Covid deniers and anti maskers

[BoroMart]

Seeing as the Op stated the opinion it's not my place to prove anything other than to state clearly there's no evidence to support the claim.

well done you, we can agree to disagree on that one

I can't find them please provide me what you've read.

I find it unfathomable that you can't find a single article in support of wearing masks. If you can't work google, you have bigger issues to worry about than the efficacy of masks or you are being facaetious.

"The more people that behave like you, thinking they know more than scientists, the more there is the chance of mutations. That's a fact, you might not like facts, but it's true."

Correct, because people spouting that masks don't work, has impact, gains momentum and becomes a rhetoric. This leads to less mask wearing, leading to more infections, and potentially more mutations. Ergo, more death, poverty, illness, and pain.

 

[Londons_Moggie]

Every time i put one on i think to myself "why am i still doing this?"

Is that a question?


I said i was in no rush to be vaccinated from a virus i am not at risk from. And i would extend that thinking to my children. And, seeing as im in my late 30s, i dont think the government are in any real rush to vaccinate me either.

You're extrapolating to "I'm all right, stuff you lot" but i have many times now said i comply with every single thing im asked. I do things for the greater good, despite opposing them strongly in my own mind. How many times can you lot prove what ive been banging on about for the last 10 pages without gaining an ounce of self awareness.

Ive said i think mask wearing is b***ks and im in no rush to get vaccinated and you think you all know everything about me.

That's how it tends to work on here by the hateful mob. They misconstrue your words to fit the narrative they have invented about you in their warped minds. They're an angry, hateful mob at times and herd on people like vultures. I think you have articulated your views perfectly and although some I'm not sure about some of them, you are entitled to them and as you have mentioned multiple times, you are complying with the rules. They just need to bully someone sometimes. i wouldn't worry too much. It's par for the course on here these days. Rise above it

 

[BoroMart]

That's how it tends to work on here by the hateful mob. They misconstrue your words to fit the narrative they have invented about you in their warped minds. They're an angry, hateful mob at times and herd on people like vultures.

oh puuuurlease, get over yourself.

I think you have articulated your views perfectly and although some I'm not sure about some of them, you are entitled to them and as you have mentioned multiple times, you are complying with the rules.

he is entitled to his views, and we are entitled to our views of him based on his words. Such is life

They just need to bully someone sometimes.

Bullying, now your just being really silly. He chose to put his opinion forward, he knew it would be contentious to some people, and he knew that it would be questioned. He was vague at various points, possibly to get a reaction. He isn't bullied for getting a response, nobody is verbally abusing him, threatening him, or destroying his character. His choices and words were questioned, that's par for the course on a message board.
You are acting like he is entitled to say what he wants and everyone has to listen and respect his opinion, life's not like that buttercup.

 

[Alvez_48]

well done you, we can agree to disagree on that one

Cool.

I find it unfathomable that you can't find a single article in support of wearing masks. If you can't work google, you have bigger issues to worry about than the efficacy of masks or you are being facaetious.

I'm not asking for articles in support of masks I'm asking for evidence and or studies for the efficacy of their use.

Correct, because people spouting that masks don't work, has impact, gains momentum and becomes a rhetoric. This leads to less mask wearing, leading to more infections, and potentially more mutations. Ergo, more death, poverty, illness, and pain.

Again 0 evidence for your claim.
So essentially you want censorship because people disagree with your opinion (it's currently an opinion because you've still not provided me any evidence on the efficacy of masks).

We should be debating the efficacy of all measures all the time. It should be essential viewing at 10pm going through the evidence with a fine tooth comb where we hear scientists from all sides debate the evidence so that we build up trust in the issue.

All you're actually doing Marty is saying people who don't think like me are stupid because I feel like they are. Remember when you point a finger there are 3 pointing back at you.

 

[BoroMart]

Cool.


I'm not asking for articles in support of masks I'm asking for evidence and or studies for the efficacy of their use.



Again 0 evidence for your claim.
So essentially you want censorship because people disagree with your opinion (it's currently an opinion because you've still not provided me any evidence on the efficacy of masks).

