I agree with or without the mask. It’s the” with “part that interests me. It explains the discrepancy between your theoretical results and what’s happened in the real world. Up to now the argument has only been “without the mask”
Bad News Thread
- Thread starter kickingandscreaming
- Start date
I got mine vc both on Friday afternoons. The first time parking lot full and 3 waiting rooms to be released. This time only 1/2 of one waiting room, parking lot 1/3 full, maybe 1/4 of the people there were teens and 20 something.
Still waiting for you to tell us which paragraph says "time reduces the effectiveness of masks."
Is it in the MIT research paper? You said it was.
still waiting for You to actually understand the point. Up to now the arguments been masks work. This is the first time the analysis factors in time, which I agree says WITH or without masks the longer you spend indoors the higher your exposure risk. I know you aren’t that thick but you do have a remarkable ability to miss the forest through the trees.
daily numbers are out. Almost 1/3 of a drop Friday from peak daily vaccination, a week and a half ago.
Glitterhater
SILVER ELITE
That's because there are morons out there that believe there are dead babies in the vaccine.
Meanwhile the news out of India is just bad. Other than the suspected case of Iran at the beginning of the pandemic, its the first country where the hospital system is actually in full blown collapse, oxygen shortages and emergency burial measures at funerals. Is there’s reason we can’t just donate to them our az stockpile if we aren’t going to use it?
You said the paper supports your claim that time makes masks less effective.
I just want to know which paragraph supports your claim.
It sure looks like you are saying something Grace believes, and pretending it has support from an article which says nothing of the sort.
India is big. If you want to have an impact on a country with a billion people, you'd have to send them all of our vaccine for the next half year or so. Then go back to "lockdowns" to get our own house in order.
Biden, accurately, believes the America First crowd would not look kindly on an attempt to save a million Indian lives at a cost of 6 more months of covid restrictions.
Quite a few of us couldn't endure the restrictions to help our countrymen. You think they'd be willing to go back to 6 months more restrictions to help out Mumbai?
[/QUOTE]
I think some hard core religious people might feel that way but
I'm just using your own words back at you. I'm not the one that has been saying masks are the miracle product that work indoors. As you yourself has said, with or without masks the longer indoors the greater the chance of exposure. My point is it explains the discrepancy between your theories and real world results
This has a lot of implications. Because the warning to people should have been "masks help, but if you spend too long indoors you still could catch it....being outdoors helps more". I suspect when all is said and done we will find out that people knew that, but just didn't want to say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason....it means all those flying is fine propaganda was bunk, it meant that we were telling essential workers such as in groceries and meat packing plants to go to work knowing the length of time of their shifts increased their risk (mask or no mask), and it means throwing all those migrants into detention overcrowded detention facilities probably also not a great idea.
I think some hard core religious people might feel that way but
I'm just using your own words back at you. I'm not the one that has been saying masks are the miracle product that work indoors. As you yourself has said, with or without masks the longer indoors the greater the chance of exposure. My point is it explains the discrepancy between your theories and real world results
This has a lot of implications. Because the warning to people should have been "masks help, but if you spend too long indoors you still could catch it....being outdoors helps more". I suspect when all is said and done we will find out that people knew that, but just didn't want to say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason....it means all those flying is fine propaganda was bunk, it meant that we were telling essential workers such as in groceries and meat packing plants to go to work knowing the length of time of their shifts increased their risk (mask or no mask), and it means throwing all those migrants into detention overcrowded detention facilities probably also not a great idea.
You are assuming we are actually going to use the AZ vaccine. We are nearing a glut without it.
j
I just know that 2M AZ vaccine doses won't go very far in a country with 1.4B people. If you want to help India, send 200M doses. Or more.
We could do it. We'd have to restore some restrictions and stretch out or vaccine distribution schedule while we send the rest to India.
I want to believe it would be popular. But I expect it would not.
I dunno. If my parents had a shot of being saved by the drop in the bucket, I'd welcome the help I agree it won't go far. But for those people it helps it would matter.
I think some hard core religious people might feel that way but
I'm just using your own words back at you. I'm not the one that has been saying masks are the miracle product that work indoors. As you yourself has said, with or without masks the longer indoors the greater the chance of exposure. My point is it explains the discrepancy between your theories and real world results
This has a lot of implications. Because the warning to people should have been "masks help, but if you spend too long indoors you still could catch it....being outdoors helps more". I suspect when all is said and done we will find out that people knew that, but just didn't want to say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason....it means all those flying is fine propaganda was bunk, it meant that we were telling essential workers such as in groceries and meat packing plants to go to work knowing the length of time of their shifts increased their risk (mask or no mask), and it means throwing all those migrants into detention overcrowded detention facilities probably also not a great idea.
[/QUOTE]
I'm fine with that wording. It's pretty good advice.
Cloth masks and social distance keep you from breathing coronavirus directly into someone else's face. That's not a miracle cure, but it is step in the right direction. Therefore, we should all wear our masks.
