Can't Mandate Masks

[Whateverman]

That's the thing: you don't. You don't prefer the science; you prefer the conspiracy theory nonsense, and fringe blogisphere. You prefer a tiny portion of the evidence over the vast majority.

Google "the science of masks and COVID-19", and look at the top 10 links. I just did, and they ALL say masks are an effective method of slowing the spread of the virus. Some even mention that they protect the people around the wearer better than the wearer him/herself. NONE of them say masks cause more harm than benefit.

Here, let me Google that for you.

That's the science you say you prefer.

Oh. Those are the studies you relied on. Haha. Dont' quit your day job.

Which studies did I rely on?

List 'em.

Those have all been rebutted by actual scientific studies.

aka. you refused to read the studies from the science you claim to "prefer". You refused even to check out the results of the Google search I posted for you.

Lol

You don't prefer science; you prefer partisan spin. Thanks for making this so blatantly clear to everyone in the thread.

[Mountain Man]

Context is important. Are you outside? Are you indoors? What is the air quality like? How long are you in contact? Is the person coughing or sneezing? Is the person talking, singing, or eating? Is anyone wearing masks? How far apart are you? Situations can change during "causal contact" and mask use and social distancing can be all that stands between you and infection. If an infected person sneezes into your open mouth during a conversation, wouldn't you prefer to have worn a mask?

Are you saying that if poor practices are common and widespread when it comes to a certain tool, nobody should use that tool? Are you against gun ownership too?

Whatever you say, Fauci Junior. It's this kind of rampant paranoia that has people scared of their own shadow.

[mikewhitney]

Population density doesn't matter. You said COVID-19 isn't much more deadly than the flu. The CDC says you're wrong. If you dispute that because of falsely-attributed deaths, then produce your own data results that are more reliable than the CDC's or don't compare them.

Asymptomatic people are irrelevant. I've been talking to you about pre-symptomatic people.

It is rational for parents to not want their children to have MIS-C or for young people to not want to have long-lasting health problems or for the elderly to not want to die. There is already plenty of blood on the hands of those who didn't take the virus seriously, and there will be plenty more if there is not great care taken to avoid exposure to those who have as of yet avoided it. Even if the chance is as minute as you claim, mask wearing is such a small price to pay to help keep others safe.

I wish you were right. Then we all could die tomorrow.

[mikewhitney]

aka. you refused to read the studies from the science you claim to "prefer". You refused even to check out the results of the Google search I posted for you.

Lol

You don't prefer science; you prefer partisan spin. Thanks for making this so blatantly clear to everyone in the thread.

you still have not shown which ones you relied on. we are going around in circles

[Psychic Missile]

Whatever you say, Fauci Junior. It's this kind of rampant paranoia that has people scared of their own shadow.

What do you get out of a discussion like this? Nobody learns anything, people dislike you more, and everyone involved wastes their time. Why even bother?

[Psychic Missile]

I wish you were right. Then we all could die tomorrow.

Why don't you deprive yourself of internet access, then you could pretend we all died and nobody would stumble upon your inane musings.

[Mountain Man]

What do you get out of a discussion like this? Nobody learns anything, people dislike you more, and everyone involved wastes their time. Why even bother?

I see... so you weren't being sarcastic when you interpreted "casual contact with a non-symptomatic person" to mean lengthy, complex interactions with symptomatic people who sneeze directly into other people's open mouths? Because that sure sounded sarcastic to me.

Let's put it this way: your chances of catching the Wuhan virus simply by walking past someone in a grocery store are not even with considering.

[rogue06]

how-to-make-wearing-masks-illegal-in-democrat-states.jpg

[Whateverman]

you still have not shown which ones you relied on.

You claimed to know which ones I relied upon.

Which is it?

---

You "prefer the science" like I prefer the bible.

[shunyadragon]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]46487[/ATTACH]

Problem it's full of holes.

[mikewhitney]

You claimed to know which ones I relied upon.

Which is it?

---

You "prefer the science" like I prefer the bible.

You haven't said anything that can be responded to. If you have a point to make or if you have specific scientific studies your relied upon, make them known.

[mikewhitney]

Problem it's full of holes.

I have thought of wearing a mask full of holes. It meets the description of the required cloth face masks but would be safer to wear and just as effective for use while shopping or out in public. It should stop the spread of the virus and make everybody happy.

The mask requirement sounds a bit like the motorcycle helmet laws. These laws require something like a DOT approved design. But there is no DOT approved design. So the law has not real requirement. Guys will wear a token helmet just to meet the superficial requirement.

[Mountain Man]

I suspect a mask mandate might be coming to my state, and even if it's legally unenforceable, a lot of stores will likely refuse entry to anybody without a face covering. A few stores in my area have already instituted such rules with the result being that I've simply stopped spending my money at those stores, so their loss, but most stores in my area are sensible enough not to require masks. If it becomes a requirement, I may have to invest in some stylish bandanas or something similar that look less ridiculous than those white dust masks that everybody wears on their chins.

[Psychic Missile]

I see... so you weren't being sarcastic when you interpreted "casual contact with a non-symptomatic person" to mean lengthy, complex interactions with symptomatic people who sneeze directly into other people's open mouths? Because that sure sounded sarcastic to me.

Let's put it this way: your chances of catching the Wuhan virus simply by walking past someone in a grocery store are not even with considering.

Casual contact is such a formless, fragile shield. What if you strike up a conversation with that person? What if they cough or sneeze in your direction? Does a meal count as casual contact? Church? Shopping for an hour or two in a small retail store? That's why I asked questions about context.

[Whateverman]

You haven't said anything that can be responded to.

... and here you are responding.

Doh!

If you have a point to make or if you have specific scientific studies your relied upon, make them known.

Already did. Despite your claim, it's clear you don't prefer the science. Masks work, they're useful, and they don't harm people in any appreciable manner.