3 ms·

Apologies, but I’m having trouble with your response. It doesn’t seem to be related to the article or my comment. This article is all about creating “better” m

Apologies, but I’m having trouble with your response. It doesn’t seem to be related to the article or my comment. This article is all about creating “better” masks for general public usage in social situations. It seems to say that even with, or because of, those not wearing masks, the mask-wearers need more effective masks.

jakeogh 6y ago
People must make their own healthcare decisions. Telling others what to do because one does not want to wear an actually effective mask is rather slick conditioning towards a forced medical procedure. I think you understood the comment you are replying to. US Experiment on infants withholding affection: https://stpauls.vxcommunity.com/Issue/Us-Experiment-On-Infants-Withholding-Affection/13213 https://stpauls.vxcommunity.com/Issue/Us-Experiment-On-Infan... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Baby+development+without+affection https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Baby+development+witho...
m0llusk 6y ago
I am saying that this "better" metric you refer to is badly defined in this article. A mask that allowed for easier breathing would potentially be used more frequently and reliably and would do less damage to the wearer. That seems better to me. The ease of carrying, wearing, and also cleaning are other important contributing factors. You are agreeing with the writer that the only contributing factor to "better" is the capacity to lower infection rates when correctly worn. That isn't merely wrong, it is dangerously and offensively stupid.
- calmworm 6y ago
  Thank you for clarifying your point. They touched on multiple points of "better" in this article... one of which is "Comfort", "For example, Stanford researchers are experimenting with wearable devices that pump oxygen into masks to make them more breathable."

3 ms·

Apologies, but I’m having trouble with your response. It doesn’t seem to be related to the article or my comment. This article is all about creating “better” m

by calmworm 6y ago

jakeogh 6y ago
People must make their own healthcare decisions. Telling others what to do because one does not want to wear an actually effective mask is rather slick conditioning towards a forced medical procedure. I think you understood the comment you are replying to. US Experiment on infants withholding affection: https://stpauls.vxcommunity.com/Issue/Us-Experiment-On-Infants-Withholding-Affection/13213 https://stpauls.vxcommunity.com/Issue/Us-Experiment-On-Infan... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Baby+development+without+affection https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Baby+development+witho...
m0llusk 6y ago
I am saying that this "better" metric you refer to is badly defined in this article. A mask that allowed for easier breathing would potentially be used more frequently and reliably and would do less damage to the wearer. That seems better to me. The ease of carrying, wearing, and also cleaning are other important contributing factors. You are agreeing with the writer that the only contributing factor to "better" is the capacity to lower infection rates when correctly worn. That isn't merely wrong, it is dangerously and offensively stupid.
- calmworm 6y ago
  Thank you for clarifying your point. They touched on multiple points of "better" in this article... one of which is "Comfort", "For example, Stanford researchers are experimenting with wearable devices that pump oxygen into masks to make them more breathable."