To Mask or Not to Mask?

[nonobaddog]

To really determine if what you are seeing isn't confirmation bias, you actually need to take data. write down the number of people you see, masked vs unmasked, over a period of time.

There was a sight that had data for a lot of states that I think used cameras and modified facial recognition software to determine mask percentages. This doesn't guarantee that whatever gets published isn't "fixed" somehow but it seems like a good approach.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

One problem is lots of people can publish through ACS with their over 100,000 members - even people that have had too much kool aid, and some stuff gets through that probably shouldn't. In a way this is fine - a lot of stuff gets published that probably wouldn't otherwise but the problem comes when people start citing these publications like they are some sort of authority or something.

Have you read the ACS publications that call out the faulty methods in your cited paper?
Or have you read the corrections published later to your cited paper?

Comment on Aerosol Filtration Efficiency of Common Fabrics Used in Respiratory Cloth Masks: Questioning Their Findings

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.0c05265

Correction to Aerosol Filtration Efficiency of Common Fabrics Used in Respiratory Cloth Masks

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.0c04676

ACS is something a college kids like to join because it looks good on their resume.

ACS - Qualification Requirements

cci-online.org

Qualification Requirements​

Applicants are required to meet the following criteria to sit for the ACS examination:

1. Have a high school diploma or general education diploma at the time of application.
2. Fulfill one (1) of the qualifications of the exam for which you are applying. See qualifications listed in the table below.
3. Provide typed documentation to support the qualification under which you are applying. Required documentation for each qualification is listed below. CCI reserves the right to request additional information.

So the first link is comments on the methodology and the authors call out several things they have issues with... then cite other studies. But, if you read the studies they cite, they contradict the authors. For example, they state that the particles should be neutrally charged per testing standards, then their cite note number 8 - that study indicates there are TWO mask filter standards, one that requires neutral charge particles and one that requires charged particles. They tested some fabrics both ways... and got the same results regardless of charged or neutral.

Also, another citation I followed focused solely on 300-400 nm particles (the weakspot of most mask filter materials). Keep in mind that is would be a couple virus particles... not sure that is the biggest worry versus 1 um plus sizes that contain hundreds/thousand/millions of individual viruses.

They also criticized the equipment used... but the equipment used is the lab grade equipment sold by the same company that also sells standard factory mask testing QA benches. smh on that one.

Finally, ACS stands for American Chemical Society... your final ACS links are for Advanced Cardiac Sonographer exam and in addition to having a high school diploma, require graduation from an accredited cardiac sonography college program. Don't know if you know anyone who's been in a sonography (ultrasound) program, but it is EXTREMELY competitive to gain admission.

ETA: They also criticize the original study because some have mis-advertised it as showing some materials filter better than N95's, Anyone who actually reads it finds the large error band in one of the tests was due to ONE N95 mask and the authors cover this... in detail. So there was a defective mask in their study... it happens. What would the critiquing authors have them do? Hide that data? THAT would be a cardinal sin... you report the data you get.

 

[nonobaddog]

Finally, ACS stands for American Chemical Society... your final ACS links are for Advanced Cardiac Sonographer exam and in addition to having a high school diploma, require graduation from an accredited cardiac sonography college program. Don't know if you know anyone who's been in a sonography (ultrasound) program, but it is EXTREMELY competitive to gain admission.

LOL - Sorry about that, I wasn't very careful there. I actually do know the difference, used to be in American Chemical Society back when the dead sea was just a little sick.

You are right - the sonography graduation tests are pretty thorough too. I used to proctor their exams sometimes.

 

[CampingJosh]

Here’s a good question. What if you’re full if ****? What if you don’t actually understand the motives of the people you’re looking down upon? What if there is some truth on the other side which you haven’t considered while passing judgement exclusively from your own perspective?

This isn’t an issue of morality. we’re not there yet. It’s an issue of differing beliefs and worldviews. You’re not listening to what people are telling you. It comes off as self-righteousness. If your purpose is persuasion, you’re failing. If your purpose is to show your contempt, mission accomplished.

If a person maintains inaccurate beliefs about reality in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, those beliefs are no longer "differing"; they are faulty.

I don't care about their motives. Negligence and recklessness don't require motive; they only require action that disregards others.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

LOL - Sorry about that, I wasn't very careful there. I actually do know the difference, used to be in American Chemical Society back when the dead sea was just a little sick.

You are right - the sonography graduation tests are pretty thorough too. I used to proctor their exams sometimes.

Just a little sick... lol, still chuckle every time I hear that... hopefully still will when I've been around long enough to use it myself.

 

[BugI02]

Don't believe masks work... fine, don't wear one.

Quoted for posterity

 

[BugI02]

I don't care about their motives. Negligence and recklessness don't require motive; they only require action that disregards others.

So, would it be reckless (or perhaps negligent) to adopt a personal protective strategy that requires you to attempt to coerce others to act the way you think they should in order for it to work?

 

[Rookie]

One of the problems with "everyone I see is masked/unmasked" is "confirmation bias".
You tend to see what you want to see.

Someone that is a racists might ignore a certain behavior from a hundred people in their own race, but then when they see it in one person from a different race, it PROVES their point.

To really determine if what you are seeing isn't confirmation bias, you actually need to take data. write down the number of people you see, masked vs unmasked, over a period of time.

Personally, I don't have that much energy.
Wear a mask.
Don't wear a mask.
I really couldn't get a ****

Exactly. If you're so worried about me not wearing a mask, stay the **** away from me. We'll both be happy.

 

[CampingJosh]

So, would it be reckless (or perhaps negligent) to adopt a personal protective strategy that requires you to attempt to coerce others to act the way you think they should in order for it to work?

