Anti-mask wearers are smarter than mask wearers, concludes MIT study.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Far, far, far too many do not care about medical exemptions, however. And it is causing some serious problems to those with medical conditions.

I absolutely accept that and appreciate it's too easily ignored.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
So, Armap... what's your choice?

I don't know, I have read you post four times and I still get confused with it. Could you rephrase it, please?

a reply to: ArMaP

I have re-read it myself, and I honestly cannot rephrase it in a way that is not more easily confused.

I can rephrase the choices:

• Do nothing because the problems do not affect you.
  
• Try to shame people for acting "unfair," making them feel more threatened.
  
• Show them via compassionate responses to their concerns that you are not a part of the problem.

TheRedneck

a reply to: EvilAxis

I absolutely accept that and appreciate it's too easily ignored.

So let me ask you this, then: assume you are at a business and you see someone claiming a medical exemption being denied entry. What do you do?

• Ignore it; none of your business. You don't have a medical condition.
  
• Join in trying to force the person to wear a mask; he's probably lying.
  
• Speak up about the fact that he is being discriminated against.

I'm not really concerned about the answer you respond with. What I am concerned about is the answer you choose when/if that actually happens. That's the only answer that will matter in the long run.

TheRedneck

As you say, it would be pointless to answer. A person's actions are what matter, not what they say they would be - we knew that already, didn't we?

I can't see the relevance of your question to the topic, other than to further air the personal grievance you feel against those who take the recommended precautions to reduce spreading the virus.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I can rephrase the choices:

• Do nothing because the problems do not affect you.
  
• Try to shame people for acting "unfair," making them feel more threatened.
  
• Show them via compassionate responses to their concerns that you are not a part of the problem.

You don't say what "the problem" is, so I suppose you are referring to the "So now, in this thread, you have seen where some who also share that characteristic are harming others and creating a bad reputation for everyone sharing that characteristic." part of your previous post.

If you are, then you are wrong, as I didn't see people that use masks harming other in this thread, I saw people saying that other people are harming others and creating a bad reputation for everyone wearing masks.

Now, if I had seen someone on this tread harming other people I would try to point them that they were doing it, as they could be doing it without noticing what they were doing, like I always do: I always try to make people see what they are doing/not doing, so they are the ones reaching the conclusion and not just listen to what I am saying.
Sometimes it doesn't work, but as it works most of the time I keep on doing it.

If they do not see that they are acting wrong then I would leave them, as I don't have any way of making people think in a different way, they have to do it for themselves.

I hope my answer wasn't as confusing as the question.

a reply to: ketsuko

Of course, you don't care about the person wearing the mask.

So are you calling out mask wearers for not caring about themselves, or calling out mask wearers for making anti-maskers "actually wear" masks?

Now if you still don't wear a mask that's great but the philosophy behind the mask is the person wearing it is trying to prevent their own sickness from leaving their body and entering yours, now I know that's confusing especially for someone who flippantly calls people narcissists whilst actually having an insanely narcissistic view full of gereralizations that make *you* the smartest most knowledgeable person to be weighing in on a world wide biological catastrophe that somehow both exists and can kill people but is also not real and hasnt killed "more than the flu(stomp stomp stomp)".

Cuz guess what you narcissists could give a rats @$$ about people dying if anything, that's why you so casually use the large amount of HUMAN DEATHS that hospitals are trying to prevent EVERYDAY as a reason why this new disease ISNT THAT BAD.

You can call that behavior whatever you want, BUT if you know what werds mean, like when you read the dictionary, you'll realize the self centered view you hold is very supportive of you and only things you believe, and it has no room for new information presented by anyone but yourself.

I'll just let you navel-gaze as long as you like, you guys think my responses are me being heated and acting crazy, no my responses are therapy for me and your threads make me fart the fun right out the behind, directly into shorts.

Y'all are MY entertainment now that I've learned there ain't no use in convincing anyone of anything here, I post for my benefit and hope some of the others, like me, waiting in the wings either laughing or crying know that we don't all have Q's member way up inside our colon and we still love conspiracy thought. We just ain't fans of that groupthink, and before you go on about masks being groupthink...let's think of all the groups who ever wore masks and the reasons they wore them, and let's not forget all the side-effects of wearing CLOTH on your face how that's been heavily reported for over centuries for sure right?

a reply to: ArMaP

If you are, then you are wrong, as I didn't see people that use masks harming other in this thread, I saw people saying that other people are harming others and creating a bad reputation for everyone wearing masks.

