I think that we are at a point where we can take the data and learn from it. Sometime around summer of last year, mask wearing was at an all time high. Cases continued to rise. Even into the fall and winter of last year, my observations were that about 98% of people were wearing masks in public, and cases continued to rise or were steady. It seems to me that the masks had little to no effect on the spread of the virus.

Also, we can take the case of two people...
My sister is a stay at home mom, with a husband working in a small office. Both followed the rules and wore a mask in public, social distanced, and used hand sanitizer frequently. Both tested positive for covid in November of 2020. Both were mild cases or asymptomatic.
My wife and I are anti mask. My wife is a stay at home mom.. I am a cop in an inner city environment. I go into houses of people who may or may not have the virus several times a day. I go into homeless shelters and hospitals almost every day. If I do wear a mask (which is typically only at the hospital because they flip out if you dont) it is well below my nose. Neither of us have gotten it.

My point is this... there is no evidence (scientific or anecdotal) that the cloth face covering is effective in reducing the spread of the virus. There is evidence of misreporting of the numbers and severity of the virus. There is huge financial gain by the people responsible for reporting the numbers. There is a huge gain of power by the government during a "pandemic".

For those reasons and more, I will not be in fear or wear a mask.

Not to derail my own thread; however you have to question how a mask can stop a virus if you can smell a fart through it.

I was just impressed that a young lady was thinking so logically and shared with the forum.

“My point is this... there is no evidence (scientific or anecdotal) that the cloth face covering is effective in reducing the spread of the virus.“

JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) Insights
February 10, 2021

Effectiveness of Mask Wearing to Control Community Spread of SARS-CoV-2
John T. Brooks, MD1; Jay C. Butler, MD1
Author Affiliations Article Information
JAMA. 2021;325(10):998-999. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.1505

Community mask wearing substantially reduces transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2 ways. First, masks prevent infected persons from exposing others to SARS-CoV-2 by blocking exhalation of virus-containing droplets into the air (termed source control). This aspect of mask wearing is especially important because it is estimated that at least 50% or more of transmissions are from persons who never develop symptoms or those who are in the presymptomatic phase of COVID-19 illness.1 In recent laboratory experiments, multilayer cloth masks were more effective than single-layer masks, blocking as much as 50% to 70% of exhaled small droplets and particles.2,3 In some cases, cloth masks have performed similar to surgical or procedure masks for source control. Second, masks protect uninfected wearers. Masks form a barrier to large respiratory droplets that could land on exposed mucous membranes of the eye, nose, and mouth. Masks can also partially filter out small droplets and particles from inhaled air.

^^^Oh, well I guess it's settled then...

^^^Oh, well I guess it's settled then... Roll Eyes

Just in case you prefer a more “numbers centered analysis:

From the National Center for Biotechnology Information:

Efficacy of face mask in preventing respiratory virus transmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Mingming Liang 1, Liang Gao 2, Ce Cheng 3, Qin Zhou 4, John Patrick Uy 5, Kurt Heiner 6, Chenyu Sun 7
Affiliations expand
PMID: 32473312
PMCID: PMC7253999
DOI: 10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101751
Free PMC article
Abstract
Background: Conflicting recommendations exist related to whether masks have a protective effect on the spread of respiratory viruses.
Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was consulted to report this systematic review. Relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP (Chinese) database.
Results: A total of 21 studies met our inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses suggest that mask use provided a significant protective effect (OR = 0.35 and 95% CI = 0.24-0.51). Use of masks by healthcare workers (HCWs) and non-healthcare workers (Non-HCWs) can reduce the risk of respiratory virus infection by 80% (OR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11-0.37) and 47% (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36-0.79). The protective effect of wearing masks in Asia (OR = 0.31) appeared to be higher than that of Western countries (OR = 0.45). Masks had a protective effect against influenza viruses (OR = 0.55), SARS (OR = 0.26), and SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 0.04). In the subgroups based on different study designs, protective effects of wearing mask were significant in cluster randomized trials and observational studies.
Conclusions: This study adds additional evidence of the enhanced protective value of masks, we stress that the use masks serve as an adjunctive method regarding the COVID-19 outbreak.

Did see that coming, So true.
Democrats and their double standard way of life must stop.

