you're ignoring asymptomatic transmission
as the data in the OP show, data from the CDC, that perceived reduction is an illusion
masks work .. to infect you :(
- Thread starter way 2 go
- Start date
you're ignoring asymptomatic transmission
as the data in the OP show, data from the CDC, that perceived reduction is an illusion
I absolutely am not. That is the reason everybody needs to wear a mask, not just sick people. And that is why people with your stubborn attitude are making this epidemic far worse than it needs to be.
And as pointed out, you have misrepresented the data.
so you're willing to risk the lives of your elderly loved ones to a cloth mask worn by a possibly asymptomatic infectious caregiver?
data is data - it's right there
If an elderly person needs to be taken care of, it should be by someone without symptoms who is wearing a mask. That is better than someone without symptoms without a mask.
What is your point?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
The CDC has taken the White House medical director to task for misinterpreting the data from this report.
That adviser, Stanford neuroradiologist Dr. Scott Atlas, appears to have taken a statistic from a CDC study wildly out of context to pose an anti-mask argument that has been central to his and President Trump’s approach.
Atlas, a source of nearly endless controversy, sent a tweet on Saturday calling into question the efficacy of facial coverings in preventing the coronavirus. “Masks work? No,” said his tweet. . . .
That conclusion appeared to be based on an errant reading of a CDC study published in the Sept. 11 issue of its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, a compendium of the latest research. The study in question reviewed data from 154 people who had tested positive for the coronavirus and had been treated at 11 medical centers around the country.
The CDC further speculated that while mask wearing has led to “sufficient protection” within subjects’ social networks, those subjects likely contracted the coronavirus in a bar or restaurant, where people take off masks to eat and drink. . . .
Linsey Marr, a leading aerosol scientist at Virginia Tech who was not involved in the CDC study, came to the same conclusion. “It is true that masks are not a perfect solution, but they are effective at slowing transmission in the community,” she told Yahoo News.
“Anecdotally, it is possible that there are people who have contracted COVID-19 who ‘frequently’ wear masks,” Marr went on to say. “But do they wear masks when it matters most, like at family gatherings and in restaurants? Masks are needed at all times in public buildings when we are with others who are not in our own household.”
Atlas, a source of nearly endless controversy, sent a tweet on Saturday calling into question the efficacy of facial coverings in preventing the coronavirus. “Masks work? No,” said his tweet. . . .
That conclusion appeared to be based on an errant reading of a CDC study published in the Sept. 11 issue of its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, a compendium of the latest research. The study in question reviewed data from 154 people who had tested positive for the coronavirus and had been treated at 11 medical centers around the country.
The CDC further speculated that while mask wearing has led to “sufficient protection” within subjects’ social networks, those subjects likely contracted the coronavirus in a bar or restaurant, where people take off masks to eat and drink. . . .
Linsey Marr, a leading aerosol scientist at Virginia Tech who was not involved in the CDC study, came to the same conclusion. “It is true that masks are not a perfect solution, but they are effective at slowing transmission in the community,” she told Yahoo News.
“Anecdotally, it is possible that there are people who have contracted COVID-19 who ‘frequently’ wear masks,” Marr went on to say. “But do they wear masks when it matters most, like at family gatherings and in restaurants? Masks are needed at all times in public buildings when we are with others who are not in our own household.”
Which is basically what I tried to tell you earlier in the thread.
and if they're asymptomatic and infectious, all you're buying is the illusion of safety
See post 12
No,. It's not an illusion at all. I am not 'buying' complete safety, nor do I think I am. I am reducing the risk of infection. Not to zero, but significantly. That's the best I can do.
Do you have another suggestion?
It's a symptom of what Mencken called the "one-hundred percenters." A sort of magical thinking, wherein if something doesn't work perfectly, it's regarded as useless.
Here's a funny angle on this: If all Americans would wear masks, far less people would be infected in the US, more businesses would be open, less unemployed- and President Trump would get easily reelected on the basis of a good economy.
yes, if you have a loved one who is at risk due to known factors, equip them with a mask designed to protect them
That is also useful. Will reduce the risk further. That doesn't make the health care worker's mask useless.
it's worse than useless if it gives a false sense of security
Look, I know you will do anything it takes to pretend that masks are evil. They aren't. They save lives. And Jewish people can be idiots too.
Masks help. Wear them. Stop being an idiot.
eider
Well-known member
Duh! Don't you understand 'levels of risk' ?
Look......... if you don't believe in there being any value in masks, I can't help your daftness, but I wear a mask because I know it protects me from touching my face, and the Medical and Science advisers for my country not only promote this, but have pressed for legislation about it, which now exists.
Let's face it, by comparison you're just a bunch of laymen who think you're all more clever, I guess. Not!
Yes, but that would require more logical steps than Trump can manage, these days.
eider
Well-known member
Wow! You sure are an optimist today! :chuckle: