Face Mask or Mouth Mask?

I the question of, "What is the expectation of wearing a mask" that should be the question asked and answered by all of those who are mandating mask wearing. What is your proof that it works. What is your justification for fining people money or even considering incarcerations. If people don't believe that this is where this is going, go have a look at what is happening in New Zealand. They have reinstituted mask and lockdown mandates and are setting up Lockdown camps. If you don't comply, they lock you up. What exactly does that sound like to you?

There is no proof that masks do anything, at this point. The link you posted appears to be a droplet experiment conducted in Japan, published through Reuters in October of this month.

Three things:

1. The article speaks to Droplet Effects but not Airborne. They mention it but they publish no numbers or statistics around any testing, and BTW, testing of this nature is not a study

2. Japan has ample supply of N95 masks. Here in the U.S., they are very difficult to get. Any real study needs to be on the masks that the U.S. population has available to them. So everything from scarves over the face to gator necks to cotton masks etc. All of these articles should not be referring to Droplet tests or N95 masks because you can't get them in the States

3. There had better be concrete evidence and not just opinion based testing that supports and justifies the idea that it is OK to take away a persons guaranteed rights under the Constitution. Like it or not, the Citizens of this country have rights and they are guaranteed. We don't have to like it but that's how it is. We can't just go around persecuting people for exercising their rights as Americans.

4. Before anybody tries to strongarm anybody, they better figure out a way to provide N95 masks for all American Citizens everywhere in the U.S. first. Don't even think about taking away anybody's rights before you can, at a minimum, provide the proper tools to make it, at least somewhat effective.

Short little story here. You probably aren't aware but as of Friday, we are back on Lockdown here in NM, with a much stricter enforcement code. I wear a mask whenever I go anywhere in public, not because I believe in it but because I know how people are. So I went to the Grocery to pick up a couple things and on my way out of the parking lot, I stop at the entrance to allow people to walk in and out. While I'm sitting there, a homeless guy walks up to my truck and asks me for change. He's easily only a couple of feet away from me. Well, I give him what I change I have and send him on his way but, basically he's violating the law. If I call a cop on him, he's fined and if he can't pay the fine, he's jailed because he has no mask. So, what do you do here? Should I have called a cop? Should I have gotten out and peat the living piss out of him for putting my life at risk? Should I have run him over? This is why this entire mask BS is ridiculous. There is no proof that it works one way or the other and lets say it does, what are you gonna do with the people who are not going to accept this? It's bad policy and not very well thought out. Cities are letting hard core criminals out of jail because they are afraid of them getting Covid and yet we intend to implement a policy that forces people to wear masks? If they don't, you gonna send them to jail so that the risk of them contracting Covid goes way up? Think about this thing. This is the height of stupidity all around.

 

Show me any proof that I am sacraficing somebody and then we can maybe entertain your strawman theory. You don't get it. It's not your call, at all.

You don't have to like that but you better get right with it because this is America, like it or not.

 

This is not a Covid 19 study on masks. This is a test based on dispersion and not an actual study that actually studies the effects of masks. This is the problem. There are all kinds of test, just like this, designed to push an agenda or, market masks but none of them are actual studies on masks and Covid. None.

Besides, this basically recommends N95 masks, which nobody can get anyway.

 

Where did I say I'm for fining or incarcerating people who don't wear masks? You and I don't live in New Zealand. I'm going to wear my mask if I go out in public and hope others do so. If they don't, I will try not to get near them. Masks work. They really do. Unfortunately they aren't 100% effective or even a high percentage effective, but there are better than nothing. A vaccine will also not be 100% effective, but it will be a valuable weapon if developed.

 

I never made the claim that you said that. I asked you, what then. I asked you how that would be handled under the current scenarios being suggested. I asked you how this could ever work. This discussion going on right now Josee, it's not about what you are suggesting. This is about what other people are suggesting. I have no problem with people who decide they want to wear a mask. I wear one every time I go out to a public place but, that is a very different discussion isn't it. What is being discussed here is mandatory actions and where that all goes.

No, we don't live in New Zealand but it's in your best interests to find out where that's going because the Country you and I do live in, this is exactly what they are talking about right now.

