1608
Comments (67)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
29
Surfsup 29 points ago +29 / -0

93% of particles? Maybe, but two masks block 0% of virus particles because they're too small.

18
Data 18 points ago +18 / -0

They block "droplets" down to a certain size. We're supposed to believe the virus hitches a ride on these "droplets", but that would only be true of an infected/sick individual. In which case they should be (and likely are) at home recovering or in a hospital receiving care, where the presence or absence of a mask is meaningless in terms of public health risk.

The benefit of mask wearing by the general (read: healthy) public is within the margin of error, statistically speaking.

11
Surfsup 11 points ago +11 / -0

You don't ever contract a virus from droplets anyway. Use your brain. When was the last time people in public spot on you?

You get the virus from airborne molecules the mask doesn't stop. In other words, one, two or ten masks stop 0% of these. It can block 100% of droplets. Who gives a shit.

1
Cantshadowbanthemall 1 point ago +1 / -0

The virus isn't airborne, it's people sneezing into their hand on on the oranges at the market and people touching that surface or rating that orange without washing it / their hands with soap