Masks are Never Coming Off

192,490 Views | 2981 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by Wangchung
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXBEAR_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Could Pete try to make it any more damn confusing?! If the mandates were set to expire any way this is all about control and not the pandemic or the safety of Americans
Bear living in the woods of Bend Oregon
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:


Off to Eastern Europe Thursday and will enjoy my first trip with no mask on the US end. The CDC can 'restate' whatever they like. As long as they can't 'reINSTATE' their absurd nonsense, I am breathing free.
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whiskey Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti said:


Good way to not answer a question.

Everyone is getting sick and tired of the mask BS. Even plenty from the left. Democrats sure have picked a weird hill to die on.
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Update: US airlines are free again….domestically. Transitting through Frankfurt on United, they applied German mask mandate. If you want a nice spot with ZERO Covid restrictions, however, come to Poland. I forgot how great this country is. It's like Germany without the snobs.
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?


the midtermicron variant is coming
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canon said:

Update: US airlines are free again….domestically. Transitting through Frankfurt on United, they applied German mask mandate. If you want a nice spot with ZERO Covid restrictions, however, come to Poland. I forgot how great this country is. It's like Germany without the snobs.


Never met any snobs in Germany. Must not have been there when you were.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti said:



the midtermicron variant is coming


I guess that ****ing corrupt ****** "we" "elected" didn't shut down the virus.
Robert Wilson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
BUbearinARK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Sam gets triggered by people who know facts, BUbearinARK

Take the win and enjoy.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
BUbearinARK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Please explain otherwise.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
Whiskey Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
LOL... Sam thinking he knows more about masks than a surgeon that wears one daily in his career.

Sam's an idiot.

Don't be a Sam
BUbearinARK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Sam gets triggered by people who know facts, BUbearinARK

Take the win and enjoy.
I know. Accepting that a 0.3 micron virus that is aerosolized and not in droplets can ne tough to accept after all the changing information over the last few years.
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.


It's amazing how many non-clinicians think surgeons wear masks to keep from sneezing their cold or flu into a patient. It could never be to keep the clinicians from getting the patients fluids in their nose / mouth.

Arrogance + limited information = stupidity with hubris.
Robert Wilson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.



So many ways I could go with this, but there's really no need.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUbearinARK said:

Oldbear83 said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Sam gets triggered by people who know facts, BUbearinARK

Take the win and enjoy.
I know. Accepting that a 0.3 micron virus that is aerosolized and not in droplets can ne tough to accept after all the changing information over the last few years.
We knew in May of 2020 that the virus was spread via aerosolization rather than droplets.

Mask mandates are the zombie that will not die, because of the explicit virtue posture they afford.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Please explain otherwise.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.

A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.

Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:

Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."

Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."

Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
BUbearinARK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Please explain otherwise.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.

A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.

Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:

Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."

Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."

Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.

Read the entire study and not just the memo put out by stanford. Read it critically and thoroughly. And then tell me if this was a good 'trial'. I didn't see informed consent (which is the cornerstone of clinical trials--I've run them in the past). I didn't see outcomes other than seropositovity in symptomatic (ie morbidity/mortality)

And "The intervention led to a 9.3% reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 sero- prevalence (which corresponds to a 103 fewer symptomatic seropositives) and an 11.9% reduction in the prevalence of COVID-like symptoms, corresponding to 1,587 fewer people reporting these symptoms.)". So in 350K people studied (spied upon) there was a difference of 100 symptomatic positives?

Now superimpose that study on the US.

I'll be sure if I'm old and ever find myself in a remote Bangledeshi village in an epidemic, I'll mask up

Study

https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf






The study I posted shows that there are no studies strong enough to dictate policy for a wider population.

oh, and btw, the rate in my county right now is 2/100000. More likely to get melanoma than corona. so wear your sun protection.
ShooterTX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Please explain otherwise.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.

A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.

Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:

Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."

Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."

Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.

Read the entire study and not just the memo put out by stanford. Read it critically and thoroughly. And then tell me if this was a good 'trial'. I didn't see informed consent (which is the cornerstone of clinical trials--I've run them in the past). I didn't see outcomes other than seropositovity in symptomatic (ie morbidity/mortality)

And "The intervention led to a 9.3% reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 sero- prevalence (which corresponds to a 103 fewer symptomatic seropositives) and an 11.9% reduction in the prevalence of COVID-like symptoms, corresponding to 1,587 fewer people reporting these symptoms.)". So in 350K people studied (spied upon) there was a difference of 100 symptomatic positives?

Now superimpose that study on the US.

I'll be sure if I'm old and ever find myself in a remote Bangledeshi village in an epidemic, I'll mask up

Study

https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf






The study I posted shows that there are no studies strong enough to dictate policy for a wider population.

oh, and btw, the rate in my county right now is 2/100000. More likely to get melanoma than corona. so wear your sun protection.

comparing mask wearing in public to mask wearing in a surgery is just foolish.
When the human body is opened up in a surgical procedure, the body is denied most of it's primary defenses, and foreign contaminants are given direct access to enter the body. The skin, nostril, mucus layers... so many defenses are completely bypassed because of a surgical incision. This is why a surgical room and all those who enter that space are required to take extra measures to create a sterile environment.