 

Spare me your chest thumping 4th of July speech. I'm not impressed. Nobody is infringing on your freedom, no matter how much of a victim you try to make yourself out to be. What I am saying is, if you are so willing to let it "run it's course" and do nothing to even try to stop it, so you aren't inconvenienced, then who would you be willing to let die while it does so? My guess is you are cool with it as long as it's not too close to home.

 

If that's how you see it, that's fine but it don't change nothing. You want to mandate this stuff, show proof. Otherwise, tell your story walking.

 

Ok, but that doesn't automatically mean the US will adopt what NZ is doing. They haven't this whole time. The states and the cities/towns have had the most say in these matters than the federal government. I don't see that changing. And if we are supposed to pay attention to other countries why did you casually dismiss the link I shared out of Japan. They are heavy mask users, so why not listen to them. They have had great success in fighting the virus and haven't even used a lockdown.

 

Is.

 

Not the way it works. Letting it run its course includes developing immunity.

There's no guarantee w/ the vaccine. It's not a miracle cure.

 

So a vaccine is not a miracle cure but letting it run it's course to develop immunity is the way to go? Do you understand what vaccines do? Am I in the twilight zone or something? The extent people are willing to bend and twist to avoid wearing a mask is insane to me.

Letting it run it's course also involves killing hundreds of thousands of people. Maybe millions. Again, who will be the people you are willing to sacrifice?

 

It is how I see it, it really is. And I can tell it walking, running, skipping...whatever. Curious, what proven study made you okay with having to wear shoes and shirts in stores without whipping out your 'Merika baby!" victim card?

 

Don't want to interrupt too much but a few quick questions.

US currently sits at about 9M confirmed cases. Supposedly, herd immunity is estimated to require about 70% of the population to be infected, right? With 330M people, that comes out to about 230M people who need to be infected. Let's assume 80% (just play along) of infections are asymptomatic. That gives you 46M confirmed infections needed to reach herd immunity.

How long is it going to take to go from 9M confirmed cases to 46M confirmed cases? Is that timeframe shorter than a vaccine? 1/5th of the way there after how long? Seems like the current rate of infection will take longer than a vaccine. Even if you could somehow expedite herd immunity, what's the cost?

 

Not sure why anyone has to have a silver bullet study that proves masks work or they don't.

There is data that shows a reduction in positivity rates after mask mandates were implemented.

Also data that showed lower mortality in regions with mask usage that I saw reported.

Data that shows even masks that the general public may be wearing provides filtration of both droplets and aerosols of varying degrees.

Data that hamsters exposed to higher viral loads had more severe infections.

More data with hamsters that showed those protected with mask material were less likely to become infected. And those that did had less severe infections.

Anecdotal data that shows mask usage resulted in no spread. Other anecdotal data that suggested higher instances of asymptomatic infections.

These things have me lean towards the possibility that masks may play a role with other mitigation steps to reduce community spread. And what it doesn't reduce possibly lowers the numbers of severe illness (which would lower mortality).

 

Does it matter when the deaths actually occurred? A couple of days delay due to weekends and holidays means we throw out all the data? There's no possible way to assign an earlier date to a death? Do we discount pneumonia or influenzae deaths based on their date of reporting? My state has counties that don't report anything on Sundays. Previously it was Saturdays and Sundays, but then they started reporting on Saturdays as well for COVID. Should we start being skeptical of all causes of death now?

We can make up plenty of alternate situations, my discussion has been on what has happened in my state. Kind of like what the OP has asked for.

What's the point in dreaming up alternate scenarios? We could have 0 cases, 0 identified, and 0 die. That's every bit as reasonable to suggest as either scenario you have suggested.

I guess it's CFR, if it matters. Johns Hopkins website uses the terms more-or-less interchangeably. Suppose you'll question them on that as well.

State of Idaho. Here are some charts:





Note: Top chart says (by Date of Official State Notification) and bottom chart says (by Date of Death). It's almost like we can account for a difference in date of death and date of reporting.

Says the guy who posted these two alternate reality situations:

10,000 cases exist, 100 are identified, 10 die. 1,000 cases exist, 200 are identified, 1 dies.​

Yes, we all know that. Same applies to any other listed cause of death that is reported.

