LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
The fact that you have not seen something does not mean it does not exist. Public health officials are all telling us it is important to avoid spreading this virus as much as possible.
- Status
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
Which is better: flattening the curve or living with constant spikes, surges, and outbreaks? Even if the virus never totally disappears, it may be curtailed by mask-wearing, which is, in my book, much better than spreading the virus continuously. This is a war against an invisible enemy: Trump said so himself. The case of Sweden is debatable. In mostly all other countries, mask-wearing has saved lives, just as wearing seatbelts and not smoking in public has saved lives. Government is not always your enemy. Please stop the politics!
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
melterboy2 . . .
You are the one who is unfortunately injecting politics into the discussion.
Your own statement about how you avoid valve masks implicitly contradicts your own broad statement about how masks saves lives.
Your answers are FEELINGS based and not scientific.
Addendum:
To the readers here.
Here again was my response to melterboy2.
Ask yourself if this is “Trumpian politics” from Cathoholic
or a frustrated melterboy2 that has no science-based answers.
I never even thought of Trump when I responded to you melterboy2.
You are the one who is unfortunately injecting politics into the discussion.
Your own statement about how you avoid valve masks implicitly contradicts your own broad statement about how masks saves lives.
Your answers are FEELINGS based and not scientific.
Addendum:
To the readers here.
Here again was my response to melterboy2.
Ask yourself if this is “Trumpian politics” from Cathoholic
or a frustrated melterboy2 that has no science-based answers.
Last edited:
T
tomarin
Guest
It seems to me that you are the one who is rejecting the consensus view of the scientists (epidemiologists and virologists) and public health authorities on this issue and, also injecting politics into what should be a neutral public health matter by seeking to undermine those public health authorities, for reasons unknown.
Last edited:
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
No, my answers are based on science, not politics. OTOH, you seem to be uttering platitudes based on an anti-governmental political ideology, whether or not it is based on Trump’s own anti-mask stance. Again, excuses for not wearing a mask won’t cut it. Now, there may be good reasons for particular people not wearing a mask: I will admit that. One such reason is if the individual has asthma and they literally cannot breathe with a mask. But that is the exception, not the rule. As to my avoiding a particular kind of mask, this is also based on what I have heard and read about that mask by health experts, not by politicians. Drop the politics against government and in favor of Trump, Biden, the right or the left. This is a health issue, a health emergency which demands that we act with intelligence not foolishness or recklessness or ideological concerns.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
tomarin. . . .
Or are you talking about me here that said . . .
And tomarin. If it is me, is it only “Trumpian politics” when I point out we should not have Government mandated mask mandates (I am fine if you want them personally),
but not “Trumpian politics” for Joe Biden who has reached the same conclusion (at least on a federal level) about not having Government mask mandates?
Is Joe Biden (who apparently has done a 180 on this issue in a matter of days) practicing “Trumpian politics” too. Or just me?
tomarin. Are you talking about melterboy2 who brought up “Trumpian politics”
Or are you talking about me here that said . . .
.
And tomarin. If it is me, is it only “Trumpian politics” when I point out we should not have Government mandated mask mandates (I am fine if you want them personally),
but not “Trumpian politics” for Joe Biden who has reached the same conclusion (at least on a federal level) about not having Government mask mandates?
Is Joe Biden (who apparently has done a 180 on this issue in a matter of days) practicing “Trumpian politics” too. Or just me?
Last edited:
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
You are trying to score debate points by picking apart every word I wrote (Trumpian politics, for example) based on your own ideology, rather than looking at this issue as one of a health concern and emergency. I am concerned about the pandemic because people are continuing to get sick and die and because this has a strong negative influence on jobs and the economy. Of course it’s tied up with politics, especially in a Presidential election year, and this is most unfortunate. It should not be. I would be overjoyed if a safe, effective vaccine came out and was distributed BEFORE the election, even if it might mean Trump would win. I don’t support Biden anyway. Meanwhile, let’s all take precautions based on science, and that includes hygiene, social distancing, and mask wearing.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
melterboy2 criticizing me for allegedly not looking at the mask issue in light of public health.