So how on earth is that comparable to a person walking in a park, or even in a crowded room? Are you saying that everyone in that room as massive lacerations which are exposing their internal body to the outside world? If that were true, then we would have far more deaths from major infections, than from Covid.

ShooterTX
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ShooterTX said:

BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Please explain otherwise.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.

A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.

Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:

Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."

Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."

Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.

Read the entire study and not just the memo put out by stanford. Read it critically and thoroughly. And then tell me if this was a good 'trial'. I didn't see informed consent (which is the cornerstone of clinical trials--I've run them in the past). I didn't see outcomes other than seropositovity in symptomatic (ie morbidity/mortality)

And "The intervention led to a 9.3% reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 sero- prevalence (which corresponds to a 103 fewer symptomatic seropositives) and an 11.9% reduction in the prevalence of COVID-like symptoms, corresponding to 1,587 fewer people reporting these symptoms.)". So in 350K people studied (spied upon) there was a difference of 100 symptomatic positives?

Now superimpose that study on the US.

I'll be sure if I'm old and ever find myself in a remote Bangledeshi village in an epidemic, I'll mask up

Study

https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf






The study I posted shows that there are no studies strong enough to dictate policy for a wider population.

oh, and btw, the rate in my county right now is 2/100000. More likely to get melanoma than corona. so wear your sun protection.

comparing mask wearing in public to mask wearing in a surgery is just foolish.
When the human body is opened up in a surgical procedure, the body is denied most of it's primary defenses, and foreign contaminants are given direct access to enter the body. The skin, nostril, mucus layers... so many defenses are completely bypassed because of a surgical incision. This is why a surgical room and all those who enter that space are required to take extra measures to create a sterile environment.

So how on earth is that comparable to a person walking in a park, or even in a crowded room? Are you saying that everyone in that room as massive lacerations which are exposing their internal body to the outside world? If that were true, then we would have far more deaths from major infections, than from Covid.
Because it makes low-information hystericals feel good and virtuous.
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Sam Lowry said:

BUbearinARK said:

Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?
I'm a surgeon. In surgery, masks are great to not be splattered upon. In real life, they are just dumb. In order to prevent a 0.3 micron virus you have to have better than a fit tested n95. They are dehumanizing and worthless in the general population.
Incorrect.
Please explain otherwise.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462620/
Simply comparing the size of aerosol particles to the pore size of masks isn't an adequate way to determine how well the masks work. There are many other factors involved, for example: masks carry an electrostatic charge which attracts particles as they try to pass through; humidity increases inside the masks, producing larger droplets that can trap and kill a virus; there is evidence that masks reduce the dose of virus received, leading to milder infection; complicated networks of fibers and multiple layers of material within the mask increase its effectiveness. Other factors include the shape and fit of the mask.

A growing number of studies, most notably the large, randomized study from Bangladesh, support the effectiveness of masks in the real world. See for example here.

Your PubMed article confirms this as well. Although it says more research is needed, it cites the following studies in support of masks:

Bundgaard -- "Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both."

Chu -- "Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection...with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar."

Mitze -- "Assessing the credibility of the various estimates, we conclude that face masks reduce the daily growth rate of reported infections by around 47%."
The bangledeshi 'study' was absolute trash.

Read the entire study and not just the memo put out by stanford. Read it critically and thoroughly. And then tell me if this was a good 'trial'. I didn't see informed consent (which is the cornerstone of clinical trials--I've run them in the past). I didn't see outcomes other than seropositovity in symptomatic (ie morbidity/mortality)

And "The intervention led to a 9.3% reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 sero- prevalence (which corresponds to a 103 fewer symptomatic seropositives) and an 11.9% reduction in the prevalence of COVID-like symptoms, corresponding to 1,587 fewer people reporting these symptoms.)". So in 350K people studied (spied upon) there was a difference of 100 symptomatic positives?

Now superimpose that study on the US.

I'll be sure if I'm old and ever find myself in a remote Bangledeshi village in an epidemic, I'll mask up

Study

https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf






The study I posted shows that there are no studies strong enough to dictate policy for a wider population.

oh, and btw, the rate in my county right now is 2/100000. More likely to get melanoma than corona. so wear your sun protection.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Stanford study is fine, but that's not really the point. There are dozens of other studies in the article I linked. You're entitled to your opinions about policy. Your fact claim that masks are ineffective against a 0.3 micron virus is false.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

quash said:

Robert Wilson said:

Cobretti said:




Masks are dehumanizing

Truly awful as applied to children in an educational setting


Tell it to your surgeon.

My surgeons in the 1st and 2nd grade?


Dehumanizing.

Truly awful.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.