Doesn't matter if it's now or thousands of years ago. That's not to say governments or individuals can't maintain a record of being well known for the truth, but when lies happens, it doesn't surprise me.
Just something to be aware of, and that we ought 'try to encourage truth, 'I think.
Doesn't mean 'everything the USA government is saying is a lie though, doesn't even mean the main meat of what they say is a lie, to 'me.
There's differences between the USA and North Korea, for an extreme example anyway.

Not sure I think people not on board yet are Absolute Morons, maybe just need to be convinced in the right manner,
Perhaps with a preponderance of historical scientific data?
Eh, I took my crack at it, not something I feel zealous about.
I think common sense, historical knowledge, societal cues, and the links that I offered were sufficient evidence.
But if someone is not convinced by them, I don't really care enough to continue trying to lay on.
#65
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
Doesn't mean 'everything the USA government is saying is a lie though,
I agree.

However, if the official recommendations contradict the preponderance of historical scientific data, some skepticism is due.

For example, a virus is small enough to pass into the air in droplets as small as 1 micron (through normal breath, not just a sneeze or a cough).

These contagious particles settle on hands, hair, clothes, doors, chairs, tables and other items.

These contagious particles might be prevented from entering directly into someone's lungs if that person happens to be wearing an AIR-TIGHT mask.

However, an ear-loop mask is not AIR-TIGHT and will not stop these airborne particles.

Furthermore, even if someone was wearing an AIR-TIGHT mask, when that person touches the mask to remove it, or touches their hair, or touches their clothes, or touches any door or chair or pretty much anything, that person will become contaminated.

Anything short of a 100% LOCK-DOWN is pointless.
Topic's author
#66
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
The recommended N95 masks have an open valve for outbound air, so NO, no, they absolutely do NOT "protect others".
Bruh if you could just google search, that'd be nice.



#67
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
From your own source,

Ironically, if the aim is to divert breath to protect other people, a second argument against wearing face masks designed for PPE becomes relevant. Rather than diverting breath, FFP masks with valves direct the breath out in a specific direction through the valve. As a result, protecting the wearer could come at the expense of those standing in front of the valve. [LINK]
#68
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
For example, a virus is small enough to pass into the air in droplets as small as 1 micron (through normal breath, not just a sneeze or a cough).

These contagious particles settle on hands, hair, clothes, doors, chairs, tables and other items.

These contagious particles might be prevented from entering directly into someone's lungs if that person happens to be wearing an AIR-TIGHT mask.

However, an ear-loop mask is not AIR-TIGHT and will not stop these airborne particles.

Furthermore, even if someone was wearing an AIR-TIGHT mask, when that person touches the mask to remove it, or touches their hair, or touches their clothes, or touches any door or chair or pretty much anything, that person will become contaminated.

Anything short of a 100% LOCK-DOWN is pointless.
Topic's author
#69
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
For example, a virus is small enough to pass into the air in droplets as small as 1 micron (through normal breath, not just a sneeze or a cough).
Yes but viruses are never alone.


however, an ear-loop mask is not AIR-TIGHT and will not stop these airborne particles.

Furthermore, even if someone was wearing an AIR-TIGHT mask, when that person touches the mask to remove it, or touches their hair, or touches their clothes, or touches any door or chair or pretty much anything, that person will become contaminated.
I never said it was. Masks prevent COVID-19. A 100% lockdown is not viable, our economy is in ruins and people need to go shopping for essential materials. You are thinking in a three year old brain.


Ironically, if the aim is to divert breath to protect other people, a second argument against wearing face masks designed for PPE becomes relevant. Rather than diverting breath, FFP masks with valves direct the breath out in a specific direction through the valve. As a result, protecting the wearer could come at the expense of those standing in front of the valve. [LINK]

No one in a pandemic will stand directly  in front of the valve. This is why there is such thing as social distancing. It seems like you're cherry picking from my source, also what it says:
"When it comes to good design, a well-fitted face covering covers the mouth, nose and chin, with loops around the ear ensuring no gaps on the sides. This is important because although your breath will pass through the cloth, the aim is to slow it down so that it does not spread as far."

It is clear here the point of a mask is not to protect against a disease 100%, but prevent the disease from spreading as fast.

"This is the reason the California Bay Area has banned the wearing of masks with valves in public. The San Francisco fire department has made a video urging double masking to ensure both the wearer and those around them are protected. Others are suggesting covering valves with tape. It is also notable that these masks are almost always worn with a plastic face shield in clinical environments so that both the healthcare worker and the patient are protected."

It is also made clear here only certain types of masks have valves, and these masks are being banned and have alternate protection by the minute.

"Without enforced standards, the effectiveness of face coverings will always be variable. This variability has been the cause for much of the debate over the use of face coverings. Unfortunately, it has taken many months for western nations, in particular, to understand that the reason we must wear face coverings in public is not to protect individuals, but rather to make a small contribution to protecting everyone."

It is made for the protection of the people, barely the wearer.




#70
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
Yes but viruses are never alone.
The virus itself is much smaller than 1 micron (0.125)

The droplets you breathe normally average 1 micron.

And the mask (which is not air-tight) just holds them, waiting to spread them all over your fingers when you take it off and put it back on again.

The particles float in the air for hours and land on practically everything.
#71
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
Masks prevent COVID-19.
There is no scientific evidence for this claim.

The contagion studies conducted with people tending to flu patients showed zero difference in transmission rates between "no mask" and "wore mask most of the time".

Also, the hypothetical "asymptomatic transmission" was unable to be replicated in laboratory conditions.
#72
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
No one in a pandemic will stand directly  in front of the valve.
The point is the particles are released into the air UNEMCUMBERED.

The plague floats in the air for hours, landing on everyone's clothes, hair, tables, and chairs.

