I'm not sure that mask wearers get it the same as sinners. Seems like I read a study where maskers were infected more often than sinners. A study conducted in the United States in July found that when they compared 154 “case-patients,” who tested positive for COVID-19, to a control group of 160 participants from health care facilities who were symptomatic but tested negative, over 70 percent of the case-patients were contaminated with the virus and fell ill despite “always” wearing a mask.
CDC Mask Wearing Guidelines
- Thread starter gfm7175
- Start date
I'm not sure that mask wearers get it the same as sinners. Seems like I read a study where maskers were infected more often than sinners. A study conducted in the United States in July found that when they compared 154 “case-patients,” who tested positive for COVID-19, to a control group of 160 participants from health care facilities who were symptomatic but tested negative, over 70 percent of the case-patients were contaminated with the virus and fell ill despite “always” wearing a mask.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Indeed, and I do think that mask wearing is at the very least indirectly, if not directly, leading to more infections as well as a plethora of other mental and physical health issues.
For my purposes in this thread, however, it need only be 'no difference at all' in order for my OP to stand, so I'm perfectly fine with taking and defending that sort of "bare minimum" position rather than defending more than what is absolutely necessary to defend.
He was acting politically. He decided he had a mission to save the loves of front line workers. It is what is called a white lie. he did it for a purpose. It is not like Trump's 25,000 lies which are all for his benefit.
AProudLefty
Adorable how loser is screeching for attention. :)
That has been discussed multiple times. You do not get to decide the outcome of the discussion just because you believe that you're right.
The virus size is not in question.
They protect the OTHERS.
See above.
You are not required to wear it at home and outdoors.
AProudLefty
Adorable how loser is screeching for attention. :)
It's a metaphor, dumbass.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
I AM right.
So what IS in question? The engineering specs of the masks?
No, that's what the CDC USED to say, after they changed their stance from "masks do not work" and before they changed their stance to their current stance of "masks protect others AND oneself"... So no, what the CDC now says is that masks protect both others AND oneself...
But if you wish to believe in the prior CDC stance, then riddle me this... How can the exact same mask pores stop a virus from coming out of a mask yet simultaneously NOT be able to stop a virus from entering inside of a mask?
See above.
... FOR NOW.... but I AM currently required to wear it indoors (I don't follow the mandate though, and I cheat at work where I am required to wear it, as I don't cover up my nose). It is still muzzling me up and treating me like a dog. It is sick tyrannical Satanic BS...
AProudLefty
Adorable how loser is screeching for attention. :)
So you say. And thanks for proving my point about deciding the outcome.
RQAA
There is no "stance". If there was any change in "stance", it was due to finding more evidence that wearing masks do help protect the wearers.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/11/933903848/wear-masks-to-protect-yourself-from-the-coronavirus-not-only-others-cdc-stresses
RQAA
Not at home or outside or anywhere else other than stores and work where the employers require it.
Indeed, and I do think that mask wearing is at the very least indirectly, if not directly, leading to more infections as well as a plethora of other mental and physical health issues.
For my purposes in this thread, however, it need only be 'no difference at all' in order for my OP to stand, so I'm perfectly fine with taking and defending that sort of "bare minimum" position rather than defending more than what is absolutely necessary to defend.
I bet you do. Your level of mistaken science is amazing. You pushed your right wing bigotry into science and found you could mold it to back your preconceptions. It requires amending and lying about the science, You are up to it. Corona travels on droplets. That is a fact. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/scientific-brief-sars-cov-2.html
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
No, I am right. I know what I am talking about. You don't.
No it wasn't.
Paradox.
No it wasn't. Answer my question.
...for now... Doesn't change what I said, though...
AProudLefty
Adorable how loser is screeching for attention. :)
Yes I do.
Now you do understand how it feels?
How so?
Your question is based on faulty assumption and premise.
At least you're honest enough to say that you do not know their motive for the future.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
I quite literally just said that I did...
Projection Fallacy.
Fallacy Fallacy. Bigotry Fallacy. Science is not people; it is a set of falsifiable theories.
Projection Fallacy.
False Authority Fallacy. Incorrect use of the word 'fact'. Viruses need not travel on or be attached to droplets. Droplets evaporate.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
No, you don't.
How what feels?
You simultaneously argued two opposing positions. (there is no stance; there is a stance) Either there IS one or there ISN'T one...
No, it is a valid question.
Bogus position assignment.
AProudLefty
Adorable how loser is screeching for attention. :)
Thanks for continuing to prove my point about deciding.
To keep saying RQAA instead of actually answering.
No I didn't. There is no "stance" in science, only what the evidence suggests. That's how science works.
I didn't say that it isn't a valid question. I said that it's a question based on faulty assumption or premise.
Droplets can land on the mask from others who have the virus. And that's assuming they don't land on eyes.
Nope. You claimed to know their motive and that they'll likely to enforce the mandate further in the future.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
I only use RQAA after I've already answered at least once (if not several times) and the same question keeps getting asked again and again...
Yes, you did. And science does not make use of supporting evidence, genius... It only makes use of conflicting evidence.
No it isn't, and this is yet another paradox on your part. (my question is valid; my question is not valid)
Doesn't explain how viruses can enter a mask but not escape through a mask (very same pores)... and that's another reason why masks are stupid; one's eyes are still exposed...
The CDC does not implement nor enforce mask mandates... GOVERNMENTS do, however... unconstitutionally...
Wrong, conditions on the ground changed, never said Covid did
No need to, two wrongs don't make a right
You just got done saying masks aren't infallible and then ask why they don't work one hundred percent of the time
Given you have no proof that mask wearers are getting sick at the same rate your attempted point is irrlevant
You are just lazy and don't want to be inconvenienced
So now a once in a generation pandemic isn't a crisis, got to wonder what you think is a crisis
See above regarding proof
See above again
Show us in history where any pandemic with no vaccine, no inherent immunities, nor little effective treatment was temporary, and the rest of your post is pure radio rhetoric
Want to break it down by prepositions and article now?
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
No valid argumentation presented.
AProudLefty
Adorable how loser is screeching for attention. :)
Yep. That's me every time you assume victory.
There is more than two posters here, in case you have forgotten.
When I am asked the same questions from other posters, sometimes I would just repeat, copy and paste my previous posts or link to posts or sources in question.
No I did not.
Uh wow.
A question can be valid and yet based on assumptions.
The masks are quite effective at stopping the droplets from the mask wearers.
^^^^Easily controlled because he's a pussy.
Fallacy fallacy again. The droplets carry Corona and a mask stops them from coming out from a disease-ridden Republican to a harmless law biding Dem. You really can't understand that?
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
No valid argumentation presented.