Here again is what I said regarding this point (I appealed to common sense and some axiomatic information) . . .
You can read for yourselves melterboy2’s posts none of which had any science-based support or built on it, other than melterboy2 saying they did.
Last edited:
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
I am not going to do your homework for you by digging up what most epidemiologists and virologists have said about the benefits of mask-wearing. Their statements can be easily found on your own, if you care to look for them. You are digging up only those in the minority who oppose mask-wearing, again, to score debate points. It’s like debating evolution or climate change: the majority of scientists who know more than I do, agree that these things exist. Why should any of us settle for the minority just because they reinforce our own social, political views? You are depending on studies that are outliers rather than the consensus view, which, in science, is always a dangerous thing to do.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
melterboy2 . . .
I already posted the benefits.
The benefits lie in slowing down the spread so as to not overwhelm the medical system.
I also posted regarding the futility and sometimes problems associated with universal mask mandates.
Problems that you have merely ignored.
You are the science ignorer here metlzerboy2. Not me.
You don’t need to.
I already posted the benefits.
The benefits lie in slowing down the spread so as to not overwhelm the medical system.
I also posted regarding the futility and sometimes problems associated with universal mask mandates.
Problems that you have merely ignored.
Consensus of what? (You are substituting recommendations for studies. And I am not falling for it. I already support such recommendations. What I do not support is Government mandates on unproven claims. This is your “beliefs” and “feelings” about masks.)
You are the science ignorer here metlzerboy2. Not me.
Last edited:
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Of course. That’s their job, just as they thought it was their job earlier to say Covid is no big deal and we didn’t need to wear masks.
Other authorities have thought differently. Initially WHO and Fauci didn’t think masks were needed. I believe both now recommend them. Swedish health authorities never did.
Unfortunately, the issue is now more political than it is anything else. I suspect everybody knows Covid 19 is going to be endemic and will go through the population and affect everybody whose immune system doesn’t destroy it without any sign, or perhaps some have cells that are not receptive to the virus. But since some perceive it as a potential political issue, nothing can be fully credited. It is probably not worth shutting down the economy or even seriously affecting it or peoples’ lives.
Last edited:
T
tomarin
Guest
I’m specifically responding to your accusation that Meltzerboy2 doesn’t adhere to science in advocating mask-wearing. It seems to me you’ve got that exactly backwards.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Frankly, if Fauci is right, it might seem so initially, but the effect of vaccine is not likely to be lasting. Maybe it will be as dependable and long-lasting as a flu shot. Maybe not.
But I don’t think anybody says mask wearing will prevent Covid indefinitely unless perhaps we wear clean, effective masks for the rest of our lives.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
tomarin . . .
Well go ahead and explain how mask wearing of a bandanna mask that jettisons out the virus even further saves lives tomarin.
Study: Certain Face Coverings Increase Transmission of Coronavirus, Worse than Going Maskless World News
Mask mouth': Dentists coin new term for smelly side effect of wearing a mask World News
Or how masks worn around town as a chin-strap saves the day. And if not, then what? (Because there is a risk-benefit ratio that science and common sense demands too.)
Do you jail these chin-strap wearers?
Should we release more rapists, murderers and drug-dealing felons to make room in our jails for the chin-strap brigade tomarin?
Is that what you are calling “science”?
Do people driving around alone wearing a mask “save lives” tomarin? How bout just walking outside alone? Does “masking-up” save lives there too (like they mandate in California)? Show me the “science” behind that please.
Or what about people who have way too much time on their hands? Should we give them checks TAKEN from the backs of those who DO work so they have more time to sit around? Maybe they can go riot huh? Oh that would never happen would it?
Or show me the mechanism of a valve N-95 mask where you can break-out Corona virus-laden air through a half-crowded Wal Mart where you still have trouble finding a parking spot and now the only use one door and have everyone be OK.