The plague floats in the air for hours, and can be breathed in through cheap cloth masks and otherwise loose fitting masks.
#73
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
 a well-fitted face covering covers the mouth, nose and chin, with loops around the ear ensuring no gaps on the sides.
YES.  100% THIS.

NOBODY IS BUYING CUSTOM TAILORED HIGH-QUALITY MASKS (WITH NO GAPS ON THE SIDES).

PEOPLE ARE USING HOME-MADE LOOSE-FITTING MASKS AND HANDKERCHIEFS OR BANDANAS (NOT FITTED AROUND CHEEKS AND CHIN).
#74
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
It is clear here the point of a mask is not to protect against a disease 100%, but prevent the disease from spreading as fast.
Where's the efficacy data?
#75
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
It is also made clear here only certain types of masks have valves, and these masks are being banned and have alternate protection by the minute.
Valve masks have only been banned in "the California Bay Area". 

So, no luck for the rest of us.
#76
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
It is made for the protection of the people, barely the wearer.
It sounds like it protects neither.

It sounds like a cynical social experiment.

Make sure you Duck-&-Cover [LINK].
Topic's author
#77
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
There is no scientific evidence for this claim.

The contagion studies conducted with people tending to flu patients showed zero difference in transmission rates between "no mask" and "wore mask most of the time".

Also, the hypothetical "asymptomatic transmission" was unable to be replicated in laboratory conditions.
There's plenty of scientific evidence, you just can't be bothered to search it up.


Essentially what 3RU7AL says is that masks don't work 100% so we shouldn't use them. He also says that a 100% lockdown would work, but that's childish thinking considering that we have almost reopened and still have a terrible economy.

Also, if you could respond with one post, that'd be great, thanks!


#78
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,352
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@MisterChris
Is public nudity at crisis point?

Nonetheless, nudity and our fascination with it is an interesting issue.

Perhaps I'll create a forum debate on the subject.
#79
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@BearMan



Essentially what 3RU7AL says is that masks don't work 100% so we shouldn't use them.

 As do many Doctors and Scientist. But you don't want to hear about that side . 

#80
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
lol.
#81
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
There's plenty of scientific evidence, you just can't be bothered to search it up.
Please present at least one study that you personally consider authoritative suggesting a statistical reduction in virus transmission specifically attributable to ear-loop style mask utilization.
#82
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
Essentially what 3RU7AL says is that masks don't work 100% so we shouldn't use them.
We need to pinpoint the statistical reduction in virus transmission.

The current data suggests the "reduction" is statistically indistinguishable from zero.

The "better-safe-than-sorry" and "common-sense-says-it's-better-than-nothing" is the same "reasoning" used to justify confining thousands of Italian and Japanese Americans to interment camps during WW2 (it maybe-probably prevented at least 1 sabotage attempt so I guess it was "worth-it").
Topic's author
#83
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Please present at least one study that you personally consider authoritative suggesting a statistical reduction in virus transmission specifically attributable to ear-loop style mask utilization.
No, search it up yourself fool. I don't debate with these kinds of people.

We need to pinpoint the statistical reduction in virus transmission.

The current data suggests the "reduction" is statistically indistinguishable from zero.

The "better-safe-than-sorry" and "common-sense-says-it's-better-than-nothing" is the same "reasoning" used to justify confining thousands of Italian and Japanese Americans to interment camps during WW2 (it maybe-probably prevented at least 1 sabotage attempt so I guess it was "worth-it").
You are literally basing your case off the illogical Nirvana Fallacy. Just because it doesn't work fully doesn't mean you shouldn't use it.


Topic's author
#84
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@Stephen

 As do many Doctors and Scientist. But you don't want to hear about that side . 
You sourced one. And that source agreed with me. Most medical procedures have very low success rates. If it works, you better use it, no matter how low it is, unless you have a breathing problem you should still use it.


There are barely any downsides to masks when kept clean. I don't know why they're so many conspiracy theorists on this site. No, this isn't a "cynical social experiment". If it doesn't work the government wouldn't want you to wear it.
Topic's author
#85
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Once again, it took me one google search to find hundreds of results.









It is clear you know almost nothing about the topic at hand. All it takes is a google search to prove you wrong. And I know exactly what you're going to say. You will insult my sources whilst you have given absolutely NONE.

#86
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
No, search it up yourself fool. I don't debate with these kinds of people.
Nice.

Expecting your opponent to provide research to support your argument is like expecting a stranger to mow your lawn.
Topic's author
#87
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
No, I'm saying you shouldn't be debating if you are too lazy to google search. I already provide what? 9 sources, and you've provided none.


Go mow your own lawn.
#88
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
You are literally basing your case off the illogical Nirvana Fallacy. Just because it doesn't work fully doesn't mean you shouldn't use it.
I agree with you that the "perfect-is-the-enemy-of-the-good" argument is an overused excuse to "do nothing" (CHERNOBYL).

HOWEVeR, simply taking action because you're afraid of an undetectable jabberwocky is WORSE.

(IFF) it's "so obvious" that masks "do something" (THEN) there should be mountains of data telling us EXACTLY how "effective" they are.

VIROLOGY IS NOT A "NEW" AREA OF STUDY.
Topic's author
#89
BearMan
BearMan's avatar
Debates: 16
Posts: 1,067
3
4
11
BearMan's avatar
BearMan
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Bruh

#85
#90
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,680
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@BearMan
If it doesn't work the government wouldn't want you to wear it.
If the Vietnam war was based on lies, they never would have forced thousands of Americans into foreign battlefields.

So, I'm guessing the Vietnam war MUST have been based on GODSHONESTTRUTH??

NEWS FLASH: "the government" doesn't give a sh*t about me or you.