Moving the Goalposts Again

[RayStark]

There’s a reason Doctors are said to practice Medicine.

Why? Cuz things change as Science is furthered.

[Borgia_dude]

@thinkingman

whens someone going to show the science of one mask let alone two?

ps. science isnt a link to an nbc story saying it’s science. just fyi

I have posted to some great physics based CFD modeling studies showing the efficacy of masks. You must have missed them.

[thinkingman]

@Borgia_dude

@thinkingman

whens someone going to show the science of one mask let alone two?

ps. science isnt a link to an nbc story saying it’s science. just fyi

I have posted to some great physics based CFD modeling studies showing the efficacy of masks. You must have missed them.

“physics” “modeling”?

how about actual efficacy and data

[Axxowiz]

They also keep stating different date for herd immunity I had always seen 60-70% before. covid Fauci said 90%. If that’s the case
how is herd immunity possible with new mutations some which are fairly resistant to the vaccines. and how can one have herd immunity if different mutations keep popping. We have a very poor record of eradicating a virus.

[Borgia_dude]

@thinkingman

@Borgia_dude

@thinkingman

whens someone going to show the science of one mask let alone two?

ps. science isnt a link to an nbc story saying it’s science. just fyi

I have posted to some great physics based CFD modeling studies showing the efficacy of masks. You must have missed them.

“physics” “modeling”?

how about actual efficacy and data

You requested science based. What is more science than the physics of particle flow?

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/5.0015044

[Borgia_dude]

You request science but you are actually requesting a statistical study. That’s math. There are plenty of them out there. Interested?

[thinkingman]

“wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,”

“ In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic”

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

emotey face eyerolls, and such

[Borgia_dude]

@thinkingman

“wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,”

“ In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic”

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

emotey face eyerolls, and such

You are all over the place. You say you want a scientific study and then link an article. OK then. How about this from the authors?

We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)1 as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.4

We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustainevd interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8 We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods.

These are the experts you cited. Do you still trust them or will you…move the goalposts?

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836

[thinkingman]

do you want to quote or summarize those paragraphs, as i have done?

how am i “all over the place” exactly?

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@Eagle-Keeper

Personally I can’t wear the N95 mask for more than 5-10 minutes without feeling out of breath.

Personally, I haven’t tried.

But my wife wears an N95, a surgical mask, AND a plastic face shield - all layered on top of each other - for 12 hours at a time, 3 days a week.

And she’s had both shots of the vaccine.

[Borgia_dude]

@thinkingman

do you want to quote or summarize those paragraphs, as i have done?

how am i “all over the place” exactly?

You say you want science. I give it to you. Then you want a statistical study showing mask efficacy. You know, data. Then you post an excerpt from the NEJM that doesn’t cite any studies yet you accept what they are saying.

And now I have posted a comment from the authors of your article in the NEJM that says you are interpreting what they said incorrectly.

Now it is just humorous. Do you agree with the authors that say mask wearing is effective in reducing Covid transmission in enclosed spaces or for extended times within 6 feet? These are the experts you cited after all. Are they suddenly unworthy of your trust? If so, that reveals your partisan view of science.

[thinkingman]

@Borgia_dude

@thinkingman

do you want to quote or summarize those paragraphs, as i have done?

how am i “all over the place” exactly?

You say you want science. I give it to you. Then you want a statistical study showing mask efficacy. You know, data. Then you post an excerpt from the NEJM that doesn’t cite any studies yet you accept what they are saying.

And now I have posted a comment from the authors of your article in the NEJM that says you are interpreting what they said incorrectly.

Now it is just humorous. Do you agree with the authors that say mask wearing is effective in reducing Covid transmission in enclosed spaces or for extended times within 6 feet? These are the experts you cited after all. Are they suddenly unworthy of your trust? If so, that reveals your partisan view of science.

where did i say “statistics?”

you gave an article on particle flow. that is hardly conclusive in terms of mask efficacy

the authors havent retracted their study

[Borgia_dude]

@thinkingman

the authors havent retracted their study

No. They said people like you are not interpreting it correctly. Here is their letter to the NEJM…

We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)1 as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.4

We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustainevd interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods.

P.S. the letter is signed by all of the authors of the original paper.

Will YOU retract your claim or reject the experts you previously cited as experts? This is interesting.

[thinkingman]

right. recommend masks when confined close together for long periods

i can go for that.

funny you wouldnt summarize that

[Borgia_dude]

@thinkingman

right. recommend masks when confined close together for long periods

i can go for that.

Cool. So we agree masks are effective.

funny you wouldnt summarize that

What? I posted their whole letter the first time. You whined that they didn’t retract their study (why would they???).

I then quoted the EXACT SAME LETTER in its entirety and you are making accusations of me not summarizing? Dude, had you just read the two paragraph letter the first time I posted it you wouldn’t look so…

[Samm]

@TheDoctorIsIn

Well, that’s how science works. When new evidence is found, the goalposts are moved.

Only in politics is inflexibility looked at as a positive attribute.

I can hardly wait until the CDC recommends triple masking.

[Samm]

@Axxowiz

I wear a mask even after being infected but two for some would be difficult my father has a hard time breathing with one and he deals with it I doubt him and others could do two.

It would be interesting to see a study of blood oxygen levels (or CO2 levels) in people who routinely wear two masks vs. one mask vs. no mask.

[Samm]

@Janet_Miller

I’m wondering if the vaccine is such a godsend, why double up?

I don’t even object to wearing one as someone who prefers to avoid common colds as well.

Two?

Now don’t let reason and sense get in the way of good public policy.

Perhaps someone should check to see if mask manufacturers are having a problem clearing their inventory.

[thinkingman]

@Borgia_dude

@thinkingman

right. recommend masks when confined close together for long periods

i can go for that.

Cool. So we agree masks are effective.

funny you wouldnt summarize that

What? I posted their whole letter the first time. You whined that they didn’t retract their study (why would they???).

I then quoted the EXACT SAME LETTER in its entirety and you are making accusations of me not summarizing? Dude, had you just read the two paragraph letter the first time I posted it you wouldn’t look so…

not effective, unless… read their text.

dont try to twist the truth to meet the narrative. “masks are needed everywhere now two” this isnt idiot tv news so dont try

you bust out word wall paragraphs without summarizing might mean you dont want to be clear

[Borgia_dude]

@Samm

@Axxowiz

I wear a mask even after being infected but two for some would be difficult my father has a hard time breathing with one and he deals with it I doubt him and others could do two.

It would be interesting to see a study of blood oxygen levels (or CO2 levels) in people who routinely wear two masks vs. one mask vs. no mask.

I got you covered for one mask. No significant difference for one mask versus no mask.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Overview

Maybe they will follow up with a two mask study?