We should also give each other some space, to reduce direct exposure , and stay outdoors, to reduce the ambient air risk.
So, as before, mask, distance, outside. This is not rocket science.
Side note: Of course the air travel advocates were full of crap. I thought it was clear that it was a bad idea to spend 2-6 hours in an aluminum tube with 150 other people.
I'm just using your own words back at you. I'm not the one that has been saying masks are the miracle product that work indoors. As you yourself has said, with or without masks the longer indoors the greater the chance of exposure. My point is it explains the discrepancy between your theories and real world results
This has a lot of implications. Because the warning to people should have been "masks help, but if you spend too long indoors you still could catch it....being outdoors helps more". I suspect when all is said and done we will find out that people knew that, but just didn't want to say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason....it means all those flying is fine propaganda was bunk, it meant that we were telling essential workers such as in groceries and meat packing plants to go to work knowing the length of time of their shifts increased their risk (mask or no mask), and it means throwing all those migrants into detention overcrowded detention facilities probably also not a great idea.
[/QUOTE]
I'm fine with that wording. It's pretty good advice.
Cloth masks and social distance keep you from breathing coronavirus directly into someone else's face. That's not a miracle cure, but it is step in the right direction. Therefore, we should all wear our masks.
We should also give each other some space, to reduce direct exposure , and stay outdoors, to reduce the ambient air risk.
So, as before, mask, distance, outside. This is not rocket science.
Side note: Of course the air travel advocates were full of crap. I thought it was clear that it was a bad idea to spend 2-6 hours in an aluminum tube with 150 other people.
I think some hard core religious people might feel that way but
I'm just using your own words back at you. I'm not the one that has been saying masks are the miracle product that work indoors. As you yourself has said, with or without masks the longer indoors the greater the chance of exposure. My point is it explains the discrepancy between your theories and real world results
This has a lot of implications. Because the warning to people should have been "masks help, but if you spend too long indoors you still could catch it....being outdoors helps more". I suspect when all is said and done we will find out that people knew that, but just didn't want to say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason....it means all those flying is fine propaganda was bunk, it meant that we were telling essential workers such as in groceries and meat packing plants to go to work knowing the length of time of their shifts increased their risk (mask or no mask), and it means throwing all those migrants into detention overcrowded detention facilities probably also not a great idea.
[/QUOTE]
Who said masks are a miracle product?
I'm just using your own words back at you. I'm not the one that has been saying masks are the miracle product that work indoors. As you yourself has said, with or without masks the longer indoors the greater the chance of exposure. My point is it explains the discrepancy between your theories and real world results
This has a lot of implications. Because the warning to people should have been "masks help, but if you spend too long indoors you still could catch it....being outdoors helps more". I suspect when all is said and done we will find out that people knew that, but just didn't want to say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason....it means all those flying is fine propaganda was bunk, it meant that we were telling essential workers such as in groceries and meat packing plants to go to work knowing the length of time of their shifts increased their risk (mask or no mask), and it means throwing all those migrants into detention overcrowded detention facilities probably also not a great idea.
[/QUOTE]
Who said masks are a miracle product?
Grace is just changing the topic because she got called out for her bogus claim about the MIT study.
When you read the details, they are still saying masks+distance+outside.
The only change is they want to raise the profile of being outside.
Ok by me. New rule is masks + distance + STAY THE HECK OUT OF INDOOR SPACES.
Better? I thought the old version was more polite. (masks + distance + outside)
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Your new rule is backward in terms of relative importance. Why am I not surprised? My new rule is, Vaccine, ... oh, wait, I'm done.
Now do "miracle".
Nah it’s much more embarrassing for your beloved experts than that. It’s the old rule should have been is inside was much more dangerous than we told you. Inside masks won’t protect you if you spend too much time indoors (which is what I’ve been saying forever). But we didnt tell you that because we had to keep the airlines afloat, bring immigrants in and couldnt freak out the essential workers who had to sacrifice themselves so people like dad4 working at home can stay safe. It’s why they said nonsense like masks are better than vaccines.
You always overread things and assume the worst in people (then ironically expect them to be angels when it comes to your policies...just like the old times preachers). Just the very same way you assumed that because I thought I didn’t think masks helped that much I just threw away my own mask or because I thought the trade off for indoor dining was too severe I went partying indoors and indoor dining
I agree with kicking though. It’s all moot now because of the vaccine which is the true miracle. Which is also btw why it’s now ok to talk about this stuff given we won’t freak out the sacrificial lambs
Overread? You just underread. There is more in those studies than you manage to pull out of them.
You saw a perfectly good study explaining how airflow modeling demonstrates that being indoors with other people is a non-mitigable risk, and never once made the connection that church and indoor dining are higher risk than you had previously believed.
Instead, you came out with an inaccurate one liner saying “told ya so.”. No you didn’t. And I didn’t either.