Link, please? Preferably not a YouTube video from some random nobody this time. And if I can poke a hole in your link like I did with your last YouTube video, please don't instruct me to go do my own research. I'm not here for homework assignments.

What should I account for with the United States' testing capacity and 6% positivity rate? Testing ability is going up across the US, and cases are creeping right behind it.



You have a bad habit of interjecting yourself into a discussion and demanding such a myriad of answers that people likely become disinterested in even responding to you. To be honest, I almost didn't just because it's really not worth the effort. Watch, you're just going to pivot or make more baseless demands that would require me to spend even more time arguing with someone who brings literally nothing to the table. Your "data" is found on social media. I asked for the best you could come up, and a YouTube video was it. A YouTube video? I could probably find countless YouTube videos that predict the end of the world from an alien invasion in the near future. That's your "best"?

Seriously, you should just stop responding to me because I'm just about done responding to you until you actually provide something to back up all the claims you make. You can't just state that someone is wrong and NEVER provide anything to back that up. You haven't even explained why case counts are wrong beyond some ridiculous hypotheticals that don't exit.

 

*sigh* The fact that you think it's just Saturdays and Sundays is extremely telling about how little you've actually looked at any of this. When you're going to talk about the death rate and what it's doing, having an accurate picture of when deaths occurred in relation to cases is relevant.

The OP asked for CFR rates in your state?

The point was clearly to illustrate that just having more cases captured by tests does not mean there are in fact more cases in reality, and that there will be more deaths. It was a simple example, not a dreamt up alternate scenario, and no, your 0, 0, 0 is not anywhere in the same realm as being close to as reasonable as my example. Because, you're obviously not claiming the virus doesn't exist, or is a hoax or something, are you?

Again, if you don't know if it matters if it's CFR, it is extremely telling. I have no reason to question John Hopkins, they're just providing data. It's how others interpret and understand it that I have serious questions about.

Yes, many states do provide the data on when the deaths actually happened (but not all). It's much more useful and provides an accurate representation of the trends, unlike date of reporting (Note: this is different for cases/deaths).

You'll notice the charts show "cases" start to rise in mid September, and deaths have remained unremarkable over a month later.

Yes, because using simple numbers to create an illustrative example is taboo.

It appears you don't know what I was talking about. And no, the same does not apply. The statement wasn't even about cause of death, but hospitalizations.

Here we go with the ad-hominems. "I don't care about the actual data and the analysis that follows a long with it. I don't know who the person is who presented it to me, so it's rubbish! I'll stick with the guys who've been wrong and push lockdowns and fear, like Fauci and Gottlieb." I don't know where you imagined you poked a hole in anything, maybe it was in a dream? Do you want information or not? Do you want to see all the increases in cases, but not death? Do you want to see the effectiveness of PCR testing when it comes to live virus? Do you care about any of that, or do you want to just complain that it was shown to you by a guy on twitter? Heaven forbid people consolidate information in one place and present it well.

So...are you suggesting we're FINDING more cases, not that there actually ARE more cases? Are you finally catching on?

That said, we are approaching the fall, and some actual case rise should be expected. but the case numbers that are thrown out with the PCR tests are not representative of the actual numbers. They never have been.

I demand such a myriad of answers? Huh? I provide a lot of information (oh know, but it's from internet peoples!). I try to inform and stop the fear and hysterics that so many wish to cling to. My data is PRESENTED on social media. That's not where the data comes from. The data comes from official resources. You're just sticking to ad-hominem fallacies. It's willful ignorance.

Okay. "Present the information! NO, Not that information!"
I've presented the information many times over in these threads, but you're afraid to listen to anything. Keep your head in the sand.

 

They haven't yet because Mandates haven't unilaterally been passed, which is what we are talking about right? There is an election coming up, much could change. I can't believe you simply discount that.

As for your "Japan Link", it's not a study on Masks with Covid, which is what I asked for. Why wouldn't I? The reasons behind why Japan has had success with Covid is not necessarily linked to masks. There are other factors at play there. I mean, what exactly is it that you wanted that article to point out?