Why face masks became political in the US

[LeafByNiggle]

Because masks don’t do that much to retard the spread of something that gets passed easily via touch.

They do when the main vector for spreading is respiratory droplets. You say “easily via touch”, but that is a relative statement. Experts agree that the most common form of transmission is respiratory. After all, it is called “SARS Cov/2”.

 

[PaulinVA]

Odd counter point…I see a lot going without masks but doing everything else.

I haven’t been in a store since early April, so I don’t know about that. I get groceries delivered, and order things online.

I do go out running or walking almost every day. I find some people are masked and distanced, and some do one or the other. A few do neither. I don’t get them at all. Maybe they think since it’s outside…

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Experts agree that the most common form of transmission is respiratory. After all, it is called “SA R S Cov/2”.

You have insisted on minimizing touch for months. Because you and many others apparently do not want to discuss the lack of hand washing culture in our country.

They have been masking up and socially distancing in long term care facilities since February. Not to mention banning visitors. That has long proven to be woefully insufficient to combating the spread in those facilities. Stamp your feet all you want, but touch is a primary vector in these facilities. To ignore that as many such as yourself insist is a big disservice to all of us.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Experts agree that the most common form of transmission is respiratory. After all, it is called “SA R S Cov/2”.

You have insisted on minimizing touch for months. Because you and many others apparently do not want to discuss the lack of hand washing culture in our country.

It is not I that is insisting on respiratory transmission being the most common. It is the expert public health officials. I just listen to what they say.

They have been masking up and socially distancing in long term care facilities since February. Not to mention banning visitors. That has long proven to be woefully insufficient to combating the spread in those facilities.

…which does not prove your point about touch. It just proves it is very very difficult to contain respiratory spread.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

…which does not prove your point about touch. It just proves it is very very difficult to contain respiratory spread.

So all those care associates are wasting their time with cleanliness protocols. Because masks and social distance are more than sufficient according to your vaunted sources.

Right.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

…which does not prove your point about touch. It just proves it is very very difficult to contain respiratory spread.

So all those care associates are wasting their time with cleanliness protocols.

Of course not. It costs very little to wash your hands. So even if it is only responsible for a tiny fraction of the infections, it is still worthwhile to do it.

Because masks and social distance are more than sufficient according to your vaunted sources.

No source of mine ever said that. Congratulations on building your 127th straw man. A few more and you can rival the Terracotta Army. (Actually, it would take more than a few…)

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

No source of mine ever said that. Congratulations on building your 127th straw man. A few more and you can rival the Terracotta Army. (Actually, it would take more than a few…)

I’m just a mere mortal who must bow down before the straw person leader. Someone who would rather spout the government line than look with their own eyes at what is happening in front of us.

I prefer my own lying eyes that actually see what is happening over believing every last thing the government tells me.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I prefer my own lying eyes that actually see what is happening over believing every last thing the government tells me.

An so how exactly to your “lying eyes” show you that covid is not spread primarily through respiratory droplets? Did you do your own original research? Or did you read all the literature on the subject and become as well-versed in it as PhD in Epidemiology and draw your conclusion from that? It’s got to be one or the other.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Of course not. It costs very little to wash your hands. So even if it is only responsible for a tiny fraction of the infections, it is still worthwhile to do it.

It is abundantly clear from this statement that you have never spent much time in a long term care facility. Or you would not say that in such a casual manner.

An so how exactly to your “lying eyes” show you that covid is not spread primarily through respiratory droplets? Did you do your own original research? Or did you read all the literature on the subject and become as well-versed in it as PhD in Epidemiology and draw your conclusion from that? It’s got to be one or the other.

How else is the continued “hot” spread in the face of masking and social distancing orders explained? How else is the spread in long term care facilities explained? Most of us have been masking and social distancing for months in most of the country. Since before that for most long term care facilities. We have been masked and distanced in public for nearly five and one half months now. Yet most of the country is still considered “hot”. Heck, you’ve gone after FL hard around this even as you let Cuomo off the hook.

That is why the debate around masking is still here. As much as you think debating on this is wrong. Not to mention it’s wrong to consider the importance of that other vector the government apparently does not want to spend much currency to talk about.

You have denied for months that there is any immunity beyond antibodies. That we don’t have anything close to a good explanation for it does not mean it does not exist as you have been expressed often. T-cells and immune history don’t exist in your book.

You believe in the corrupting effect of money when it comes to the fossil fuel industries, but never when it comes to health care in general and Big Pharma in particular.

You want us to believe every last word of the government without any shred of doubt whatsoever. Without ever checking our eyes first.

Message received.

 

[Sarcelle]

We have been masked and distanced in public for nearly five and one half months now.

No we haven’t.

Some of us have been wearing masks and social distancing. A lot more have gone on as if COVID doesn’t really exist.

 

[Peeps]

Who told you that is the reason for obesity? I’m surprised that you, a member of the medical community, would spread this misformation. As a matter of fact, the recommendation of having no more than 20% protein is still the recommendation today from health professionals:

MIsinformation? I think not. I’ve attended plenty of conferences with doctors and researchers giving well-documented presentations. This was a real event with a time-line and identifiable people–the changing of the American diet from meat/fat to starches and carbs. The consequences have been devastating.