We should be debating the efficacy of all measures all the time. It should be essential viewing at 10pm going through the evidence with a fine tooth comb where we hear scientists from all sides debate the evidence so that we build up trust in the issue.

All you're actually doing Marty is saying people who don't think like me are stupid because I feel like they are. Remember when you point a finger there are 3 pointing back at you.

take you rpick mate, as you are aware there are loads of articles out there and some of these articles link to other articles:

Still Confused About Masks? Here’s the Science Behind How Face Masks Prevent Coronavirus

We talked to UCSF epidemiologist George Rutherford, MD, and infectious disease specialist Peter Chin-Hong, MD, about the CDC’s reversal on mask-wearing, the current science on how masks work, and what to consider when choosing a mask.

www.ucsf.edu

A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients

The pandemic of COVID-19 is growing, and a shortage of masks and respirators has been reported globally. Policies of health organizations for healthcare workers are inconsistent, with a change in policy in the US for universal face mask use. The aim of ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Face masks: what the data say

The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough?

www.nature.com

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission...

www.pnas.org

conclusions in all of these are that masks work, to enough extent to make a difference, reduce spread, allow economies to open up, and save lives. There are 100s more of these, if you need help with how to use google again, let me know

 

[BoroMart]

All you're actually doing Marty is saying people who don't think like me are stupid because I feel like they are.

nope, I'm saying...

 

[BoroMart]

Remember when you point a finger there are 3 pointing back at you.

science doesn't care about popularity contests

 

[Muttley]

I'm not asking for articles in support of masks I'm asking for evidence and or studies for the efficacy of their use.

Google too complicated for you?

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-covid-19-masks

 

[Alvez_48]

take you rpick mate, as you are aware there are loads of articles out there and some of these articles link to other articles:

Still Confused About Masks? Here’s the Science Behind How Face Masks Prevent Coronavirus

We talked to UCSF epidemiologist George Rutherford, MD, and infectious disease specialist Peter Chin-Hong, MD, about the CDC’s reversal on mask-wearing, the current science on how masks work, and what to consider when choosing a mask.

www.ucsf.edu

A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients

The pandemic of COVID-19 is growing, and a shortage of masks and respirators has been reported globally. Policies of health organizations for healthcare workers are inconsistent, with a change in policy in the US for universal face mask use. The aim of ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Face masks: what the data say

The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough?

www.nature.com

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission...

www.pnas.org

conclusions in all of these are that masks work, to enough extent to make a difference, reduce spread, allow economies to open up, and save lives. There are 100s more of these, if you need help with how to use google again, let me know

Thanks for your effort, all of these papers apart from the CDC one don't have any studies in them. They aggregate based on case data. The problem is they were released in summer which is the classic case of correlation clearly not being causation because well... Then winter happened.

The CDC pieces are more interesting and I will pick through them but suffice to say that they are pointing to very small sample sizes but still I will read through it thoroughly.

I don't care about dying on the hill that is masks Marty as I've said previously I happily wear them when required, I just want people to talk and converse not attack one another. I think you know this and I know that you like talking to me even if we disagree on certain topics, this is good.

 

[BoroMart]

Thanks for your effort, all of these papers apart from the CDC one don't have any studies in them. They aggregate based on case data. The problem is they were released in summer which is the classic case of correlation clearly not being causation because well... Then winter happened.

The CDC pieces are more interesting and I will pick through them but suffice to say that they are pointing to very small sample sizes but still I will read through it thoroughly.

I don't care about dying on the hill that is masks Marty as I've said previously I happily wear them when required, I just want people to talk and converse not attack one another. I think you know this and I know that you like talking to me even if we disagree on certain topics, this is good.

I'm sure there will be plenty more papers coming out, and of course knowledge evolves, you make decisions based on the best available data and if the best available data says masks work (and it does) then that is what you do.

But this is just another respiratory disease, and masks have proved effective in the past against them, time and time again. Yes sample sizes are relatively small, larger sample sizes take a long time to validate, and with a deadly virus getting people to join in with completely controlled conditions isn't easy (and is fraught with issues) but as I say, the science heavily points to masks being good.

