Why Wear Masks

[edy420]

A hot button topic right now. There's a few viral videos containing furious mask wearers who lose the plot when they see others not wearing them.

It's no issue here in NZ. No one wears them anymore. But even when we had to, I refused to. I don't see the logic.

Those who are afraid, should wear the masks. Those who are fit, strong and healthy, should be allowed the right to not cower in fear.

If I am to understand the fearmongerers argument, it is that, if I wear a mask then I protect others from me if I have the virus. But this is nonsensical, because others also have the option of wearing the mask or not.

Am I getting something wrong. Or should those who cower, have the power to control my thought, decisions and actions?

[charon]

Covid is spread mainly in the air. Getting close to people who may - I stress may - be infectious renders you vulnerable to inhaling droplets. Keeping your distance lessens that risk. But being in a closed environment obviously greatly increases it because the air circulation is less.

Big, tough, macho guys don't like masks because it makes them feel wimpy, like they're scared of something. So if they want to take the risk it's up to them, isn't it? But the virus doesn't care how tough you are, that's the problem.

Personally, I don't like masks because they fog up my glasses :-)

[edy420]

'Big, tough, macho guys don't like masks because it makes them feel wimpy, like they're scared of something.'

Heh this made me laugh. I've been humbled by becoming a wimp. It's nothing to be afraid of.

I believe that there is a higher risk of being hit and killed by a car. Statistically true, especially here in NZ. So then, forcing me to wear a mask, is like me forcing you to wear a hi-vis vest every time you cross the road. Also, you should paint your car a bibrant hi vis so other cars are less likely to hit you. Absolutely rediculous.

While I don't disagree with your logic, it's also true that some just aren't afraid of the minimal risk. I say this, because the big macho guys do refuse to wear hi-vis when they should lol.

But if you won't wear a hi vis every time you cross the road, is it because you are too tough and macho?

[charon]

Did I say you?

[TheVat]

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... -cov2.html

Fifty percent of transmission is from the asymptomatic. There's nothing demeaning or unmanly about taking a simple step to protect those who may be more vulnerable to an infection, or someone who may come in contact with a vulnerable person later. Manly strong fellows often do things unselfishly, for the good of their community. Slowing community spread is one of those things. If all this obvious reality hadn't been obscured and politicized, no one would even be debating it. In any case, we don't have absolute freedom to endanger others. With public decency laws, where the stakes are only offending others, we are asked to wear pants, and very few have a problem. Why then, when you can help reduce the spread of a dangerous pathogen by masking up, would it be an issue?

(respectfully request reading the link posted, with its scientifically based information, before replying. Really, any search engine would get you the facts by typing in "why masks help" or similar)

[TheVat]

https://news.yahoo.com/masks-block-99-9 ... 16084.html

[edy420]

The first link you provide... Also provides links. Some don't even match the original conclusion. One even basically described the need for a full face gas mask for best results.

It's not about being manly. It's about having the right to make up my own mind. I actually want to catch the virus, so reducing air droplets by 79% is a bad idea. If the new strain has the same survival rate as the original of 99.9% then, given my current immune system, I just don't care.

Make the vulnerable wear the masks. Lock them up until another vaccine comes out. Tell them they can't visit loved ones. But I will exercise my freedoms.

[edy420]

The second link talks about reducing the large droplets by 99.9percent. And somehow unscientifically implies that this reduces transmission by the same amount.

Something like a condom reduces transmission by 100%. Yet is only 99.9 percent effective due to errors. The masks hardly reduce the smaller droplets, but we should rest at ease because it is 'thought' by experts to be effective. Instead of using words like thought, they should say, this evidence that transmission 'is' reduced by x amount.

Science is less about fear and ideas, and more about measurable and relative facts. These links represent the former. No thank you.

[TheVat]

The CDC is widely recognized as one of the world foremost centers of epidemiology and allied disciplines. The mask mandates are well supported by facts, and research from around the world. As has been posted in our extensive threads in Science News, many studies have been done comparing transmission rates in no-mask states and mask-required states. Also between nations. The results are consistent and unequivocal.

It's not about being manly. It's about having the right to make up my own mind....