Are you saying you don't believe people with medical conditions are being discriminated against?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Poofmander

Now if you still don't wear a mask that's great but the philosophy behind the mask is the person wearing it is trying to prevent their own sickness from leaving their body and entering yours

So, if I am understanding you correctly, you believe that everyone on the planet is infected?

know that we don't all have Q's member way up inside our colon and we still love conspiracy thought.

Whoops, my bad... sorry to bother you. I didn't see your sign.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

That's your interpretation of that part of my post? I thought it was clear, but I will try to rephrase it.

I haven't seen in people in this thread harming other people, unless there is someone that feels harmed with the words written on this thread. What I saw was reports of people being harmed, directly or indirectly.

a reply to: ArMaP

I wan't sure how to interpret it. That's why I asked for clarification.

If you have seen reports of people being directly or indirectly harmed, and if you believe those reports, how does it not follow that you believe people are being harmed? I don't understand your logic.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Do you really not understand preventative measures?Especially when there is a real thing called asymptomatic people who may never know they were infected?

I never said everyone was infected but there are times when you can pass it to other people when not showing signs of disease!!

You wear a mask as much as you can in order to PREVENT (that pre-fix "pre" it means before) transmission to people around you. If you get sick you still tell all those people that were around you so they can get tested but the chances of them becoming infected if both you and they were wearing masks is very low AND will slow the spread of the disease and there and by SAVE LIVES!

All the while you stand there and say we are the ones getting brain damage, and I don't even have the confidence in you guys to think your way out of a cloth mask.

Just for my own information when/if you drive in a vehicle do you wear a seatbelt?

a reply to: Poofmander

Do you really not understand preventative measures?

I think I do. Do you? For example, people have been "social distancing" for quite some time, certainly since before I was born. I still do... if I do catch a cold or a flu bug (which in my case is usually evidenced not by any debilitation, but by a slight fever or runny nose at worst), I tend to not go around other people, or at least keep a little distance. That's just common sense.

Mask use, however, is something new, and as such is unproven. There are a few things which are proven: surgeons rarely wear a mask more than two hours at a time, as longer use can and has led to reports of a difficulty in concentration. Why? Because a face mask will lead to one of two things: a drop in blood O2 (SplO2) readings, or deeper and more rapid breathing. That's a fact. It also leads to an increased pulse rate, especially during physical exertion, as a lower SplO2 reading means less O2 is available to the muscles and the heart attempts to compensate by increasing blood flow.

Which is my issue, incidentally... my heart cannot compensate.

The lower SplO2 is caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and a depletion of oxygen in the small area between the face and the mask... the smaller the area, the more rapid the effect. A mask does provide some resistance to free air flow; if it did not, there would be no use in wearing one at all. Any filtration system requires a certain amount of pressure to operate, and that requirement of pressure means there is some restriction to free air flow. That's physics.

So what the mask is doing, is two-fold: it is restricting free air flow in and out of your respiratory tracts, thusly slowing viral spread the way a self-contained apparatus would, just to a much lesser extent, while effectively stopping any droplets of moisture from exiting your respiratory tracts; it is also, at the same time, trapping any viral load that is not released into the atmosphere, forcing you to breath it back in with the next breath, and creating a sort of "petri dish" (optimal conditions for growth) for your body to breathe through. The result? A temporary lessening of cognitive skills, irritability, discomfort, and potential re-infection of any present pathogens for the wearer, and a minimal advantage over time for others.

You might be interested in the fact that all of the present tests that show mask use reduces spread of pathogens use bacterial spread, not viral spread, as a measure. The cheap surgical masks do slow bacterial spread (bacteria are massive compared to viral particles). The testing is typically using a petri dish to observe bacterial growth from contamination... a virus does not show such growth, as it requires a living host cell to replicate.

In addition, when a surgeon discards a face mask, it is considered biological waste and is processed as such. When the average person finishes with a mask, it is either left as litter contaminating the entire area, tossed into a garbage can which actually can mimic a petri dish, or sometimes saved to be used again later!

And that's assuming that people wear them correctly, and not as a "chin diaper." From my experience, that's a pretty big assumption!