 

[ThirdLeg]

oh puuuurlease, get over yourself.

he is entitled to his views, and we are entitled to our views of him based on his words. Such is life

Bullying, now your just being really silly. He chose to put his opinion forward, he knew it would be contentious to some people, and he knew that it would be questioned. He was vague at various points, possibly to get a reaction. He isn't bullied for getting a response, nobody is verbally abusing him, threatening him, or destroying his character. His choices and words were questioned, that's par for the course on a message board.
You are acting like he is entitled to say what he wants and everyone has to listen and respect his opinion, life's not like that buttercup.

Yes, wouldn't claim I am being bullied or want to put that against anyone in this thread. Just a bit of back and forth to keep me going this snowy Thursday afternoon.

But i have certainly seen that behaviour on here previously, and i think LS was speaking more generally.

You're right, I was vague. And instead of clarifying or questioning, as you say you were doing, any of my posts the preferred response was assumption of my beliefs and behaviours, and some frankly ridiculous (IMO) posts RE culpability for mutations.

So i do think you (generally to all participants) could reconsider your approach. It does feel a bit more like personal attack than friendly questioning

But i think i've made my point now, as have you lot to me. Just wanted to hop on to squash that bullying thing.

 

[Andy_W]

Some of the people on here questioning mask use, it's laughable and ridiculous.

If they cannot see that a mask can/ will limit the number of potential droplets/ aerosols or whatever containing a virus, then they've got much bigger issues. If this extremely basic concept is not understood without being able to see a study (and there are studies and a mass of examples), then there are zero points in providing studies or examples as they will either go over their heads, they won't read them, they won't acknowledge them or they're intentionally avoiding it as it does not fit their narrative.

Even if a mask prevented 20% of aerosols/ droplets, this would mean that it would directly reduce covid-19 infections, it has to, purely on a mathematical/ probability point of view, and it basically cannot do the opposite.

Do they seriously think that pretty much every developed and responsible nation is mandating mask use, just for the craic?

They're either:
Conspiracy nuts
Morons who can't see the common sense in it
Incapable of understanding risk, and risk v reward
Trying to provoke a reaction, or on a wind-up, which would be extremely poor form
Don't want to see or approve the logic of it, as it does not fit their narrative

Sometimes things do not need massive studies, as it's such blindingly obvious common sense, that it's going to help. Any help is a bonus, a reduction of just 5% will have a massive impact, even more, when multiplied at other things reducing risk, like the hand washing and social distancing.

Wating for a year of a pandemic, or not wearing masks for a full winter so you can carry out a study is ludicrous. When you only have one shot at something you should go on the side of caution, until you know otherwise, you do this even more if what is being asked poses next to zero additional hardship (like masks do).

It's risk v reward, it's as simple as that.
Do masks cause 99.9% of people a problem? No, wear the mask, it's not going to kill you.
Do masks reduce aerosols and liquid particles leaving a person? Yes, wear the mask, it's not going to kill you.
Do masks reduce aerosols and liquid particles entering a person? Maybe, wear the mask, it's not going to kill you.

Questioning something which is so logical just spreads disinformation or illogical thoughts to others, this gets latched onto, disinformation spreads and then the virus spreads, it's basic probability.

 

[Laughing]

Some of the people on here questioning mask use, it's laughable and ridiculous.

If they cannot see that a mask can/ will limit the number of potential droplets/ aerosols or whatever containing a virus, then they've got much bigger issues. If this extremely basic concept is not understood without being able to see a study (and there are studies and a mass of examples), then there are zero points in providing studies or examples as they will either go over their heads, they won't read them, they won't acknowledge them or they're intentionally avoiding it as it does not fit their narrative.

Even if a mask prevented 20% of aerosols/ droplets, this would mean that it would directly reduce covid-19 infections, it has to, purely on a mathematical/ probability point of view, and it basically cannot do the opposite.

Do they seriously think that pretty much every developed and responsible nation is mandating mask use, just for the craic?