I’m surprised you haven’t run across this information. So here’s one link, with a source that I hope you consider trustworthy, NPR --they certainly do a lot of research before airing or printing their stories: Why We Got Fatter During The Fat-Free Food Boom : The Salt : NPR

 

[F_Marturana]

Yep. (1234)

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Of course not. It costs very little to wash your hands. So even if it is only responsible for a tiny fraction of the infections, it is still worthwhile to do it.

It is abundantly clear from this statement that you have never spent much time in a long term care facility. Or you would not say that in such a casual manner.

I think you are misinterpreting the conditional, (“even if it is only responsible for a tiny fraction of the infections”) as if it were a claim (“it is only responsible for a tiny fraction of the infections”). The conditional is meant to justify handwashing, which is what you challenged me about. Obviously if handwashing is justified by a “tiny fraction” of the infections, it is also justified by a larger fraction of the infections. And that still does not imply the larger fraction is > 50%, which I think was your contention.

An so how exactly to your “lying eyes” show you that covid is not spread primarily through respiratory droplets? Did you do your own original research? Or did you read all the literature on the subject and become as well-versed in it as PhD in Epidemiology and draw your conclusion from that? It’s got to be one or the other.

How else is the continued “hot” spread in the face of masking and social distancing orders explained? How else is the spread in long term care facilities explained?

OK, I see you did not do the original research, nor did you take the trouble to learn PhD-level epidemiology. But instead you chose to play epidemiologist yourself.

That is why the debate around masking is still here.

No, the debate is still here because the average person is not a scientist, but wants ever so much to play one. Incidentally, that is also why there is still a popular debate over the supposed vaccine/autism link. So the fact that you see a debate on Facebook and YouTube does not mean the subject is objectively debateable.

You have denied for months that there is any immunity beyond antibodies.

No, I have not. I have denied that there is evidence yet the supports that theory. That is not the same thing as denying the theory.

T-cells and immune history don’t exist in your book.

I don’t think I ever said that. In fact I have said the opposite - that T-cells express an immunity that was acquired through infection.

You believe in the corrupting effect of money when it comes to the fossil fuel industries, but never when it comes to health care in general and Big Pharma in particular.

We should compare Apples to Apples here. If Big Pharma were to publish a research paper saying that only a vaccine could save us, I would indeed distrust their conclusions as being possibly corrupted by their financial interests. But when public health officials who work for the government - not Big Pharma - all agree on something, I am less worried.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/25/business/cdc-antimask-guidance-retail-employees/index.html

New York (CNN Business)When in doubt, don’t argue with anti-maskers.

That’s the recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to retail and service employees.

This week, the health agency issued new guidance to limit workplace violence that could be aimed at workers when enforcing their companies’ Covid-19 safety procedures.

The procedures that retail and service businesses have been advised to implement under CDC guidelines include enforcing mask wearing, social distancing and limiting the number of customers allowed in a business at one time.

But the CDC warns that workers could be threatened or assaulted for employing these safety measures, describing violence ranging from yelling and swearing to slapping and choking the employees. The CDC has outlined a number of steps businesses can take, which include conflict-resolution training for their workers, installing security systems and identifying designated safe areas in stores employees can go to if they feel in danger.

One of the agency’s biggest suggestions: “Don’t argue with a customer if they make threats or become violent,” the CDC says.

The guidance follows a number of violent incidents that have occurred at businesses across the country over mask-wearing requirements. Earlier this month, a man in Pennsylvania was charged with shooting at an employee after being asked to wear a mask in a cigar shop.

Last month, Walmart (WMT), Home Depot (HD), CVS (CVS) and other major stores announced they would still serve customers who refuse to wear masks.

 

[F_Marturana]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ecame-a-beacon-for-mask-wearing?sref=VGqaY5U2

After a woman with the coronavirus visited a Starbucks cafe north of Seoul this month, more than two dozen patrons tested positive days later. But the four face mask-wearing employees escaped infection.

 

[tomarin]

You’d think assaulting an employee of a retail store would get you arrested and a lifetime ban from the store.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

You’d think assaulting an employee of a retail store would get you arrested and a lifetime ban from the store.

One may, though I don’t know how effective such a ban is unless there is always someone that recognizes the person present. But yes, that is justification for a restraining order.

I think the CDC’s guidance is being proactive in preventing the assaults. A ban is reactive, after there is injury.

 

[Feanor2]

I agree that some people put their faith in things they read in social media, their like-minded friends, President Trump, etc. (look at the poster up thread who thinks that shining light inside our bodies is a legitimate virus fighting method that merits investigation) that goes against what the medical authorities are saying, but I am baffled as to why they trust those sources and distrust the doctors and public health authorities who have spent their careers studying these things and precisely don’t have a political axe to grind (unlike online cranks, etc.). I think it may be what has become a reflexive conservative distrust of intellectuals or something.

One poster summed it up pretty clearly.

“Science isn’t everything”.

I certainly don’t share this view just “shining light- pun intended” on what folks are thinking.

 

[tomarin]

I’m trying to be sympathetic. I just have a tendency to trust authority figures (police, firefighters, doctors etc.) when perhaps I shouldn’t.

 

[tomarin]

I read a biography of Einstein recently and was surprised to learn how up until the early decades of the 20th century, physicists believed in something called ‘ether’ that was thought to be the substance that light traveled through as a wave (I think Einstein’s work contributed to proving that ether didn’t exist); a lot of time and energy went into looking for evidence of ‘ether’s’ existence as it was a bit of a holy grail. Ultimately of course it was all futile because there is no ether - light doesn’t need a substance to move through. So yes, scientists do get things wrong.