I f*cking hate how stupid, moronic and tribal people have become over these masks.
Wear masks when it makes sense. Do not demonize people who have a different opinion than you.
If I live in an area with a high number of cases, I'd wear a mask:
a) if i am in a plane (circulated air)
b) if i am in a hospital. (makes sense to me why Trump did as well in Walter Reed).
c) if i am in a crowded public transport (armpit to face crowded)
d) if i am working in aged care industry or in a service industry (for customer confidence).
e) if i am immuno-compromised or if i am elderly
Other than that, I won't wear a mask, especially in open air.
I know the risk and in life there is no such thing as zero risk.
If you want to wear masks in open air, you're risk-averse, I get it, but don't push your risk aversion to me.
If someone SJW tells me to wear a mask or PPE, I'd tell them that wearing a mask unnecessarily creates tons of landfill and plastic waste.
Saying things like "hoax or lie" just plays into their propaganda that people who don't wear masks are anti-science.
"science" is another hoax perpetrated by the left.
the left knows nothing of skepticism or research or the scientific method or peer review or statistics or critical thinking. i imagine 95% of their scientific inquiry goes beyond memes at worst and the wikipedia opening paragraph at best.
the way the left uses "science" is just rebranded religion for those smug atheists... a means by which to control the idiot masses. i dont give a FUCK if those sheep think im "anti-science".
I agree that people nowadays forget that science is based on challenging hypotheses and revisiting assumptions when facts change. It has been weaponised nowadays.
I am only pointing out that using the term "hoax" (while I agree that the over-reaction the pandemic is the hoax), it can be easily misconstrued as denying the virus. The virus is real and the number of deaths is real and significant. Throwing the word "hoax" blows up the argument/discussion unnecessarily.
You may not care what other people think, but popular opinion drives social policies. And social policies affect us all. Hence, we have to win arguments.
All I am saying is to fight it with logical arguments based on science to win people's minds.
Example:
I have told people I know that vaccines take a long time. Anyone with knowledge of how clinical trials work, know they take a long time, and may not even be 50% effective. There was no vaccine created for previous coronaviruses like SARS and MERS, that I know of.
Even some vaccine experts are doubting if an effective vacine can be created due to the nature of infection is technically outside the body.
Because of the uncertainty and indefinite target date for a vaccine, it is foolish to keep the economy on lockdown.
The death rate is pretty low for healthy individuals, and if the more healthy people get the virus, the more we build up herd immunity (science).
The more herd immunity, the sooner we can get back to normal life.
The "number of COVID deaths" is indeed "inflated" depending on who's counting it, and which country.
The "number of CASES" which includes asymptomatic cases, is greatly hyped by media for fear-mongering.
It is the number of hospitalized cases and number of deaths per capita, that matters. And as far as I understand those are really low. Hence lockdowns are not justified.
But some of you here seem to be fixated on calling the whole thing a hoax.
Brushing off deaths as a hoax is not going to convince others. For anyone who knows a victim, it is downright insensitive.
All I am saying is if you want to be effective in getting people on board, then argue the points, don't just call everything a hoax.
afaik primary way the virus spreads is being carried by water droplets in exhalation.
masks do significantly limit that because they block vast majority of the moisture when a person exhales.
Respiratory droplet transmission is the usual route for respiratory infections. Transmission can occur when respiratory droplets reach susceptible mucosal surfaces, such as in the eyes, nose or mouth. This can also happen indirectly via contact with contaminated surfaces when hands then touch the face. Respiratory droplets are large and cannot remain suspended in the air for long, and are usually dispersed over short distances.[14] The size of the particles for droplet infections are > 5 μm.[12]
(yes I know wikipedia is a cucked source, but the part I quoted is a very basic part of medicine that is accepted and known worldwide)
In fact the first red-pill my family had about governments through the west mishandling the infection is when they first said
"Its a coronavirus.... but masks don't help'
back when this pandemic was only starting, because that was such a clear and blatant lie flying in the face of how these types of viruses spread.
that said, mask use should be limited to situations of close contact with a lot of people or with the people who are in high-risk. Wearing them all the time as many are suggested is just bullshit, because there are some studies that hint that they might have negatively impact on the wearer's health if worn for long periods.
wikipedia is not a trustworthy source of information. If you use it at all, I recommend looking at the source they cite at the bottom of the page and look at those instead.
