Corona Virus

[Bronn]

So the argument against wearing masks is that it is potentially only 10% efficient?

LOL

Would you rather have 10% of a million dollars, or 0%?

Great, big brain logic going on here.

 

Wear a mask of some sort so your dumb asymptomatic ass has at least a 10% less of a chance of spreading A VIRAL PANDEMIC. I'll wear my mask so I can also have a 10% less chance of catching it from all your mouth breathing ass, and combined we can potentially cut the risk of A VIRAL PANDEMIC spreading by 1/5th.

 

If you argue against mask wearing, you're an insolent toddler. Just like the President of the US.

If you see someone not wearing a mask in a public place, punch them in the face just like you would a Nazi.

[45catfan]

3 minutes ago, Bronn said:

If you see someone not wearing a mask in a public place, punch them in the face just like you would a Nazi.

From a moderator.  Does Igo condone this?

[Bronn]

15 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

From a moderator.  Does Igo condone this?

lol

[The NFL Shield At Midfield]

35 minutes ago, KSpan said:

52 minutes ago, rippadonn said:

 

Your own source says that droplets are large enough to be stopped by the masks, so if the viral particulates are in the droplet... the particulates are stopped/slowed as well. The whole point of the masks isn't really to protect on the inhale, though wearers benefit from a layer blocking touching of the face, it's to disrupt the exhalations of the wearer. Also, of course other methods like regular hand-washing are crucial. 

This whole line of thinking is silly. There is no harm in wearing one and given the rate of infection in the US masks can also cause people to just be generally more aware. From your the NEJM article quoted on your link:

That website he posted is a conservative think tank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

e:

Quote

 The association has promoted a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. It is opposed to the Affordable Care Act and other forms of universal health insurance.

lmao alright then.  Glad we got the real facts on the mask debate from these fuging people.

Edited July 16, 2020 by The NFL Shield At Midfield

[NanuqoftheNorth]

In the age of COVID, we all have the potential to unknowingly become an uncontrolled biological weapon set loose on general society.

Let's try and behave like responsible members of society, good citizens:  Frequently wash your hands, social distance whenever possible and wear a mask for the benefit of others.  

Why is any of this even debatable at this point?

[LinvilleGorge]

12 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

In the age of COVID, we all have the potential to unknowingly become an uncontrolled biological weapon set loose on general society.

Let's try and behave like responsible members of society, good citizens:  Frequently wash your hands, social distance whenever possible and wear a mask for the benefit of others.  

Why is any of this even debatable at this point?

I really tried this approach for the longest time. Logic and evidence will eventually win, right?

Face punching might actually be the way to go.

[The NFL Shield At Midfield]

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I really tried this approach for the longest time. Logic and evidence will eventually sin, right?

Face punching might actually be the way to go.

The guy that's been spamming this thread can't even bother to vet his own damn sources.  Yeah great excellent you found an antivaxx HIV-denialist conservative medical lobbying group that agrees with you.

[Brooklyn 3.0]

Just ignore ripp, 45cat, and CatTower and your board life will be much simpler.

[NanuqoftheNorth]

43 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

 

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

I took a quick look. Holy poo, that's a laughable study. First of all, they had a sample size of four. Second of all, in their testing they found no virus detected on the inside of two masks while finding virus on the outside. That screams control issues or even outright data falsification. You mentioned common sense earlier, now use it. Do you really think a mask being worn by an infected person would have no virus detected on the inside of it? Did the virus teleport itself through the mask and then consciously decide to cling to the exterior? There testing was also done at a distance of roughly 8" away. Much closer than any normal social encounter and far closer than the recommended six feet of social distancing which mask wearing does not change.

Sample size of 4.  Why would anyone hoping to be taken seriously include this "study"?

[KSpan]

21 minutes ago, The NFL Shield At Midfield said:

That website he posted is a conservative think tank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

e:

lmao alright then.  Glad we got the real facts on the mask debate from these fuging people.

I'm trying to avoid any semblance of politicizing my points, both for my own objectivity and for the discussion itself, and that specific link IMO deserves objective review regardless of any political leaning since there are data cited. However, there doesn't seem to be any clear and conclusive evidence noted that masks are harmful and that definite ill effects outweigh any potential benefits.

Edited July 16, 2020 by KSpan

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Sample size of 4.  Why would anyone hoping to be taken seriously include this "study"?

Yeah, it was the very first thing I saw. I really didn't need to read much deeper, but I did. It just got worse.

The study has now been retracted. LOL

[KSpan]

59 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Strange...not sure what I was talking about, but then again knew exactly what I was talking about.  A vaccine isn't around the corner as much as the media keeps hyping one.  The reason is very obvious.  Even so, it will likely be a seasonal vaccine and not a cure, likely with spotty effectiveness.   This will continue to make its round every year for a while.  Therapeutics is the best way to tackle this.  We can't even eradicate the common cold, but a cure for a novel viral disease is just over the horizon!!!  I'm not buying it.  So what, we lock down until more studies are done on the linger effects? What then?  Wait for more studies to be done based off those findings for some consensus in the scientific community?

Thanks for somewhat acknowledging my post, however, even though you skirted around it.  Yes, deaths have dipped below pandemic levels in America, at least for the time being.

You and I discussed this yesterday and you posted that same graphic, but since we already discussed it I'm not clear what you're trying to emphasize further. As I said yesterday I recognize that this is a very complicated situation and feel that weighing of all factors must come into play when performing risk/benefit analyses. Deaths are an incomplete metric, similar IMO to overall infections, and it's possible that vaccines may even be ineffective. I'm not suggesting that everyone shut in forever but a semester/year of limited action as more data are obtained may be a prudent course of action. I'm not saying there's any good or possibly even notable chance of this happening but 5/10/20 years from now it sure would suck to have strong links between COVID infection and onset of any number of debilitating conditions if a few more months of caution and data generation while folks carefully tread the line between 'old normal' and current conditions might minimize that risk.  

Overall, it sucks and the US seems to be performing poorly by most accepted metrics.

[KSpan]

11 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Sample size of 4.  Why would anyone hoping to be taken seriously include this "study"?

Come on now, that's a whole 1 sample more than necessary to calculate a coefficient of variance. Airtight.

[stirs]

A discussion board is just that.

If you ban everyone that disagrees with your opinion, it becomes my big ole echo chamber.

Out of the 50 different people who have posted here, I probably agree and disagree with different points they have all made, even 4 Corners, although not that often, haha.

Let people argue their points, good, bad, informed, ill informed, etc.  Stop the cancel culture attitude on a damn message board. Sheesh.

Everyone is subject to post stuff they read and the world is full of varied opinions.  Quit trying so hard to make people think exactly like you do, or in 4 Corners case, to think at all.  It won't work.  Apologies to 4C, it was just low hanging fruit.

This is no different than arguing different points of view on drafting a WR or an OL based on stats and measurables, well, except people aren't dying.  Anyway, calm down, let people talk.  If they are calling names, then step in, otherwise you are herding cats.

Look at our elected gov officials on both sides of the aisle and tell me with a straight face that America is all about the smartest people to follow.

Edited July 16, 2020 by stirs