masks work .. to infect you :(

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
It's not surprising; early on, all we knew for sure was that it protected others if the wearer was infected. Only later did we realize that it also provides some protection for the wearer.
 

eider

Well-known member
Next you'll tell me that peanuts have warning on them, that they "might contain peanuts..."

Indeed. :)
Just so.

But don't tell the OP or he might think that peanuts should be banned or something.

Over here in the UK they do.!
 

eider

Well-known member

When to use s mask..... When the law requires masks to be worn or you'll get poorer by £100 every time ( in the UK)
 

ok doser

Well-known member
When to use s mask..... When the law requires masks to be worn or you'll get poorer by £100 every time ( in the UK)

up to $6000 per offense in parts of Quebec

now that's Canadian $$$, so multiply by 0.76 to get real dollars
 

chair

Well-known member

Yep- they wrote that back in March. They learned that they were wrong- it's about time that you learned it too.
 

ok doser

Well-known member
Yep- they wrote that back in March. They learned that they were wrong- it's about time that you learned it too.

same question to you - would you let your elderly loved ones be cared for by an infected caregiver as long as they were wearing a cloth mask?
 

chair

Well-known member
of course not, but I suspect we'll get no answer from the usual suspects

Would you allow an elderly loved one to be cared for by an infected caregiver if they (the infected caregiver) was wearing a cloth mask?

Of course not! Masks reduce the risk of infection, they don't eliminate it completely. The point, which you insist on missing, is that reducing the risk of infection helps public health, even though they only provide partial protection for the individual.
 

ok doser

Well-known member
Of course not! Masks reduce the risk of infection, they don't eliminate it completely. The point, which you insist on missing, is that reducing the risk of infection helps public health, even though they only provide partial protection for the individual.

:darwinsm:
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
That's like asking if you'd be O.K. with a drunk driver in your community if everyone was wearing seat belts. It's a stupid question, since seat belts save lives, but they aren't 100% effective.

And yes, there really are people that stupid.
 

ok doser

Well-known member
That's like asking if you'd be O.K. with a drunk driver in your community if everyone was wearing seat belts.

not really

It's a stupid question,

The strawman you just constructed? Yes. Yes it is. Surprising to see you admit it.


And yes, there really are people that stupid.

indeed there are barbie, it's just unexpected to see you admit it

You don't have to remain stupid, barbie. There are things you can do. Would you like me to show you how?
 

ok doser

Well-known member
That's like asking if you'd be O.K. with a drunk driver in your community if everyone was wearing seat belts.

What it's like is asking if you'd be ok with a drunk driver in your community if he had a speed limiter installed on his car, or pool noodles strapped to his bumper, or some other device that gave the appearance of reducing the risk he posed.
 

chair

Well-known member
Ok, why not?

Be concise, specific and clear.

I explained, clearly, specifically and concisely.
Masks only reduce the chance of an infected person infecting somebody else. It doesn't completely eliminate the possibility. So if you know that someone is sick, a mask isn't good enough- you shouldn't get anywhere near that person. The sick person needs to be in quarantine.

From a public health viewpoint it looks different. If you can reduce the rate of replication, i.e. the number of people who get infected by a sick person, that is already a huge help. It doesn't mean nobody will get sick or die, but a lot less will- and that is what public health is about. In fact, if you get the replication rate down low enough, the virus will eventually disappear.

If you don't understand this, it is only because you REFUSE to understand it.
 
Top