They're either:
Conspiracy nuts
Morons who can't see the common sense in it
Incapable of understanding risk, and risk v reward
Trying to provoke a reaction, or on a wind-up, which would be extremely poor form
Don't want to see or approve the logic of it, as it does not fit their narrative

Sometimes things do not need massive studies, as it's such blindingly obvious common sense, that it's going to help. Any help is a bonus, a reduction of just 5% will have a massive impact, even more, when multiplied at other things reducing risk, like the hand washing and social distancing.

Wating for a year of a pandemic, or not wearing masks for a full winter so you can carry out a study is ludicrous. When you only have one shot at something you should go on the side of caution, until you know otherwise, you do this even more if what is being asked poses next to zero additional hardship (like masks do).

It's risk v reward, it's as simple as that.
Do masks cause 99.9% of people a problem? No, wear the mask, it's not going to kill you.
Do masks reduce aerosols and liquid particles leaving a person? Yes, wear the mask, it's not going to kill you.
Do masks reduce aerosols and liquid particles entering a person? Maybe, wear the mask, it's not going to kill you.

Questioning something which is so logical just spreads disinformation or illogical thoughts to others, this gets latched onto, disinformation spreads and then the virus spreads, it's basic probability.

Do paper and cotton surgical masks not produce infected micron scale particles? Is disposing of them not a health hazard? The evidence isn't nearly clear enough to declare someone a moron for thinking masks are not very effective in stopping the spread of an airborne virus. In fact, washing your hands is up to 90% more effective in stopping the spread of a virus.

But you carry on insulting Andy

 

[Andy_W]

Do paper and cotton surgical masks not produce infected micron scale particles? Is disposing of them not a health hazard? The evidence isn't nearly clear enough to declare someone a moron for thinking masks are not very effective in stopping the spread of an airborne virus. In fact, washing your hands is up to 90% more effective in stopping the spread of a virus.

But you carry on insulting Andy

The masks don't produce anything, it's the body doing that (caught after big infected by other bodies). The masks are a physical barrier, they have to work in this aspect, at least to a high degree. Similar to why doctors may wear them etc. But if they collect virus as a side effect, that's possibly bad, yes, but it's not as bad as letting out a lot more into the adjacent atmosphere and onto adjacent surfaces by not wearing a mask. People should be washing their masks, or using disposable masks and then disposing of them, for the limited times that they visit public places. If they're at work, then their workplace should be providing them free of charge.

How is disposing of a mask a health hazard, any more than 1000 other things? People aren't ramming them down each other's throats, they're meant to go in the non-recyclable waste bins, at worst. It's not even on the scale of the risk it's limiting, hence why they're being mandated (likely after an extremely robust risk assessment).

People should have their masks on before entering shops or whatever, then using sanitiser before they touch anything. People shouldn't be wiping their masks or hands all over things that other people are going to touch. Other people should be sanitising before / after touching things that others are going to touch, or may have touched. The chance of someone touching their mask, then touching something they don't buy, then somebody else touching that is going to be less than someone not wearing a mask, touching their face/ mouth at the same time as breathing/ talking into the localised atmosphere etc, around other non-mask wearers.

It's basic common sense, it doesn't need a scientific study, especially a study which is almost certainly put a massive amount of people at risk to potential spread.
It's going to reduce risks, that's why it's being mandated.

Washing hands might be 90% more effective, I'm not sure how that could be proven mind, or even assumed (same as the masks). But if two people are face to face or within 2m they can wash their hands as much as they want, it's not going to reduce the droplet or aerosol risk.

Even if masks are only 10% effective, or even 10% as effective as hand washing, that 10% could be a difference between an R or 0.95 and 1.05. One of those is a decreasing problem, the other is an increasing problem.

 

[Muttley]

Do paper and cotton surgical masks not produce infected micron scale particles?

No, they do not. Unless you can explain to me how something made of sanitised wood pulp or cotton can "produce" infected particles.

This contrarianism is a piece of p*ss isn't it?

 

[Laughing]

No, they do not. Unless you can explain to me how something made of sanitised wood pulp or cotton can "produce" infected particles.