If we have such a divide in "science" it is not settled in the least.

You can post links to individuals or groups findings all you want, but:
1. I can do the same from scientists and groups that oppose those views.
2. Those people are paid to reach those conclusions.

I think that given the financial and political motives, this is one of the rare scenarios where anecdotal evidence should be given equal or greater weight than "scientific" evidence. Look at the states with lax or non existent covid regulations, they are not showing increases in cases. Just as people who don't wear the masks in areas with stri t mask regulations don't contract covid at a higher rate than people who do wear the mask. Common sense should be able to guide your opinion of the masks.

Another thought on "science". I mentioned that the scientists are paid to reach a conclusion.... think confirmation bias. Another factor is that MSM and social media do everything they can to silence science that does not agree with their narrative. Look at global warming. The left is constantly talking about the "science" being settled. Well, you know how that goes. Hardly settled. And science is hardly science any more, just politics.

quote:

Originally posted by beltfed21:
Let's not forget that there are those who are A-symptomatic....carry the virous but are not affected. They can spread it to folks that have underlying conditions that would pretty much kill them if they got the virous.

It's not always about you.

Yet they have no issues with the cost/responsibility of raising their little fuck trophies to society and the taxpayer.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Difference: someone who has Covid can give it to someone else. Someone who's pregnant can't get someone else pregnant.

quote:

Originally posted by Underdog:
Short story short-

The very same people who are pro mask and all about government enforcement of it are the same crowd that are pro-abortion "its my body, etc."

No hypocrisy there at all..

Smokers make the same argument. It's their body, their choice. That's fine outdoors, but what about when you're on an airplane, bus, in a restaurant w/ them? Is it fair to say that if you don't like inhaling second-hand smoke then you should just stay home all the time?

IMHO, required mask-wearing should be left up to the property owner or proprietor. Same goes for smoking. I detest smoking, but I also think clubs & bars should be able to decide if they want to allow it or not rather than municipalities enforcing no-smoking ordinances.

Since we're on the subject of hypocrisy, I've seen it all the time from adamant no-mask people. They say it's their Constitutional right to not wear a mask if they choose, but when they're on someone else's private property and asked to leave, they refuse and throw tantrums. You have the Constitutional right to be on someone else's property? Yeah, I don't think that's covered under free movement.

quote:

Originally posted by bogeyman:
“My point is this... there is no evidence (scientific or anecdotal) that the cloth face covering is effective in reducing the spread of the virus.“

JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) Insights
February 10, 2021

Effectiveness of Mask Wearing to Control Community Spread of SARS-CoV-2
John T. Brooks, MD1; Jay C. Butler, MD1
Author Affiliations Article Information
JAMA. 2021;325(10):998-999. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.1505

Community mask wearing substantially reduces transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2 ways. First, masks prevent infected persons from exposing others to SARS-CoV-2 by blocking exhalation of virus-containing droplets into the air (termed source control). This aspect of mask wearing is especially important because it is estimated that at least 50% or more of transmissions are from persons who never develop symptoms or those who are in the presymptomatic phase of COVID-19 illness.1 In recent laboratory experiments, multilayer cloth masks were more effective than single-layer masks, blocking as much as 50% to 70% of exhaled small droplets and particles.2,3 In some cases, cloth masks have performed similar to surgical or procedure masks for source control. Second, masks protect uninfected wearers. Masks form a barrier to large respiratory droplets that could land on exposed mucous membranes of the eye, nose, and mouth. Masks can also partially filter out small droplets and particles from inhaled air.

There you go, inserting facts into an emotion-based argument.

There is no such thing as "settled science" the very nature of being scientific, or a scientist is to question everything including the results of others.

The only thing "settled" about science is ones perception of what the science results mean.

At one time great minds thought:


The world was flat and you'd fall off the edge
The Earth was the center of the Universe
Pluto was a Planet
That time and space were absolutes and cited as incontrovertible proof a vast literature of peer-reviewed, published studies.
That artificial sweeteners were safe
WMDs were in Iraq
Anna Nicole married for love

Einstein – like Copernicus, Galileo, and scores of other vindicated “deniers” over the centuries – ultimately disproved the vaunted scientific consensus.