The result is that any minor benefit one might receive from wearing a mask themselves is far outweighed by their increased risk of becoming symptomatic and requiring hospitalization, and any benefit to society gained by the constant use of face masks is more than offset by the after-use contamination of the environment. As evidence, Alabama recently cancelled the mask mandate... now maybe 1 in 20 people are wearing masks during shopping, and most businesses have dropped or are dropping the requirement for employees to wear masks. As a result, there was a 2-day spike in cases about 2 weeks after the mandate was dropped, and then new cases went back to normal and have continued to fall.

In science, we call that a "causal correlation" and it is usually considered a sign that a "causal relationship" might well be probable.

I never said everyone was infected but there are times when you can pass it to other people when not showing signs of disease!!

You said that mask use was in order to prevent infected individuals from spreading the disease. You are obviously a proponent of all people wearing a mask whenever possible. Therefore, the logical conclusion was that you consider all people as infected.

And if we consider all people as infected, what is the purpose then of requiring a face mask? One is obviously not needed to prevent infection to an infected person, so if one considers everyone as infected there is zero need for a face mask.

If, on the other hand, one considers that everyone is not infected but many are asymptomatic, then the question becomes why make such a requirement when the disease itself is 50% asymptomatic? Diseases which require extreme responses (like quarantine) are those which have dire consequences. The Chinese virus does not have dire consequences for society as a whole when 50% of the infected have no symptoms, less than 1% of the population has had fatal consequences (and that includes many cases which could easily be considered murder... talking to you, Andrew Cuomo), and less than a 10% fatality rate for those who at greater risk of dying from anything. This is not ebola, polio, whooping cough, etc... it is much closer related to a bad cold. A very bad cold, granted, but still a bad cold.

There is no way you can spin a requirement that de facto ignores the medical needs of a portion of society as appropriate in this case.

All the while you stand there and say we are the ones getting brain damage, and I don't even have the confidence in you guys to think your way out of a cloth mask.

I never said people were getting brain damage; I said that it seems to be those who are most easily led and who have the least actual understanding of the science who are the most vocal. Not vice versa. But I'm interested that you would accuse those with a medical disability of such... after trying to explain how you understood their plight.

Just for my own information when/if you drive in a vehicle do you wear a seatbelt?

Actually, no, I don't. Had a guy hit me and total my car a year or so ago, too... no damage to me.

I don't mind if others wear theirs... not a bad idea, as some people are easily injured in a car wreck. But I would mind if everyone who got into my car suddenly started screaming in my ear about me wearing mine. My car; my body; my choice. I also don't get too upset about others asking me to buckle up in their car either... but I am very upset over the law that makes them do so.

The only reason I am so upset over people demanding face mask use is that many are trying to force it onto me despite a medical condition that prohibits it and one that they do not understand or share, and if I do not comply and risk my own health, then will deny me the benefits of society.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
If you have seen reports of people being directly or indirectly harmed, and if you believe those reports, how does it not follow that you believe people are being harmed? I don't understand your logic.

That's because you are assuming that I do not believe people are being harmed.

But believing that is not the same as witnessing people doing it, as I cannot talk to those people.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
So what the mask is doing, is two-fold: it is restricting free air flow in and out of your respiratory tracts, thusly slowing viral spread the way a self-contained apparatus would, just to a much lesser extent, while effectively stopping any droplets of moisture from exiting your respiratory tracts; it is also, at the same time, trapping any viral load that is not released into the atmosphere, forcing you to breath it back in with the next breath, and creating a sort of "petri dish" (optimal conditions for growth) for your body to breathe through. The result? A temporary lessening of cognitive skills, irritability, discomfort, and potential re-infection of any present pathogens for the wearer, and a minimal advantage over time for others.

I have been using masks since May 2020, sometimes for 6 consecutive hours, and I never noticed those symptoms. And my lungs already have a lower capacity than normal, as I am an asthmatic since I was 5.

a reply to: ArMaP

That's because you are assuming that I do not believe people are being harmed.

Your own response is indicative that you do not believe people are being harmed, or would you rather I believe you simply do not care about people being harmed? As it is, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt.

But believing that is not the same as witnessing people doing it, as I cannot talk to those people.

I have seen plenty of posts on this site from people who either do not understand or simply do not care about these requirements being harmful to others. Can you not talk to them? How is that when you are talking to me?

I see much illogic in your answers thus far to my posts. Perhaps you are a bit conflicted?

TheRedneck

a reply to: ArMaP

I have been using masks since May 2020, sometimes for 6 consecutive hours, and I never noticed those symptoms. And my lungs already have a lower capacity than normal, as I am an asthmatic since I was 5.

