But those are not figures. Unless you're going to post 220,000 similar links, it's not relevant to his (initial) claim.
Run away from no-mask people
- Thread starter Kung Fu Wang
- Start date
- Status
But those are not figures. Unless you're going to post 220,000 similar links, it's not relevant to his (initial) claim.
But those are not figures. Unless you're going to post 220,000 similar links, it's not relevant to his claim.
jobo
Grandmaster
nono no
MY chances and probably your chances of dieing from the virus are practically nil
my and probably your chances of being attacked if you go round getting into mask arguments on either side are much higher
ive had a big guy threatening me on the bus already, if id have taken him up on it and quite sure he would have come at me swinging
jobo
Grandmaster
did you know gullible isnt in the dictionary ?
You mean NOW that the "experts" are no longer saying - do NOT wear a mask, unless you work in the medical field? I am sure I am not the only one who remembers the experts ridiculing folks for wearing them, right?
To the poster who asked what qualifications he had to determine KFW was paranoid- I didn't hear anyone ask for the qualifications asked of the people who referred to us naked facers as "selfish". So selfish is an opinion but paranoid is a mental condition that requires special training to diagnose?
The fact that someone would view a "mandate" the same as a "law" is greater cause for alarm than a virus with inflated number (yes, I KNOW they do, seen it) and a 2% mortality rate.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Which oxford study? Was it this one?
Research finds that inadequate US pandemic response cost more American lives than World War I
Or was it from this Oxford article from way back in July? Face coverings made compulsory after Oxford COVID-19 study inspires debate
As time has marched on, we've learned more about masks. There is a new study that is in the process of peer review. Association of country-wide coronavirus mortality with demographics, testing, lockdowns, and public wearing of masks. Update August 4, 2020.
jobo
Grandmaster
, no non of them, try again
Where in my post did I suggest doing that?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #111
Last night, one of my neighbor, a 80 some years old lady knocked on my front door wanted to visit my wife and talked about some dog business. I put my mask on and open the front door. She didn't have mask on. I didn't let her in. When she saw my wife came to the front door also had a mask on, she felt it might be improper for this visiting, and said she didn't want to interrupt the dinner (it was not dinner time). This is the no-mask lady that I always have to turn around when I ran.
Will you
- visit someone's house without putting on a mask?
- let someone into your house without a mask on?
Your thought?
Will you
- visit someone's house without putting on a mask?
- let someone into your house without a mask on?
Your thought?
Last edited:
You're talking about early advice, which was mostly focused on keeping masks available for front-line medical staff, and the advice was around prevention of GETTING, not prevention of TRANSMISSION.
And the fact that advice changes is NOT - I repeat NOT - in any way an indication that the people giving it are confused. It means their knowledge progressed. This is how science works: they give the best answer they have, and revise it when new information is available.
As to the next bit, "paranoid" is a psychological condition, something that should be left to those trained in it. "Selfish" is an opinion of behavioral traits - something we're all qualified to do. So, yes, to your question. Though I'm confused as to why you asked me that.
Inflated number? 220,000 doesn't care about what the % is, nor why you claim it is inflated. You are repeating bad information you were fed. I'll keep following the advice of those actually using good data analysis and research.
jobo
Grandmaster
he was laughing at wangs run away solution and you corrected him dont find it weird listen to experts, so ,,,,
jobo
Grandmaster
if they have changed advice, its a fair indication that they were wrong in the first place, which its self is a fair indication they might be wrong now
Actually, I commented on him saying he wasn't going to wear a mask unless required, because he found it weird to follow instructions (you can go read the rest if you want to know). Maybe comment on what I said, rather than the part I didn't mention.
So, your thought is that literally everything in physics is probably wrong, since it has basically all been revised as we've learned more?
That's a ludicrous line of logic, and you know it.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #117
What will be my options, jumping kick my no-mask opponent down? I think turning around, and run away is a much better solution.
I follow Dr. Fauci's suggestion.
jobo
Grandmaster
you dont need to tell me, i wasnt laughing at you
Steve
Mostly Harmless
I recall the experts saying don't wear the N95 masks because we don't have enough of them, and the folks in the hospitals and other front line people needed the PPE.
I really don't think you understand how significant even a 2% mortality rate is. Consider cancer... all kinds of cancer. It's ubiquitous. People, just about every person, takes reasonable precautions to mitigate their risk of getting cancer. From wearing sunscreen to quitting (or never starting) smoking. Eating better, getting colonoscopies, mammograms, etc. In addition, we as a culture have committed significant resources and energy into finding effective treatment and cures. The mortality rate for all kinds of cancer combined is less than .2%. The reason that cancer is so visible is that it affects so many people. We have over 16 million cancer survivors in the USA, and every family has felt that burden.
2% (actually, it's closer to 3% than 2) mortality is literally 2 out of every 100 people who gets it dies. Think about it like this. We know that coronavirus is highly contagious like the flu. The CDC estimates that between 9 million and 65million Americans get the flu each year. We're on the low end of the incidence rate for Covid now, at over 8 million and growing. When 9 million people get the flu, about 12k end up passing away. We know that with 8.2 million people contracting Covid, over 220k have died.
Let's consider what the numbers will look like if we get to the high end of the incidence range (65 million). At 65 million cases of the flu, the CDC says that about 61,000 Americans have died. If 65 million people get COVID, at a 2% mortality rate (which is actually a little optimistic) we are looking at losing 1.3 million people. That's what we have to look forward to, if people aren't smart about this thing.
Now, the good news is that vaccines look like they're on the horizon. But we have to get there, and wouldn't it suck to be the last person to die from Covid?
jobo
Grandmaster
well yes, quantum mechanics indicates/ means that everything we call reality including physics is probably wrong
thats not me saying it, its main stream scientific opinion saying it, which means they might be wrong as well
you just cant trust them
Last edited:
- Status