No tomarin.
There is no “science” or common-sense to the Government IMPOSED mask mandates.
Horowitz: Philippines had the harshest lockdown and most mask wearing. It didn’t work World News
From here.
Well go ahead and explain how mask wearing of a bandanna mask that jettisons out the virus even further saves lives tomarin.
Or how a couple of extra trips to the dentist saves lives?
Or enlighten me on how a paper mask worn and re-worn by wearers sometimes for weeks, puts society in “the pink” tomarin.
Or how masks worn around town as a chin-strap saves the day. And if not, then what? (Because there is a risk-benefit ratio that science and common sense demands too.)
Do you jail these chin-strap wearers?
Should we release more rapists, murderers and drug-dealing felons to make room in our jails for the chin-strap brigade tomarin?
Is that what you are calling “science”?
Do people driving around alone wearing a mask “save lives” tomarin? How bout just walking outside alone? Does “masking-up” save lives there too (like they mandate in California)? Show me the “science” behind that please.
Or what about people who have way too much time on their hands? Should we give them checks TAKEN from the backs of those who DO work so they have more time to sit around? Maybe they can go riot huh? Oh that would never happen would it?
Or show me the mechanism of a valve N-95 mask where you can break-out Corona virus-laden air through a half-crowded Wal Mart where you still have trouble finding a parking spot and now the only use one door and have everyone be OK.
No tomarin.
There is no “science” or common-sense to the Government IMPOSED mask mandates.
Last edited:
T
tomarin
Guest
I don’t need to explain anything, but merely to point out that your opinion goes against the consensus of the scientific authorities. I doubt you know more about the transmission of viruses than they do.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Tomarin to Cathoholic . . .
Good grief.
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
You know human nature as well as I. When something is recommended but happens to be inconvenient or uncomfortable, do most people follow such recommendations? If using seatbelts were recommended, would most drivers wear seatbelts? If not smoking in public spaces were recommended, would most people not smoke? If students are given a reading list of recommended readings instead of required readings, will most students read the books on the list? I think you know the answer.
That is why I say that a mandate for mask-wearing is the only way to go. However, even here, people will flaunt the mandate, and how in the world would it be enforced even if it were constitutional? Major problems here with regard to the law, human nature, and politics; but no problem with regard to what is best for the country as a whole according to most medical experts.
That is why I say that a mandate for mask-wearing is the only way to go. However, even here, people will flaunt the mandate, and how in the world would it be enforced even if it were constitutional? Major problems here with regard to the law, human nature, and politics; but no problem with regard to what is best for the country as a whole according to most medical experts.
T
tomarin
Guest
What is the date of the excerpted article?
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
A job they do exceedingly well.LeafByNiggle:
Of course. That’s their job.
Wrong. They never did. Trump did. But the public health professionals kept an open mind until they had more information. Which they now have.
As you know, that was partly to preserve medical grade masks for those that needed them more urgently, and partly because of incompletely knowledge, which is now much more complete.
I don’t know what the Swedish scientists said on this issue. I know what the Swedish government said.
Yes, that is indeed unfortunate, because it undermines the public’s confidence in our professional institutions.
Not surprisingly, I suspect nothing of the sort. And for good reason. I still have confidence in the integrity of our public health officials.
You just admitted that you are one of them, didn’t you?
The economy will be “shut down” whether the government orders it or not. Just look at the airline industry. They are bleeding money by flying mostly empty planes. This is not because of a government shut-down order like we had for a while on restaurants. It is because people do not want to risk their lives like that. But it is misleading to lump together the two extremes of “shutting down the economy” and “seriously affecting people’s lives”, which could be taken to mean things as simple as wearing masks in grocery stores. The economy is no longer “shut down” by government mandate like it was. But there are “inconveniences” in place that still make sense. It is sad the extremes that many people are going to avoid the fact that the United States is near the bottom of the list when it comes to successfully addressing covid-19 among developed nations.
- Status