This contrarianism is a piece of p*ss isn't it?

They do Mutley and you know they do, I wasn't being contrary at all, just replying to a completely imbalanced post by Andy.

There are numerous studies that masks have hardly any effect at all in stopping the spread of aerosoled particles and introduce other problems that could easily outweight their use. Disposal, not maintaining social distancing, going out more because you think you are safe. I could go on. When they are most effective is when you are in close proximity to someone for a short period. If you are in a supermarket for 60 minutes with infected people the air will be poluted by the virus and no amount of mask wearing changes that fact.

 

[Andy_W]

They do Mutley and you know they do, I wasn't being contrary at all, just replying to a completely imbalanced post by Andy.

There are numerous studies that masks have hardly any effect at all in stopping the spread of aerosoled particles and introduce other problems that could easily outweight their use. Disposal, not maintaining social distancing, going out more because you think you are safe. I could go on. When they are most effective is when you are in close proximity to someone for a short period. If you are in a supermarket for 60 minutes with infected people the air will be poluted by the virus and no amount of mask wearing changes that fact.

Your post is also imbalanced, but you're imbalanced on the side of conspiracy, which is going against the scientific advice (all over the world) which has enabled our risk assessments and our actions. Or do you not think that more informed people than you and me have not looked into this in massive detail?

What about stoping the non-aerosol particles, from people talking, shouting, spraying whatever? Will it slow/ reduce them, yes.

The point about the mask-wearing is, does it do as intended? Yes, it does, even to some degree is great. The other points about disposal and not social distancing are purely clutching at straws. I still dispose of my mask correctly, maintain social distancing etc, so should anyone else, that's not the problem of the mask, it's the problem of the user. If they can't grasp this, they have bigger problems.

Yes, a reckless user may not dispose of their mask correctly or may think they're invincible, but the chances are these people don't believe in the mask anyway, so if they're not wearing one they will be equally as reckless in other ways, yet doing it not wearing a mask (which will be worse).

People shouldn't be going to a supermarket for 60 minutes, and just because "some" air is infected, it doesn't mean it all is, and even if it all was, the level of this is crucial. There's a key thing called viral load, which is pretty much proven to have a massive impact, and any degree of reduction will help that, again it goes back to probability.

Supermarkets should also be limiting people in-store, limiting time in-store and have all windows and doors open etc, as should any enclosed space.

The standard of masks should have been far higher by now also, all staff should be given FFP3 at the least. I can see some reasoning why a piece of cloth was fine (better than nothing) when masks were limited, but it's been a year, we shouldn't be doing that now, we should have higher mask standards.

 

[SmallTown]

You have entirely missed the point of my post.

I dont need to do any of those things, i can just wear a mask, so says the Government.

Millions of deaths lurk around the corner, says the FMTTM poster. "it is a fact that the higher the rate of infection in a virus, the more chance of mutation." so why not extend the efforts to reduce the the rate of infection and close the coffee shop?

“I don’t need to do any of those things, I can just wear a mask”
I know I’ve used the word a lot but that’s the most ignorant thing I’ve read on this thread.

 

[Laughing]

OK Andy, let me try and be clear. The only real world test on a large sample size was done with flu. Masks were found to have little or no effect in stopping the spread of flu indoors, if you were in an enclosed space for an extended period of time.

No research has been done on the social effects of a population wearing masks, nor the additional health problems masks cause when being disposed of.

You believe that masks help, the truth is, if they do help, they help very little and that may well be offset, and them some, by the other problems that masks cause: lack of social distancing, more mixing, false sense of security and disposal.

It's not conspiracy, it's not a single scietists view. During the current pandemic, it is safer for the WHO to advise mask wearing, they see it as a blameless decision, which it largely is. Probably does no harm, overall, so why wouldn't you.

My issue is not with wearing a mask or not, I like my mask, it keeps my face warm. My issue is solely your categorization of anyone who thinks a mask is innefective, as a moron. They cearly are not.

 

[bear66]

Quite a good review of all of evidence surrounding use of face masks. It's quite a long review, but the most comprehensive I've seen.

Link