I know where you are getting at. Viruses are very small (nanometers). Neither homemade masks nor surgical masks is gonna filter them all out. N95 or higher grade masks are necessary and even those are not 100% effective.
But masks do have limited effectiveness in "minimizing exposure" (not complete prevention) to the virus. And a healthy immune system should be able to deal with small exposures and give you immunity.
imho, exposure matters because a healthy doctor exposed to virus 24/7 is going to have their immune system overwhelmed, no matter how healthy they are.
If a surgical mask gives you, i dunno, something like 20% effectiveness (very ineffective), some will argue 20% is still better than 0%. I understand that argument.
With that said, I don't work in a hospital, not an elderly, and I don't go to crowded places. So my risk exposure is very low.
I am also confident with my health, hence my risk aversion is low.
For those reasons, I do not wear a mask.
All this boils down to is individual attitudes towards risk. Some people are extremely risk averse. Some are not.
You cannot change that. People will be themselves.
And if you believe in freedom, then you also have to believe in freedom of risk-averse people to wear a mask, if they choose to.
What is important is not to conflate individual/personal decisions with policies/laws that will be imposed on everyone else.
Respect individual decision to do what they want (wear a mask or not).
Governments / businesses should not force anyone to wear a mask, nor penalize them.
Don't shut down the economy just because some people are too risk averse.
I f*cking hate how stupid, moronic and tribal people have become over these masks.
Wear masks when it makes sense. Do not demonize people who have a different opinion than you.
If I live in an area with a high number of cases, I'd wear a mask:
a) if i am in a plane (circulated air)
b) if i am in a hospital. (makes sense to me why Trump did as well in Walter Reed).
c) if i am in a crowded public transport (armpit to face crowded)
d) if i am working in aged care industry or in a service industry (for customer confidence).
e) if i am immuno-compromised or if i am elderly
Other than that, I won't wear a mask, especially in open air.
I know the risk and in life there is no such thing as zero risk. If you want to wear masks in open air, you're risk-averse, I get it, but don't push your risk aversion to me.
If someone SJW tells me to wear a mask or PPE, I'd tell them that wearing a mask unnecessarily creates tons of landfill and plastic waste.
Saying things like "hoax or lie" just plays into their propaganda that people who don't wear masks are anti-science.
"science" is another hoax perpetrated by the left.
the left knows nothing of skepticism or research or the scientific method or peer review or statistics or critical thinking. i imagine 95% of their scientific inquiry goes beyond memes at worst and the wikipedia opening paragraph at best.
the way the left uses "science" is just rebranded religion for those smug atheists... a means by which to control the idiot masses. i dont give a FUCK if those sheep think im "anti-science".
I agree that people nowadays forget that science is based on challenging hypotheses and revisiting assumptions when facts change. It has been weaponised nowadays.
I am only pointing out that using the term "hoax" (while I agree that the over-reaction the pandemic is the hoax), it can be easily misconstrued as denying the virus. The virus is real and the number of deaths is real and significant. Throwing the word "hoax" blows up the argument/discussion unnecessarily.
You may not care what other people think, but popular opinion drives social policies. And social policies affect us all. Hence, we have to win arguments.
All I am saying is to fight it with logical arguments based on science to win people's minds.
Example: I have told people I know that vaccines take a long time. Anyone with knowledge of how clinical trials work, know they take a long time, and may not even be 50% effective. There was no vaccine created for previous coronaviruses like SARS and MERS, that I know of.