By all means, vet your guests carefully – avoid the uncredentialled nut jobs and purely political partisans. But, above all, heed Einstein’s wise words about how science really works.

“No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right,” he observed, “a single experiment can prove me wrong.”

quote:

Just in case you prefer a more “numbers centered analysis:

From the National Center for Biotechnology Information:

Can anybody publish a scientific study prior to 2020 that shows that cloth face covering are effective and stopping viral spread?

Based on my research it appears that science did a 180 just after Covid, and I find that rather interesting.

quote:

You have the Constitutional right to be on someone else's property? Yeah, I don't think that's covered under free movement.

There is a difference when property is open to the public.

If you claim a business can require you to wear something, then by that same logic they should be able to prevent you from wearing something.

Can a business require that all of those who enter be topless?

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
If you claim a business can require you to wear something, then by that same logic they should be able to prevent you from wearing something.

Can a business require that all of those who enter be topless?

"No shirt, no shoes, no service" seems to have survived (at least) my entire lifetime.

quote:

Can a business require that all of those who enter be topless?

As long as it's not discriminatory, not just men, women should be allowed to be topless, and if they want to wear a mask, while topless, on private property, no problemo....

quote:

As long as it's not discriminatory, not just men, women should be allowed to be topless, and if they want to wear a mask, while topless, on private property, no problemo....

You should call your local police department, tell them you own a local business, and ask them what will happen should people be topless in your establishment.

My point being that as a business open to the public, it's not exactly "your business your rules". The government has a hand in what you are and are not allowed to allow on your private property when it's open to the public.

I find it ironic that so many banks which were very anti-mask prior to 2020 are now so accepting. Have you been into your bank with a mask on lately?

quote:

You should call your local police department, tell them you own a local business, and ask them what will happen should people be topless in your establishment.

Nobody said anything about legal.....

quote:

There is no such thing as "settled science" the very nature of being scientific, or a scientist is to question everything including the results of others.

The only thing "settled" about science is ones perception of what the science results mean.

At one time great minds thought:


The world was flat and you'd fall off the edge
The Earth was the center of the Universe
Pluto was a Planet
That time and space were absolutes and cited as incontrovertible proof a vast literature of peer-reviewed, published studies.
That artificial sweeteners were safe
WMDs were in Iraq
Anna Nicole married for love

Much, if not most, of the “science” denial was really religious in nature. The Pope and the church did not want people to believe that the world wasn’t made in six days, or that demons didn’t cause illness, or that humans evolved from lower forms of life, or that God didn’t make the earth the center of his universe. I would hope that most people agree that the scientific method is much more rigorous that it used to be. We’re pretty sure that the world is not flat and that the Earth is not the center of the universe.

I agree that we need to be skeptical about all “new” discoveries. But at what point do we accept the “new” science as fact? I could quote other studies from the CDC, Johns Hopkins, the Cleveland Clinic, et al, that all say that cloth masks work, but it would bore people who agree with those findings and would be rejected by those who disagree as being merely big government propaganda.

By the way, I liked your “Shooter” movie reference.

quote:

all say that cloth masks work

If they all say cloth masks work, then why have people wearing cloth masks become ill?

Furthermore, why aren't more doctors, researchers, and lab personnel wearing cloth masks now?

I rarely interject myself in these kinds of debates, but here goes. Masks, respirators etc. are for the protection of the wearer. If it makes you feel safer to wear one, by all means do so. If it's so effective then the others around you shouldn't have to wear one. You do you, I'll do me. If I get it and die, you can tell me "told you so".

[quote]all say that cloth masks work


If they all say cloth masks work, then why have people wearing cloth masks become ill?

Furthermore, why aren't more doctors, researchers, and lab personnel wearing cloth masks now?

Oh, please. Surely you know (or at least you should) that cloth masks are recommended for the general population in community settings, not hospital settings. No credible study has recommended cloth masks for medical personnel. It is also the scientific consensus that cloth masks reduce, but do not eliminate, one’s chance of contracting Covid 19 while out in public places.

Would you contend that just because people die in automobile accidents in cars equipped with airbags and seatbelts that those devices are worthless? Of course not. They reduce, but do not eliminate, your chances of a serious or fatal accident.