You don't have the right to make up your own facts. And there's no Constitutional right, at least in this country, to put others at risk in a public health crisis. That's why there are sanitation laws for food service, for example. That's why there is inspection of meats and other foods, at various stages from farm to table. Many laws exist because public safety takes precedence over some imagined absolute personal freedom. You can risk getting sick, but if you could, asymptomatic, easily pass a disease to someone else then you are not free to put them at risk. No nation has ever asserted such an absolute freedom when there's a health emergency.

It is not fearmongering to provide public health directives which are based on decades of research, and truthfully represent the risks to people with prior medical conditions when community spread is not contained by mask wearing, social distancing, proper ventilation, and handwashing.

Several threads here have provided factual material, from the world's best research institutions, and you have chosen to ignore them. But doing the research is what's expected at this website, so if you skip that, your participation can only be quite limited.

[bangstrom]

THE URINE TEST

If everyone is running around without pants on, if someone urinates, you'll get wet right away.

If you're wearing pants and get urinated upon? Better coverage, less pee, less risk of infection.

If you and the person urinating are both wearing pants? The person who pees keeps the pee with them, and it doesn't impact your life at all.


https://couriernewsroom.com/2020/05/01/ ... test-meme/

[Serpent]

There are no rights in a society, but those conferred by the members on one another. And those rights can always be taken away again for reasons laid out in the laws of that society - as when a member is convicted of theft, discovered in collusion with an enemy or deemed a danger to others. The transmitting of deadly disease is such a danger.
(Of course, they can always be pardoned by a naked emperor....)

[Dave_Oblad]

Hi Folks,

I'm curious to see what happens a month from now when many have been vaccinated. When you get vaccinated are you going to continue wearing a mask? Why would you? You won't catch covid and thus can't spread covid. But the anti-maskers will look around and see many without masks (vaccinated folks) so why should they wear a mask if so many others are not wearing such?

Those anti-maskers that do get vaccinated will then have defensible grounds not to wear a mask. In a crowd, how does one tell the difference between the vaccinated and not? Will the anti-maskers take advantage and pretend to be vaccinated (while not wearing a mask) when they aren't vaccinated yet?

Do those vaccinated get a card that can't be replicated in Photoshop? What happens if you challenge a person not wearing a mask but claims to be vaccinated but can't produce a card or proof?

Just a few questions above. I suspect the answer will be mandatory masks.. always.. for everyone.. until it's determined to safe for everyone, like next fall or so. The anti-maskers will love that..lol.

Stay safe and Happy New Year!
Dave :^)

[jocular]

As far as I know it has not yet been established to what (if any) extent these vaccinations prevent transmission of the disease from those who have been successfully vaccinated to others who are unprotected.

So David_Oblad's questions seem a bit premature.

Let's hope that transmissability is significantly reduced and the question then arises.

In any case mask wearing is a small burden that pales in comparison with the advice that can be given to forego visits to other households and other everyday privations.

Good manners should be enough to ensure it is widespread but mandatory exhortations have their place.

I only started to wear mine once it was made officially required.

I very rarely see anyone not following the guidance.

[Serpent]

Hi Folks,

I'm curious to see what happens a month from now when many have been vaccinated. When you get vaccinated are you going to continue wearing a mask?

Of course. (In a month, only the long-term-care residents and medical staff will have been vaccinated. I don't expect a turn until April or May. At that time, nevertheless, of course I'll keep my masks - I have several fanciful masks - because there are three or four levels of vaccine recipients behind me. )

Why would you?

Because, even if my body is producing antibodies, they're only 95% (max) effective, and they don't stop me passing the virus on the from an infected person to an uninfected one.

You won't catch covid and thus can't spread covid.

Wrong! You don't have to catch something to pass something. That's what carriers do. So do packages, fabric and impersonal clouds left behind someone who isn't even there anymore.

But the anti-maskers will look around and see many without masks (vaccinated folks) so why should they wear a mask if so many others are not wearing such?

They're already idiots. My example made no impression on them up to this point; it won't hereafter.

In a crowd, how does one tell the difference between the vaccinated and not?

You can't. So stay out of crowds.

