I can blow a massive holes in the "must wear masks" montra

a reply to: daskakik

I'm arguing the same thing I have been arguing all along. Cheap masks = more risk and some people are ok with that.

Hello. What was the reason behind the call to wear masks?

a reply to: neutronflux

I’ll give you a hint. It’s the same reason “they” poop pooped people wearing N-95 masks with exit valves.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Hello. What was the reason behind the call to wear masks?

Doesn't matter, that wasn't what I was arguing.

I was arguing people can and do choose cheap masks knowing the tight fitting N-95 masks are better.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: neutronflux
Hello. What was the reason behind the call to wear masks?

Doesn't matter, that wasn't what I was arguing.

I was arguing people can and do choose cheap masks knowing the tight fitting N-95 masks are better.

Then wearing a mask isn’t about protecting others to one’s best ability and resources?

Because N-95 masks don’t come in trendy designs? Or have team logos?

Just highlights “society’s” need to appear to do something while understanding and doing nothing.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Then wearing a mask isn’t about protecting others to one’s best ability and resources?

It is for some, not for others.

You seem to be kinda hung up on absolutes.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: neutronflux
Then wearing a mask isn’t about protecting others to one’s best ability and resources?

It is for some, not for others.

You seem to be kinda hung up on absolutes.

What was the purpose of mask mandates, and the logic behind them, based on what?

If I dig through your posts. Will I find you posting wearing a mask is about protecting others. Or wearing a mask to stop the spread?

originally posted by: neutronflux
If I dig through your posts. Will I find you posting wearing a mask is about protecting others. Or wearing a mask to stop the spread?

You will. That was the reason behind the mandates, which I had no say in.

That wasn't what I was arguing here. Thought I said that already.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: neutronflux
If I dig through your posts. Will I find you posting wearing a mask is about protecting others. Or wearing a mask to stop the spread?

You will. That was the reason behind the mandates, which I had no say in.

That wasn't what I was arguing here. Thought I said that already.

The mandates were to eliminate risk by forcing people to wear something to protect others.. So your post of:

I'm arguing the same thing I have been arguing all along. Cheap masks = more risk and some people are ok with that.

Is total contradictory to why the mask mandates were placed. And mask mandates took away choice.

If your going to were a mask, why wouldn’t you wear a mask like an N-95 that is actually effective. This should be a moot point for those clinging to masks, and the call it’s about protecting others, sense N-95 masks are now available. And provide the most protection.

a reply to: neutronflux
Simple, the reason for the mandates and what person X chooses to do and their reasons are not the same thing.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: neutronflux
Simple, the reason for the mandates and what person X chooses to do and their reasons are not the same thing.

You mean like people figuring out mask mandates were made off bad/erroneous modeling/assumptions. And anyone that has trained to wear respiratory protection knows cloth masks are ineffective and unreliable for containing a virus be it breathing in or breathing out?

a reply to: neutronflux
Those and others.

Your point?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: neutronflux
Those and others.

Your point?

That

I was arguing people can and do choose cheap masks knowing the tight fitting N-95 masks are better.

Wasn’t the design of mask mandates which were based on bad modeling, erroneous assumptions, by clueless virtue signaling people who only had access to ineffective masks, ending up with a plea to double masks, to force people to protect those around them. Which is not the purpose of most personal protective equipment.

a reply to: neutronflux
Here you go with the absolutes again.

Where? I have seen people claim they were never even mandated to wear one where they live.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: neutronflux
Here you go with the absolutes again.

Where? I have seen people claim they were never mandated to wear one.

www.nytimes.com...

First, Dr. Ferrer, can you explain why it was necessary to put in place the mandate rather than continuing with mask guidance? You told my colleague a couple of weeks ago that you didn’t intend to “return to lockdown or more disruptive mandates.” What changed?

I guess I would start by saying we don’t consider wearing masks a disruptive mandate at all. Some people might be inconvenienced by it, but it doesn’t disrupt customary business processes.

We were hopeful that more people would mask indoors with the recommendation. With the Delta variant, the situation has changed. I don’t think we’d see a surge in cases without the Delta variant.

All along, this department has been very clear we’re recommending masking indoors because of what we’ve been seeing in other countries with this variant.

Now that we know more, it’s time to mandate masks indoors. This is in line with how we’ve been approaching mitigating the devastating effects of this virus with the evidence at hand.

NYC’s New Mask Fine Adds to America’s COVID-19 Confusion


Gabrielle Olya
By Gabrielle Olya
October 10, 2020

www.gobankingrates.com...

Owner of Indiana restaurant closed for violating mask mandate discusses lawsuit against county, governor

cbs4indy.com...

a reply to: daskakik

That’s not even covering the TSA and travel.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: neutronflux
Here you go with the absolutes again.

Where? I have seen people claim they were never mandated to wear one.

Never said I was referring to people that were not under a mask mandate. I thought that would be self evident.

My posts are very much in context of the thread…

I can blow a massive holes in the "must wear masks" montra

What thread we in?

a reply to: neutronflux
Didn't see anything about double masking in those.

Is it really that difficult for you to differentiate between a group of policy makers enacting a mask mandate and people opting for one type of mask over others being different events?

What thread we in?

The one where you agree with OP because some masks are better than others and keep arguing even though everyone seems to be aware of that point.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: neutronflux
Cheap masks are not worthless, they are less efficient.

Nobody has argued otherwise.

Why keep beating this dead horse?

No, either the mask works or it doesn't. Neutron has made his point on the OSHA industrial standards. If an employee is welding stainless steel the employer either provides the proper CFM[cubic feet per minute] air changing system and the proper PPE or they don't.
There is no such thing as not as effective in terms of acceptability. You either have the proper PPE or you don't.
Cloth masks are useless.

a reply to: fringeofthefringe
Different circumstances. When you have someone in an environment with large amounts of particles, day after day and they must all be excluded then yes.

When you have someone who might enter a place where there might be a virus which they might come in contact with and even then infection isn't a given, then the procedure doesn't need to be as strict.

I mean, why isn't everyone on the road mandated to wear a 5 point seat belt and have roll cages in their vehicles?

originally posted by: 727Sky
The mask is a feel good "hey look I am doing my part " when in actuality it is as useful as a screen door on a submarine as far as keeping a virus out.

Exactly!