4 ms·

Do you think wearing the same mask every single day and being able to take it off when the waiter brings the breadsticks is an effective mask policy? Would you

Do you think wearing the same mask every single day and being able to take it off when the waiter brings the breadsticks is an effective mask policy? Would you go into surgery with a physician who wears the same mask on a daily basis?

newacct583 5y ago
> Do you think wearing the same mask every single day and being able to take it off when the waiter brings the breadsticks is an effective mask policy? More so than not wearing a mask at all, yes. Are you arguing for more effective mask distribution and more stringent mask enforcement? I think I'd agree that is warranted at the moment. But you're not, you're just whatabouting.
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  Would love a citation for that. Texas lifted all restrictions including masks and has lower infection rates per capita than most places with mask mandates and Covid restrictions. So the statement you make with arrogance may actually be wrong misinformation.
  - newacct583 5y ago
    > Would love a citation for that. Are you living in a cave? How can you not have seen all this. UCSF has this amazing review, and it's right at the top of the google results page: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-abou... You are claiming not to have seen this not because you have looked for this evidence and failed to find it, but because you have been CONVINCED BY YOUR MEDIA that this evidence doesn't exist. You also cite lies. Texas is one of the worst areas in the country for both total infection count and current infection rate: https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=states-normalized&highlight=Texas&show=us-states&y=both&scale=linear&data=cases-daily-7&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right#states-normalized https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=states... > So the statement you make with arrogance may actually be wrong misinformation. Ditto.
    - nickthemagicman 5y ago
      You use opinion pieces for 'science'? The modern day Covid Evangelist... views opinion pieces and the media as science.... Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA. Despite that terrible citation....even the opinion piece you linked says there are 'compelling strands of evidence'. NOT CONCLUSIVE. > You also cite lies. Whatever off the wall data set you posted seems to disagree with Statistica which puts TX in the bottom half of states for population adjusted rate of new Coronavirus cases. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109004/coronavirus-covid19-cases-rate-us-americans-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109004/coronavirus-covi... Here's a publication stating that Mask usage INCREASED chances of infection thats NOT AN OPINION PIECE FROM UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 Here's a collection of studies showing the ineffectiveness of face masks. https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/ https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/ You're clearly radicalized, anti-science, and pro-fascist from your media/peer group and you would support supression of discussion, demonizing dissent, and controlling of the narrative through force. You would destroy Democracy to be right. It's sad.
      - newacct583 5y ago
        > Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA. It's... a medical school. An elite one, no less, doing public outreach. Effectively that link is a review paper written for non-experts, it's certainly not "opinion journalism". I mean, it links to studies throughout the piece. It absolutely represents (and I don't understand why you think this is controversial) virtually uniformly held scientific consensus on this topic. I mean, I don't know what to say. If you don't trust doctors about medical issues, preferring to read pieces from (literal) Swiss conspiracy theory sites and citing isolated single Vietnamese studies, then I guess I can't help you. But yes: SWPRS and sites like that are LYING TO YOU. Very effectively, since now you trust them more than you do one of the best med schools in the country.

newacct583 5y ago

> Do you think wearing the same mask every single day and being able to take it off when the waiter brings the breadsticks is an effective mask policy? More so than not wearing a mask at all, yes. Are you arguing for more effective mask distribution and more stringent mask enforcement? I think I'd agree that is warranted at the moment. But you're not, you're just whatabouting.

nickthemagicman 5y ago
Would love a citation for that. Texas lifted all restrictions including masks and has lower infection rates per capita than most places with mask mandates and Covid restrictions. So the statement you make with arrogance may actually be wrong misinformation.
- newacct583 5y ago
  > Would love a citation for that. Are you living in a cave? How can you not have seen all this. UCSF has this amazing review, and it's right at the top of the google results page: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-abou... You are claiming not to have seen this not because you have looked for this evidence and failed to find it, but because you have been CONVINCED BY YOUR MEDIA that this evidence doesn't exist. You also cite lies. Texas is one of the worst areas in the country for both total infection count and current infection rate: https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=states-normalized&highlight=Texas&show=us-states&y=both&scale=linear&data=cases-daily-7&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right#states-normalized https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=states... > So the statement you make with arrogance may actually be wrong misinformation. Ditto.
  - nickthemagicman 5y ago
    You use opinion pieces for 'science'? The modern day Covid Evangelist... views opinion pieces and the media as science.... Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA. Despite that terrible citation....even the opinion piece you linked says there are 'compelling strands of evidence'. NOT CONCLUSIVE. > You also cite lies. Whatever off the wall data set you posted seems to disagree with Statistica which puts TX in the bottom half of states for population adjusted rate of new Coronavirus cases. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109004/coronavirus-covid19-cases-rate-us-americans-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109004/coronavirus-covi... Here's a publication stating that Mask usage INCREASED chances of infection thats NOT AN OPINION PIECE FROM UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 Here's a collection of studies showing the ineffectiveness of face masks. https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/ https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/ You're clearly radicalized, anti-science, and pro-fascist from your media/peer group and you would support supression of discussion, demonizing dissent, and controlling of the narrative through force. You would destroy Democracy to be right. It's sad.
    - newacct583 5y ago
      > Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA. It's... a medical school. An elite one, no less, doing public outreach. Effectively that link is a review paper written for non-experts, it's certainly not "opinion journalism". I mean, it links to studies throughout the piece. It absolutely represents (and I don't understand why you think this is controversial) virtually uniformly held scientific consensus on this topic. I mean, I don't know what to say. If you don't trust doctors about medical issues, preferring to read pieces from (literal) Swiss conspiracy theory sites and citing isolated single Vietnamese studies, then I guess I can't help you. But yes: SWPRS and sites like that are LYING TO YOU. Very effectively, since now you trust them more than you do one of the best med schools in the country.