How can you spot a Trump supporter?

[aygart]

TLDR

No wonder you are having difficulty with facts.

[aygart]

Agaaiiiiinnnnn. I say panic, you say world destroyed around them.
Not sure if you're not getting its, or purposely repeatedly twisting what I said.

Huh? You said panic and I said panic. Are you okay?

[davidrotts63]

Looking foolish was an observation not a rebuttal to your hypocritical position.

Rebuttal:
You want to use the WHO as trust worthy when they agree with you.
You don't want to use the WHO as trust worthy when they disagree with you.
Any reasonable person will see right through this.

After all this you have failed to produce one trusted source for your position.

I guess you missed this extensive list of sources that masks do work?

I have no problem believing masks work, and I have no problem believing they don't work, I'm just presenting the side that you're ignoring because you chose to Karen around, and that's what I don't like.

Does the CDC 2017 pandemic study help you?
"However,
little evidence supports the use of face masks by well persons
in community settings, although some trials conducted during
the 2009 H1N1 pandemic found that early combined use of
face masks and other NPIs (such as hand hygiene) might be
effective"

https://cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/rr/pdfs/rr6601.pdf…

No wonder you are having difficulty with facts.

Please don't throw around accusations like that, kindly elaborate if you choose to attack.

[davidrotts63]

Huh? You said panic and I said panic. Are you okay?

Here is what I said:

Maybe there is no possibility. And yes, its difficult, and it induces fear, which is deadly.

And here is what you said:

Anyone who panics from seeing masks needs some Xanax quick and a follow up because it won't be enough.

Are you not getting that there is a huge disconnect between what I said, and your continued responses?

[aygart]

Here is what I said:And here is what you said:Are you not getting that there is a huge disconnect between what I said, and your continued responses?

You're right I should have directed it at him instead of you

it's a constant reminder of the virus and to panic about it, human instinct.

[gozalim]

If by 'panic' you mean not 'panic attack' but 'an uncomfortable reminder of a sad reality we live in' then I fail to see why that's a reason for me not to take minimum steps to protect myself and those around me. Sad reality don't care about your feelings

[davidrotts63]

You're right I should have directed it at him instead of you

If it's the word you're concerned about, consider substituting "panic" for "fear". I'm referring to a mild form of fear simply because the mask says "there is death all around and this is needed to save you". You keep discussing a level of fear/panic which one would need a xanax for, that's over-exaggerating my position. That is what I understand to be a textbook strawman, and I'm shocked to see this from you.

[davidrotts63]

If by 'panic' you mean not 'panic attack' but 'an uncomfortable reminder of a sad reality we live in' then I fail to see why that's a reason for me not to take minimum steps to protect myself and those around me. Sad reality don't care about your feelings

That is what I mean. I was presenting the negative side of a mask, obviously if they work, this is a mild inconvenience, but if they are indeed ineffective, as both the CDC and WHO indicated, then I'm explaining why its not just "not helping you" it's bad as well.

[gozalim]

That is what I mean. I was presenting the negative side of a mask, obviously if they work, this is a mild inconvenience, but if they are indeed ineffective, as both the CDC and WHO concluded, then I'm explaining why its not just "not helping you" it's bad as well.

to call them ineffective to that Level requires a tin foil hat. If you're wearing neither then you are unprotected

[aygart]

If it's the word you're concerned about, consider substituting "panic" for "fear". I'm referring to a mild form of fear simply because the mask says "there is death all around and this is needed to save you". You keep discussing a level of fear/panic which one would need a xanax for, that's over-exaggerating my position. That is what I understand to be a textbook strawman, and I'm shocked to see this from you.

Someone who feels that there is death all around from seeing a mask most definitely needs some xanax or the like.

[aygart]

That is what I mean. I was presenting the negative side of a mask, obviously if they work, this is a mild inconvenience, but if they are indeed ineffective, as both the CDC and WHO concluded, then I'm explaining why its not just "not helping you" it's bad as well.

Neither one concluded that so maybe your dishonesty here is the issue.

[davidrotts63]

Neither one concluded that so maybe your dishonesty here is the issue.

Sorry, fixed. What a drama queen you are.

[davidrotts63]

Someone who feels that there is death all around from seeing a mask most definitely needs some xanax or the like.

Again, overly dramatic. Straw-Karen.

[aygart]

Sorry, fixed. What a drama queen you are.

I apologize for understanding that you meant what you wrote. Maybe that is the issue here too?(Not sure who Karen is or what she has to do with anything.)

Again, overly dramatic. Straw-Karen.

