| So mask-sceptics ... on 17:44 - Nov 18 with 756 views | factual_blue |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 11:33 - Nov 18 by Herbivore |
BuT mY LiBeRtY!!! |
They're swapping the old slogan from 'Liberty or Death' to 'Liberty and Death'.
#darwinawards [Post edited 18 Nov 2021 17:45]
|  |
|  |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 17:52 - Nov 18 with 734 views | GeoffSentence |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 11:32 - Nov 18 by Cotty |
53% drop in transmission. If you know that, and don't wear a mask (if you are able to), then you are a selfish c***. Unfortunately that leaves us with a high percentage of selfish and/or ignorant people in this country. |
I am waiting for Facters to provide the exact percentage of 'selfish and/or ignorant people' I know he has it at his finger tips. |  |
| |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 18:01 - Nov 18 with 724 views | withyblue |
That article has awfully misinterpreted the data from that study.
The statement that masks are the most effective public health health measure is nonsense. Last autumn/winter cases sky rocketed (in this country and across europe). when mask wearing was much, much higher
The measures that are most effective in bringing cases down are vaccines and lockdowns, not masks. |  | | |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 18:03 - Nov 18 with 710 views | footers |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 18:01 - Nov 18 by withyblue |
That article has awfully misinterpreted the data from that study.
The statement that masks are the most effective public health health measure is nonsense. Last autumn/winter cases sky rocketed (in this country and across europe). when mask wearing was much, much higher
The measures that are most effective in bringing cases down are vaccines and lockdowns, not masks. |
Interesting first post.
Pablo or Shefki? |  |
| |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 18:07 - Nov 18 with 705 views | withyblue |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 18:03 - Nov 18 by footers |
Interesting first post.
Pablo or Shefki? |
Manchego | | | |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 18:37 - Nov 18 with 650 views | StokieBlue |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 18:01 - Nov 18 by withyblue |
That article has awfully misinterpreted the data from that study.
The statement that masks are the most effective public health health measure is nonsense. Last autumn/winter cases sky rocketed (in this country and across europe). when mask wearing was much, much higher
The measures that are most effective in bringing cases down are vaccines and lockdowns, not masks. |
It's interesting you claim misrepresentation when you have misrepresented the article.
Your second paragraph is a bit of a red herring fallacy because you're saying wearing masks didn't stop cases rising whilst ignoring the other mitigating factors behind that rise.
Not sure what the point of the last paragraph is, mask wearing doesn't undermine those measures (which weren't part of the study anyway) so it's not an either/or conclusion.
As footers said, interesting first post.
SB |  |
| |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 21:34 - Nov 18 with 547 views | XYZ |
Update - this bloke is pretty respectable on this. A different interpretation of the data ...
| | | |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 22:01 - Nov 18 with 503 views | StokieBlue |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 21:34 - Nov 18 by XYZ |
Update - this bloke is pretty respectable on this. A different interpretation of the data ...
|
The Bangladesh based study showed at least 11% decrease in transmission with masks but due to lack of some controls they predicted the actual reduction was much higher. These results seem to broadly tally. There are other studies which give a far higher reduction in transmission. There are also studies showing they can cut flu transmission by 80% or more (lower R than covid).
The main take from this is that masks are cheap, not that much of an inconvenience and reduce the risk of transmission.
There is no reason not to use them in certain venues and locations.
SB [Post edited 18 Nov 2021 22:03]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| So mask-sceptics ... on 22:07 - Nov 18 with 483 views | footers |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 22:01 - Nov 18 by StokieBlue |
The Bangladesh based study showed at least 11% decrease in transmission with masks but due to lack of some controls they predicted the actual reduction was much higher. These results seem to broadly tally. There are other studies which give a far higher reduction in transmission. There are also studies showing they can cut flu transmission by 80% or more (lower R than covid).
The main take from this is that masks are cheap, not that much of an inconvenience and reduce the risk of transmission.
There is no reason not to use them in certain venues and locations.
SB [Post edited 18 Nov 2021 22:03]
|
Do you mean to say that 'I don't want to' or 'This particular venue doesn't make me so I won't bother' or 'Other people aren't so I won't either' aren't valid excuses for not protecting other people's health?
 [Post edited 18 Nov 2021 22:16]
| |
| |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 22:09 - Nov 18 with 488 views | XYZ |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 22:01 - Nov 18 by StokieBlue |
The Bangladesh based study showed at least 11% decrease in transmission with masks but due to lack of some controls they predicted the actual reduction was much higher. These results seem to broadly tally. There are other studies which give a far higher reduction in transmission. There are also studies showing they can cut flu transmission by 80% or more (lower R than covid).
The main take from this is that masks are cheap, not that much of an inconvenience and reduce the risk of transmission.
There is no reason not to use them in certain venues and locations.
SB [Post edited 18 Nov 2021 22:03]
|
He's not arguing against masks, just disputing the Guardian's interpretation and headline.
As you state (and I believe the tweeter from the FT above would agree) the case for wearing masks if you're in an enclosed space outside your home is seemingly undeniable. | | | |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:05 - Nov 19 with 364 views | chicoazul |
What is the point of this thread, other than a chance for people to point and laugh? |  |
| |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:11 - Nov 19 with 359 views | StokieBlue |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:05 - Nov 19 by chicoazul |
What is the point of this thread, other than a chance for people to point and laugh? |
Surely increasing the knowledge around any subject with the latest and relevant information always has a point?
Especially when the subject is one where a change in behaviour from some people could help the community at large.
SB | |
| |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:19 - Nov 19 with 343 views | chicoazul |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:11 - Nov 19 by StokieBlue |
Surely increasing the knowledge around any subject with the latest and relevant information always has a point?
Especially when the subject is one where a change in behaviour from some people could help the community at large.
SB |
If OP and others had taken that approach then yes. As it is OP and others are just spoiling for the squabble with people they look down on, as so often on TWTD | |
| |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:21 - Nov 19 with 331 views | Digger77 |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 21:34 - Nov 18 by XYZ |
Update - this bloke is pretty respectable on this. A different interpretation of the data ...
|
Thanks for posting. Interesting! | | | |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:29 - Nov 19 with 313 views | StokieBlue |
| So mask-sceptics ... on 09:21 - Nov 19 by Digger77 |
Thanks for posting. Interesting! |
It is interesting.
Both agree that wearing masks reduces the transmission of C19 which is direct contrast to your stated position that "masks don't work".
SB [Post edited 19 Nov 2021 9:30]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