Even some vaccine experts are doubting if an effective vacine can be created due to the nature of infection is technically outside the body.
Because of the uncertainty and indefinite target date for a vaccine, it is foolish to keep the economy on lockdown. The death rate is pretty low for healthy individuals, and if the more healthy people get the virus, the more we build up herd immunity (science). The more herd immunity, the sooner we can get back to normal life.
Umm the number of deaths is absolutely not real at all. It's a hoax
Yup. I couldn't read anything he said after reading that part. He sounds like a concern troll.
Maybe next he'll ask you guys to acknowledge your white privilege just a bit or else liberals won't think you're cool.🤷🏿♂️
The "number of COVID deaths" is indeed "inflated" depending on who's counting it, and which country.
The "number of CASES" which includes asymptomatic cases, is greatly hyped by media for fear-mongering.
It is the number of hospitalized cases and number of deaths per capita, that matters. And as far as I understand those are really low. Hence lockdowns are not justified.
But some of you here seem to be fixated on calling the whole thing a hoax. Brushing off deaths as a hoax is not going to convince others. For anyone who knows a victim, it is downright insensitive.
All I am saying is if you want to be effective in getting people on board, then argue the points, don't just call everything a hoax.
5%, not 95%?
So why weren't you wearing a mask in all of these situations before?
i get it that mask-shaming is being used as a political weapon, not just in the US, but in various countries as well.
but going towards the extreme opposite end implying all mask usage are bad and mind-control, aint gonna help either.
Tell us what you think the mask is blocking, microbe-wise.
Share how big you believe the pores on the very best masks are...and how big viruses are.
Explain WHY a mask can help. Maybe more people will give up their freedom and follow along.
afaik primary way the virus spreads is being carried by water droplets in exhalation.
masks do significantly limit that because they block vast majority of the moisture when a person exhales.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_(medicine)#Droplet_infection
(yes I know wikipedia is a cucked source, but the part I quoted is a very basic part of medicine that is accepted and known worldwide)
In fact the first red-pill my family had about governments through the west mishandling the infection is when they first said
back when this pandemic was only starting, because that was such a clear and blatant lie flying in the face of how these types of viruses spread.
that said, mask use should be limited to situations of close contact with a lot of people or with the people who are in high-risk. Wearing them all the time as many are suggested is just bullshit, because there are some studies that hint that they might have negatively impact on the wearer's health if worn for long periods.
https://www.jpost.com/health-science/could-wearing-a-mask-for-long-periods-be-detrimental-to-health-628400
wikipedia is not a trustworthy source of information. If you use it at all, I recommend looking at the source they cite at the bottom of the page and look at those instead.
I know where you are getting at. Viruses are very small (nanometers). Neither homemade masks nor surgical masks is gonna filter them all out. N95 or higher grade masks are necessary and even those are not 100% effective.
But masks do have limited effectiveness in "minimizing exposure" (not complete prevention) to the virus. And a healthy immune system should be able to deal with small exposures and give you immunity.
imho, exposure matters because a healthy doctor exposed to virus 24/7 is going to have their immune system overwhelmed, no matter how healthy they are.
If a surgical mask gives you, i dunno, something like 20% effectiveness (very ineffective), some will argue 20% is still better than 0%. I understand that argument.
With that said, I don't work in a hospital, not an elderly, and I don't go to crowded places. So my risk exposure is very low. I am also confident with my health, hence my risk aversion is low. For those reasons, I do not wear a mask.
All this boils down to is individual attitudes towards risk. Some people are extremely risk averse. Some are not. You cannot change that. People will be themselves.
And if you believe in freedom, then you also have to believe in freedom of risk-averse people to wear a mask, if they choose to.
What is important is not to conflate individual/personal decisions with policies/laws that will be imposed on everyone else.
Respect individual decision to do what they want (wear a mask or not).
Governments / businesses should not force anyone to wear a mask, nor penalize them.
Don't shut down the economy just because some people are too risk averse.
Yes