Defensive Carry banner

121 - 140 of 150 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,185 Posts
Because people don't use them properly. Watch what people do when they wear them. In a grocery store...touching items...then touching the mask around their eyes and noses...then touching times.

It's foolish to think that the general populace will be 100% compliant when wearing a mask.

These are solutions that look good on paper, but fail miserably in practice.
Still better for the infected to wear them. Whatever might happen by contact is better than blowing virus-filled droplets through the air.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Still better for the infected to wear them. Whatever might happen by contact is better than blowing virus-filled droplets through the air.
thanks for the great idea to stop the door to door solicitation- we have a big bottle of bubbles, I’ll hack and sneez then hurl bubbles at them!


assulted by bubbles, they sneak into safe spaces :image035: bwaaahha ha ha they are floating Pony Soldier 😜
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,338 Posts
Still better for the infected to wear them. Whatever might happen by contact is better than blowing virus-filled droplets through the air.
What data do you have to prove that touching surfaces, then masks around the eyes and nose, and then surfaces again is reducing infection? And what data do you have to prove that transmission by air is worse the transmission by surface contact?

You stated a conclusion; please provide the proof.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,185 Posts
What data do you have to prove that touching surfaces, then masks around the eyes and nose, and then surfaces again is reducing infection? And what data do you have to prove that transmission by air is worse the transmission by surface contact?

You stated a conclusion; please provide the proof.
I'll admit that that simply seems obvious to me. An infected person will exhale the same quantity of virus particles in droplets: is it better to have them

1. exhaled directly into other people's faces and onto surfaces that others may or may not touch; or
2. to have them trapped in a mask, which the person may or may not touch, which may or may not transfer virus to their hands, with which they may or may not touch another surface before sanitizing, which may or may not transfer virus to that surface, which others may or may not touch?

I guess another way to look at it is, unless an infected person's mask is completely free of virus when they remove and discard or sanitize it, it has been effective in reducing the number of infectious particles released into public environments. Right?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,338 Posts
I'll admit that that simply seems obvious to me. An infected person will exhale the same quantity of virus particles in droplets: is it better to have them

1. exhaled directly into other people's faces and onto surfaces that others may or may not touch; or
2. to have them trapped in a mask, which the person may or may not touch, which may or may not transfer virus to their hands, with which they may or may not touch another surface before sanitizing, which may or may not transfer virus to that surface, which others may or may not touch?

I guess another way to look at it is, unless an infected person's mask is completely free of virus when they remove and discard or sanitize it, it has been effective in reducing the number of infectious particles released into public environments. Right?
The next time you are in a grocery store, watch what happens. There's not a lot of "may or may nots." Watch what is happening in the real world instead of reading best practices on the Internet. I've yet to see anyone fully comply with the CDC guidelines for wearing a mask. And when you implement a solution, you must consider compliance in the real world. It's the classic "looks good on paper" but fails in the real world.

Assuming an infected person is the grocery store.

Infected person touches mask, which is loaded with virus. Infected person then touches and puts back: pickle jar, cereal box, milk carton, package of bread, etc.

Uninfected person later touches pickle jar and puts it into cart. After touching jar, person adjusts mask, touches near eyes and nose.

Another uninfected person later touches cereal box and puts it back After touching box, person adjusts mask, touches near eyes and nose.

How many masks are being washed after wearing? Very few.

We don't wear a mask now. We sanitize our hands before going in, don't touch our faces (takes some discipline), and then sanitize our hands before getting back into the car. I'm pretty confident our practices are presenting less risk than non-complying mask wearers. When I was wearing a mask I was always adjusting the damn thing.

Masks for the general public are a complete joke. It's a solution that cannot be implemented properly (which everyone seems to overlook).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,338 Posts
Here's another example of habits defeating prophylactics:

Last week we were in a Chic-Fil-a line. A woman a few cars up in front of us was wearing nitrile gloves. She was often rubbing her eyes and nose....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,185 Posts
Assuming an infected person is the grocery store.

Infected person touches mask, which is loaded with virus. Infected person then touches and puts back: pickle jar, cereal box, milk carton, package of bread, etc.

Uninfected person later touches pickle jar and puts it into cart. After touching jar, person adjusts mask, touches near eyes and nose.