You seem to be having difficulty expressing yourself. Is everything okay?

Also, the only time the CDC was giving any indication of that was when they lied in order to prevent a shortage. Source- Dr Fauci

Re the WHO, is that from before wa week or so ago when they figured out that it was airborne?

Either way, I feel bad and I will stop beating up on you. If you want the last word go ahead.

[S209]

That is what I mean. I was presenting the negative side of a mask, obviously if they work, this is a mild inconvenience, but if they are indeed ineffective, as both the CDC and WHO indicated, then I'm explaining why its not just "not helping you" it's bad as well.

This should be obvious but both studies you posted were about the flu (which spreads almost exclusively by symptomatic carriers with a short incubation period) and not COVID-19 (which is believed to spread primarily through presymptomatic and asymptomatic carriers with a long incubation period).

1) The studies discuss the wearing of masks by people who are well, while we are obviously discussing the wearing of masks by people who are (unknowingly) currently infected.
2) The studies do *not* indicate that the masks wouldn’t be effective, only that they don’t recommend it in those cases. When you’re dealing with an illness that is deadly at a rate 15-20 times that of the flu, with a hospitalization rate exponentially higher, the analysis would obviously change as well.
3) Those studies still both clearly conclude that masks *should* be worn situationally to prevent transmission!!

So again, do you know of a single study or doctor with the conclusion that the wearing of face masks would be ineffective in lowering the transmission of COVID-19? @yuneeq graciously provided 70 sources to the contrary. (This is a world in which millions don’t vaccinate their children against deadly illnesses because they have a quack chiropractor who encourages them.)

If you don’t know of any, it might be a good idea to stop claiming you’re speaking in the name of science and medicine.

[davidrotts63]

This should be obvious but both studies you posted were about the flu (which spreads almost exclusively by symptomatic carriers with a short incubation period) and not COVID-19 (which is believed to spread primarily through presymptomatic and asymptomatic carriers with a long incubation period).

1) The studies discuss the wearing of masks by people who are well, while we are obviously discussing the wearing of masks by people who are (unknowingly) currently infected.
2) The studies do *not* indicate that the masks wouldn’t be effective, only that they don’t recommend it in those cases. When you’re dealing with an illness that is deadly at a rate 15-20 times that of the flu, with a hospitalization rate exponentially higher, the analysis would obviously change as well.
3) Those studies still both clearly conclude that masks *should* be worn situationally to prevent transmission!!

So again, do you know of a single study or doctor with the conclusion that the wearing of face masks would be ineffective in lowering the transmission of COVID-19? @yuneeq graciously provided 70 sources to the contrary. (This is a world in which millions don’t vaccinate their children against deadly illnesses because they have a quack chiropractor who encourages them.)

If you don’t know of any, it might be a good idea to stop claiming you’re speaking in the name of science and medicine.

1) studies are about pre-symptomatic.
2) the sure do indicate. And no, it's far less deadly than the flu, you're insane to say such numbers, infections rates are higher, fatality rate is tiny, mortality rate is so high, simply because of the insane amount of cases, namely because of the ineffectiveness of all the measures attempted to prevent it.
3)no? Not sure what else to say when you make your own conclusions.

https://www.news-medical.net/amp/news/20200315/Reusing-masks-may-increase-your-risk-of-coronavirus-infection-expert-says.aspx?
 The link of 70 studies, are all clearly a bunch of quacks, no real study was completed, there are plenty old ones saying how bad they are.
If you look back, you'll see with Sars, during the outbreak the world was screaming masks, but once it died down and the real studies presented true data, they all concluded, masks usage would not have helped.

And no, I don't keep a pile of links to every study, and not necessarily can I pull them up on demand, that doesn't change what I saw.

[S209]

1) studies are about pre-symptomatic.

No, they’re not. The guidelines are about whether healthy people in an infected population should wear masks to prevent presymptomatic spread of the flu. Because presymptomatic spread of the flu is exceedingly rare, that wouldn’t apply to COVID (of which it’s very common). The guidelines are *not* about the efficacy of face masks in preventing transmission. The guidelines specifically show that masks *are* presumed to prevent transmission in infected persons.

2) the sure do indicate.

Umm..  no, they don’t. Have you read them? Or TLDR?

And no, it's far less deadly than the flu, you're insane to say such numbers, infections rates are higher, fatality rate is tiny, mortality rate is so high, simply because of the insane amount of cases, namely because of the ineffectiveness of all the measures attempted to prevent it.