Asthma is not always a mark of physically decreased lung function, although it can be. It can also be a failure in the feedback loop that controls breathing, or a combination of the two. In my case, hard breathing beyond a very low threshold does me absolutely no good; I can control my breathing and rest just as fast and just as efficiently. However, my instinctive (subconscious) response to exertion is heavy breathing. The feedback loop is still operational, but the physical damage has rendered it useless. Blood cannot saturate beyond 98-99%, and flow must be sufficient at experienced levels to deliver enough blood to where it is needed for continual exertion.

Also, are you saying there is absolutely no discomfort to you wearing a face mask? I find that hard to believe... I have never met anyone in my entire life who has stated such. Lessened cognitive ability is hard for one to detect in oneself, since one must use their cognitive functions in order to assess their cognitive functions. Irritability is a symptom which is also not readily apparent to the one experiencing it.

In any case, my entire point has been and is that others do not have asthma since they were 5. That's you. It also requires, I assume, certain lifestyle considerations that you must take into account. I do not have asthma, and therefore I do not have to take into account those considerations... just like I am sure you have no trouble walking across a parking lot. My considerations are different from yours. My wife has Type II diabetes; she has to take into account different considerations than either of us. I have a close friend with bad knees... one has been replaced, and doing anything on his knees is now extremely painful (as well as potentially damaging to his artificial knee). That is a consideration he has to take into account for himself.

There is no logical reasoning that says I should give up sugar and sweets or supplement my insulin levels artificially because my wife has diabetes. There is no logical reasoning that says I have to avoid doing anything on my knees because my friend cannot. There is no logical reasoning that says my friend must limit his physical exertion because I must limit mine. Everyone has differing medical considerations that apply to them, them alone, and to no one else. Laws must allow for these physical considerations based on individual conditions.

How would you feel if you were somehow required by law to undertake actions which you knew would lead to a severe asthma attack? That is how I feel whenever people start demanding that others wear masks. I hope you can understand that.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

How would you feel if you were somehow required by law to undertake actions which you knew would lead to a severe asthma attack? That is how I feel whenever people start demanding that others wear masks. I hope you can understand that.

Very well said here.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Mask use, however, is something new, and as such is unproven.

Mask use isn't new. Their specific utility against Covid-19 was untested a year ago, but there's been a lot of research in the meantime, and the consensus is strong.

Face masks: What the data say Nature, Oct 6, 2020

The findings provide justification for the emerging consensus that mask use protects the wearer as well as other people. The work also points to another potentially game-changing idea: “Masking may not only protect you from infection but also from severe illness,”

originally posted by: TheRedneck

There are a few things which are proven: surgeons rarely wear a mask more than two hours at a time, as longer use can and has led to reports of a difficulty in concentration.

Not true. Many routinely work for much longer than that. On long haul, complex ops, lead surgeons work for 6, and sometimes over 12 hours, grabbing sustenance and loo breaks when they can. They're supposed to change masks when working for over 2 or 3 hours, but that's for the sake of the patient, not the surgeon. Dentists wear them most of their working day.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

You might be interested in the fact that all of the present tests that show mask use reduces spread of pathogens use bacterial spread, not viral spread, as a measure.

I might, if it was true. The very first one I googled (Study evaluates the filtration efficacy of 227 commercially available face masks in Brazil, 2nd June, 2021), analysed different masks' effectiveness in reducing both droplet and aerosol particle transmission. Aerosol particles were defined as, "of a size equivalent to the novel coronavirus", which is approximately 0.1 μm in diameter.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Alabama recently cancelled the mask mandate... now maybe 1 in 20 people are wearing masks during shopping, and most businesses have dropped or are dropping the requirement for employees to wear masks. As a result, there was a 2-day spike in cases about 2 weeks after the mandate was dropped, and then new cases went back to normal and have continued to fall.

In science, we call that a "causal correlation" and it is usually considered a sign that a "causal relationship" might well be probable.

No, in science that would be called correlation. It's only considered causal when other possible causes are eliminated (like vaccines, etc.) Your anecdotal 'maybe 1 in 20 people wearing masks' and 'most businesses have dropped or are dropping the requirement' don't amount to robust scientific data anyway.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

You said that mask use was in order to prevent infected individuals from spreading the disease. You are obviously a proponent of all people wearing a mask whenever possible. Therefore, the logical conclusion was that you consider all people as infected.

I can see why ArMaP is struggling to follow your logic there. There doesn't seem to be any.