Another uninfected person later touches cereal box and puts it back After touching box, person adjusts mask, touches near eyes and nose.
Are you saying that's more likely to cause an infection than the infected person exhaling droplets directly into the uninfected person, plus exhaling droplets onto every item on the shelves they're passing by?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,338 Posts
Are you saying that's more likely to cause an infection than the infected person exhaling droplets directly into the uninfected person, plus exhaling droplets onto every item on the shelves they're passing by?
No. I'm saying the masks are not being used properly, and will not be by the general populace, and the way people are behaving largely defeats the purpose of the mask.

More generally, my point is that solutions that look good on paper may not, in practice, work. People fail to take this into consideration. And simply saying "Well people must be educated to follow the guidelines" is not a practical response. You cannot change the behavior of hundreds of millions of people.

Masks are a joke, but it gives lock down advocates something to focus on so they can ignore suicide increases, drug abuse increases, missed cancer diagnoses, and all the ills and deaths resulting from a prolonged lock down.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,335 Posts
Yup, always trust the government. They know what they are doing. it is for your own good.
It make perfect sense to limit the number of hospital and nursing home beds so they can keep the costs up and limit competition.
Then when a crisis comes along, you are left there with your you know what hanging out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,221 Posts
And No One knew about this???. I didn`t!.
I was unaware of CON. After reading the article, the goal was intended to keep health care costs down because in the free market patients were being overcharged to cover the cost of excessive hospital development. But, because of that there isn't enough hospital facilities during CV-19 that may have resulted in more deaths. Anyway, it seems that medical costs are out of control regardless of CON. Even with insurance, your copay for an ER visit could run into thousands of dollars. I sure hope that I don't go bankrupt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Old Anglo

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,934 Posts
I was unaware of CON. After reading the article, the goal was intended to keep health care costs down because in the free market patients were being overcharged to cover the cost of excessive hospital development. But, because of that there isn't enough hospital facilities during CV-19 that may have resulted in more deaths. Anyway, it seems that medical costs are out of control regardless of CON. Even with insurance, your copay for an ER visit could run into thousands of dollars. I sure hope that I don't go bankrupt.
One of the reasons costs are astronomical is because competition and the free market have been stifled.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,335 Posts
The article stated that it was the free market that caused hospitals to overcharge because they couldn't recoup the cost of the unused facilities otherwise. So, CON was put into force. From the article:

"It was theorized that free-market competition incentivized healthcare providers to overbuild, and, in turn, overcharge patients or overhospitalize them to cover the extra costs."
Over build/ under build it made no difference we are still gett screwed blued and tattooed every time we go in one of them.
Either by the hospital administrators or the insurance companies.
And now some in government say thet single payer health care will solve all the problems.
Anyone here buy that one?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,221 Posts
Over build/ under build it made no difference we are still gett screwed blued and tattooed every time we go in one of them.
Either by the hospital administrators or the insurance companies.
And now some in government say thet single payer health care will solve all the problems.
Anyone here buy that one?
Nope.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,349 Posts
What you're missing is that virus particles, on their own, don't easily travel far from the source. Yes, individual virus particles can get out from a mask, but that's not nearly as dangerous as large droplets carrying virus particles. And yes, the moisture will dry; that's why a mask is ineffective as protection for the uninfected. But when the infected wears it, it limits the size of particle exhaled, and therefore the distance it can travel.
Individual viruses can float around in the air like dust in the wind.

But, you keep believing the talking heads on TV!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
Individual viruses can float around in the air like dust in the wind.

But, you keep believing the talking heads on TV!
Depends on the virus. Enveloped viruses can't survive without being suspended in a water droplet at all. Encapsidated viruses can do a little longer, but are unlikely to survive either temperature changes or sun's UV rays. Viruses don't maintain homeostasis - they cannot repair their genetic material, cannot maintain acid/base balance, cannot manage any oxidative chemicals. Most viruses are pretty helpless without a host cell, or some friendly medium.

The press has been busy scaring everyone with "COVID detected outside patient room" etc nonsense, but all those tests are nucleic acid-based. A virus that's been damaged beyond its ability to cause disease can still show up on a genetic test. Also, numbers matter, especially with SARS-CoV2. The amount of exposure appears to correlate very well with severity of disease, as does exposure site. If you get a small amount of virus on your throat or nose, and you're otherwise healthy, you'll probably do fine. If you get a huge number of virus particles, and inhale them deeply into your lungs, you'll get much sicker. There is so much misinformation and DIS-information out there, and people are either frustrated or have an agenda, so a discussion that has numerous caveats has lost all sense of complexity.
 
121 - 140 of 150 Posts
Top