Aha. It’s far less deadly than the flu? Since you’re a fan of the CDC, what if I told you that according to the CDC’s latest estimates COVID has a death rate approximately 16 times that of the flu? Also, every single person ever. If you’re going down that path you’ll need to quote a source too since every single source I’ve seen (oh, also the people I know who’ve died) shows it to be at least 10 times as deadly.

Even on the ridiculous hypothetical that all those tens of thousands of NYers who died really fell off ladders and motorcycles, why does it matter if it’s due to spread or fatality rate? By stopping the spread we could still cause that much less death, wouldn’t we? And as I’ve clearly shown up thread has happened in most countries, it’s quite possible to slow the spread down to a trickle by being careful (like wearing masks). So again: where did you see a study that shows that masks do not prevent the spread of the virus?

3)no? Not sure what else to say when you make your own conclusions.
https://www.news-medical.net/amp/news/20200315/Reusing-masks-may-increase-your-risk-of-coronavirus-infection-expert-says.aspx?
 The link of 70 studies, are all clearly a bunch of quacks, no real study was completed, there are plenty old ones saying how bad they are.
If you look back, you'll see with Sars, during the outbreak the world was screaming masks, but once it died down and the real studies presented true data, they all concluded, masks usage would not have helped.

Yeah, so again, I’ve asked for one source that masks don’t prevent transmission, which you still haven’t shown. As has been the pattern with links you post, that media report (again, not an actual doctor) agrees that masks would help slow transmission, but says there are other potential negative consequences (which have since been debunked).

Now, I’ll ask you again. You claim that science isn’t sure if wearing a mask would lower transmission. Do you still say that? Can you find me one doctor who agrees?

And no, I don't keep a pile of links to every study, and not necessarily can I pull them up on demand, that doesn't change what I saw.

That doesn’t sound like something someone who cares about the science would say.

[davidrotts63]

No, they’re not. The guidelines are about whether healthy people in an infected population should wear masks to prevent presymptomatic spread of the flu. Because presymptomatic spread of the flu is exceedingly rare, that wouldn’t apply to COVID (of which it’s very common). The guidelines are *not* about the efficacy of face masks in preventing transmission. The guidelines specifically show that masks *are* presumed to prevent transmission in infected persons.
Umm..  no, they don’t. Have you read them? Or TLDR?
Aha. It’s far less deadly than the flu? Since you’re a fan of the CDC, what if I told you that according to the CDC’s latest estimates COVID has a death rate approximately 16 times that of the flu? Also, every single person ever. If you’re going down that path you’ll need to quote a source too since every single source I’ve seen (oh, also the people I know who’ve died) shows it to be at least 10 times as deadly.

Even on the ridiculous hypothetical that all those tens of thousands of NYers who died really fell off ladders and motorcycles, why does it matter if it’s due to spread or fatality rate? By stopping the spread we could still cause that much less death, wouldn’t we? And as I’ve clearly shown up thread has happened in most countries, it’s quite possible to slow the spread down to a trickle by being careful (like wearing masks). So again: where did you see a study that shows that masks do not prevent the spread of the virus?

Yeah, so again, I’ve asked for one source that masks don’t prevent transmission, which you still haven’t shown. As has been the pattern with links you post, that media report (again, not an actual doctor) agrees that masks would help slow transmission, but says there are other potential negative consequences (which have since been debunked).

Now, I’ll ask you again. You claim that science isn’t sure if wearing a mask would lower transmission. Do you still say that? Can you find me one doctor who agrees?
That doesn’t sound like something someone who cares about the science would say.

90% a bunch of nothing, long responses don't make anything more valid, half the sentences here don't even make sense. So I'll choose sleep over whatever responding to this and continuing the circle would be called.

[yuneeq]

90% a bunch of nothing, long responses don't make anything more valid, half the sentences here don't even make sense. So I'll choose sleep over whatever responding to this and continuing the circle would be called.

TLDR

Troll reply, didn’t read

[S209]

90% a bunch of nothing, long responses don't make anything more valid, half the sentences here don't even make sense. So I'll choose sleep over whatever responding to this and continuing the circle would be called.

Right, so just to be clear, there are 74 sources on this thread of doctors and scientists who say masks work in preventing transmission of COVID-19 and you can’t bring one who disagrees. Not one.

This is from a guy who says

Has the effectiveness of a mask ever been proven?  Heck, even anecdotal evidence supporting it is lacking.

So yeah... there is no lack of hard evidence, nor are there multiple medical opinions on the matter. You just never bothered asking. You can’t be bothered to wear a mask, and maybe that’s ok, but please don’t claim to be speaking in the name of science. There isn’t a doctor or scientist in the world who agrees with you.