Will the anti-maskers take advantage and pretend to be vaccinated (while not wearing a mask) when they aren't vaccinated yet?

Whatever happens in the real world has no effect on the idiots who have their alternate reality.
They are irrelevant, except insofar as it is wise to steer very far clear of them.

Do those vaccinated get a card that can't be replicated in Photoshop?

No.

What happens if you challenge a person not wearing a mask but claims to be vaccinated but can't produce a card or proof?

They'll probably spit on you, and might shoot you - so, don't.

I suspect the answer will be mandatory masks.. always.. for everyone..

Voluntary for me.

until it's determined to safe for everyone, like next fall or so.

If we're very, very lucky. Probably much later; spring of 2022.

The anti-maskers will love that..lol.

Why do you care?

[Serpent]

May I add, as illustration, that the people of my community have been following the guidelines from the middle of March and continued the same shopping, gathering and masking policies throughout. Not coincidentally, my community reported an infection rate of 1 in 6,000 and 0 deaths.

[Forest_Dump]

I have to admit that there are certainly a number of facets to a lot of this that I find interesting so I will respond in a more scattered fashion.

As to appearing to be a wimp, I have to admit that this one is odd to me. You think I am going to care if someone thinks I am a wimp?

When you get down to it, it is all a numbers game to me. Where I am, we have a very small population and are somewhat isolated so truth be told, known cases are rare here and generally confined to people who have travelled outside the region. There has been no community spread here. But the odd case does show up and most people wear masks, sanitize, etc. I even went in for a test when I caught a common cold because it doesn't hurt. What is being asked doesn't hurt and is pretty minor particularly since then worst pain is indeed foggy glasses or avoiding unnecessary shopping which I prefer to do anyway. Instead I spend a lot more time alone in the bush or ice fishing. Is that wimpy?

Chances are that you will be assymptomatic if you are exposed to the virus and get through without a problem. But a tiny percentage will need medical intervention and an even smaller percentage will die. A tiny percentage. But cumulatively it has added up to more deaths in the US per day than 9/11 or Pearl Harbor. Was it wimpy to want to protect against those events? Again a strange sense of priorities to me.

One perspective I have is that it is indeed true that you are still in danger of dieing from other things or at least in need of medical intervention for cancer, car accidents, skiing accidents, etc. But it appears that our medical system did not have enough capacity to expand enough to meet the surge in numbers caused by this pandemic. It seems to me to be clear that there was simply not enough buffer built into the system. Could you imagine what would have or will happen if a really scary disease like ebola evolves a more transmissible robust variant? We would really be in trouble then and personally I do think it is simply a matter of time and we should take this one as a warning in terms of medical capacity, fragility of the economic system and cultural capacity to adapt. Along these lines I can't help but note that the US has 5% of the world's population but 20% of the covid-19 cases. No question they are doing somethings stupid. I suspect that if New Zealand is doing better it is because they were doing better are cutting off travel, etc. The US could probably learn a few things there but Americans are definitely not known for making personal sacrifices like that.

Just some stray thoughts.

[Forest_Dump]

Sorry just a few more stray thoughts. Not many of us are real experts in medicine, the spread of disease, etc. I have my own expertises that I spent years learning. I have to admit that I don't always have much patience for overnight experts who try to tell me something that is the opposite of what I have seen repeatedly over many years. So similarly I tend to trust good mechanics who have proven themselves over the years. Ditto for good electricians, plumbers, trappers, etc. Do masks work? Yes according to the experts and that's good enough for me. Sure I believe in critical thinking and looking at the bigger picture, various kinds of institutional biases, systemic problems, etc. But what's the hardship with wearing a mask or washing your hands more? I had grandfather's who fought in two world wars. They told stories of going overseas, wearing uncomfortable uniforms covered in blood mud sh!t puke etc for weeks or months. And I am going to snivel about not being able to shop, go to a restaurant, or have to wear a mask for a few hours a day? Sorry but not exactly a real hardship in my view, especially if that saves a few older folks. Truth be told if the only ones hurt were young dumb wimps who are too fussy to wear a mask, I wouldn't think it much a loss. I wear a mask for the ones who need protection.