Tomorrow evening, there will be some who fire guns into the air at midnight in celebration. Is it negligent for me to leave my car outside, or is it negligent for them to shoot off something that may harm someone else?

I think the normal phrasing is that one's rights end at another's nose. This time we just have to add mouth, too.


By the way, we aren't talking about a "personal protective strategy." I'm young and healthy; I seem to be significantly more likely to have an asymptomatic case than a severe or deadly one. I'm not worried about getting the virus. I'm worried about the damage it has done and continues to do to our society and to our economy.

Since April (at least) it's been widely reported that wearing a mask does much more to prevent the wearer from spreading the virus that it does to prevent the wearer from catching the virus. It's not about personal protection; it's about not causing harm. Those are very different goals.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

I’m old enough to remember when we first found out about Covid and us preppers wore masks, some even wore gas masks, and we were told we were killing nurses and doctors by using the supply up.

Ahhh. Those were the days.

 

[BugI02]

I think the normal phrasing is that one's rights end at another's nose. This time we just have to add mouth, too.

So is not MY nose past the end of yours? YOU have a right to wear a mask, no argument. You have no right to insist someone else do so

 

[foszoe]

So, would it be reckless (or perhaps negligent) to adopt a personal protective strategy that requires you to attempt to coerce others to act the way you think they should in order for it to work?

Coercing others? When I drive in the right side of the road I am expecting others to do the same but I don't coerce them....or do I?

 

[buckwacker]

I’m old enough to remember when we first found out about Covid and us preppers wore masks, some even wore gas masks, and we were told we were killing nurses and doctors by using the supply up.

Ahhh. Those were the days.

Probably by the same know-it-all busybodies trying to force everyone to wear one now.

 

[churchmouse]

Tomorrow evening, there will be some who fire guns into the air at midnight in celebration. Is it negligent for me to leave my car outside, or is it negligent for them to shoot off something that may harm someone else?

I think the normal phrasing is that one's rights end at another's nose. This time we just have to add mouth, too.


By the way, we aren't talking about a "personal protective strategy." I'm young and healthy; I seem to be significantly more likely to have an asymptomatic case than a severe or deadly one. I'm not worried about getting the virus. I'm worried about the damage it has done and continues to do to our society and to our economy.

Since April (at least) it's been widely reported that wearing a mask does much more to prevent the wearer from spreading the virus that it does to prevent the wearer from catching the virus. It's not about personal protection; it's about not causing harm. Those are very different goals.

The damage could have and should have been better dealt with than what we have and are seeing my friend. A lot of this could have and should have been avoided.

 

[NKBJ]

This topic reminds me of laying flat on my back gasping for breath because of triggered asthma and allergies, pollen in the air in southeast Texas reducing a six year boy to a debilitated physical and mental wreck. The best we could do was a damp dish towel (cotton cloth diaper) draped over my face. Maybe the diapers prevented me from blowing mucus bubbles across the room. Oh well, thank goodness for antihistamines and decongestants.

But this isn't about just masks. Never has been. The masks are stage props for crowd control. Like all the rest of you I've had plenty of time to think this thing over and I still don't get it as to why anyone as an individual or any group collectively is willing to surrender our civilization for the sake of physical survival. Cower in our homes, cower behind our magic blue beard bags, fear, obey. And close our minds as to what's going from the witches kettles into our arms.

And to save your civilization from being over written with the technocratic dictatorship all you ever had to do was to collectively say "No".

 

[CampingJosh]

So is not MY nose past the end of yours? YOU have a right to wear a mask, no argument. You have no right to insist someone else do so

Do your exhalations stay within your nose?

If you are in public and create a dangerous situation for others (whether that be by spraying out bullets or spraying out virus), you ought to consider yourself responsible for the damage done.

Taking reasonable precautions to protect others from your own actions is not a new societal expectation. When novel situations occur, new precautions become reasonable. I'm not sure why you feel masks are fundamentally different.

 

[jamil]

Just for you, Jetta

View attachment 105721

There’s centrism, and there’s moderation. The two are not the same. I’m not a centrist. Sometimes I think the right answers to some issues are on the right. To other issues it’s on the left. Reality resides where it is, and not necessarily where you or I am.

 

[BugI02]

Taking reasonable precautions to protect others from your own actions is not a new societal expectation. When novel situations occur, new precautions become reasonable. I'm not sure why you feel masks are fundamentally different.

Because they are not a 'reasonable' precaution. They attempt to require everyone to exhibit a personal behavior because they MIGHT be sick rather than because they are capable of spreading. They are prior restraint and apparently they don't work or you wouldn't need such a high level of compliance. Why don't you just wear two and we'll call it even

It's like supporting stop and frisk or RKBA restrictions instead of carrying; the former details the state to enforce conditions that make some people feel safer, while the latter is pro-active personal behavior designed to actually make the person adopting it safer regardless of the actions of others

 

[CampingJosh]

They are prior restraint

Categorically wrong. Wearing a mask to keep oneself from spreading a disease is unrelated to government censorship.

 

[CampingJosh]

Because they are not a 'reasonable' precaution. They attempt to require everyone to exhibit a personal behavior because they MIGHT be sick rather than because they are capable of spreading. They are prior restraint and apparently they don't work or you wouldn't need such a high level of compliance. Why don't you just wear two and we'll call it even

It's like supporting stop and frisk or RKBA restrictions instead of carrying; the former details the state to enforce conditions that make some people feel safer, while the latter is pro-active personal behavior designed to actually make the person adopting it safer regardless of the actions of others

We don't require everyone in society to drive armored cars and wear body armor. We require those with guns to refrain from needlessly shooting in situations where others could be struck.

Air is safe until someone contaminants it. The person who causes the dangerous situation is responsible for the outcome. Those are normal things in our society.