2 ms·
ah, so you didn't read the article I guess, because it never says that they don't work 100% just says the evidence that they do isn't great, it also covers what
by jimmyjazz14 5y ago
ah, so you didn't read the article I guess, because it never says that they don't work 100% just says the evidence that they do isn't great, it also covers what the writer sees at downsides (cost) to masking children. Its fine to have differing views but you should probably focus your arguments on the substance of article. The author laid out several very compelling paragraphs to back up her point along with sources cited, so I'm sorry, but if the only counter argument you can come up with is "its bullshit" you should probably quit the debate club.
- sleepybrett 5y ago1% effective is better than 0% effective. The best defense is defense in depth.
- jimmyjazz14 5y agoI mean that is generally referred to as "safetyism" and while I guess its a fine personal choice it is not something that should be applied in public policy.