Masks??????

[xsubsailor]

I think masks are going to be around for a while since the big boys (Hanes and Fruit of the Loom) started making them.  Manufacturers with money attract Politicians. 

[bersaguy]

On 7/18/2020 at 10:35 AM, xsubsailor said:

I think masks are going to be around for a while since the big boys (Hanes and Fruit of the Loom) started making them.  Manufacturers with money attract Politicians. 

I think you are 100% dead on cause once people become accustom to wearing them and there is any chance to catch anything airborne many people will elect to wear them.

[Quavodus]

I'm wearing one right now............

[Garufa]

 

[Raoul]

.........

Edited July 20, 2020 by Raoul

[E4 No More]

I would remind folks that wearing even an N95 mask that is properly fitted is NOT going to 100% keep you from getting the virus. If it was that effective then researchers would be wearing them rather than fully sealed body suits with independent fresh air pumped into them when dealing with deadly viruses. Latest research indicates that they reduce your chances of getting COVID by 65%. You can still get the virus through your eyes or by your fingers. The virus can blow into your eyes where it gets washed down into the lacrimal ducts and into your respiratory system.

You still need to practice hand-cleansing/sanitizing regularly along with keeping your fingers out of your eyes, mouth, and nose to reduce your chances further. 

[bud]

.

Edited December 24, 2020 by bud

[FUJIMO]

22 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

 

You still need to practice hand-cleansing/sanitizing regularly along with keeping your fingers out of your eyes, mouth, and nose to reduce your chances further. 

This is the latest issue I'm noticing. We started with hand sanitizer and washing hands. But when we moved on to the mask the former took a backseat and now you have people wearing around a catch all funk rag. Not to mention the masks are now littering up everything like cigarette butts. But I guess that's O K

Makes me wonder what we are preventing and what we are prolonging

[gregintenn]

40 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

I would remind folks that wearing even an N95 mask that is properly fitted is NOT going to 100% keep you from getting the virus. If it was that effective then researchers would be wearing them rather than fully sealed body suits with independent fresh air pumped into them when dealing with deadly viruses. Latest research indicates that they reduce your chances of getting COVID by 65%. You can still get the virus through your eyes or by your fingers. The virus can blow into your eyes where it gets washed down into the lacrimal ducts and into your respiratory system.

You still need to practice hand-cleansing/sanitizing regularly along with keeping your fingers out of your eyes, mouth, and nose to reduce your chances further. 

Or you can say “screw it!” and go on about the business of living life.

[Erik88]

1 hour ago, Garufa said:

 

What a guy. First he told us he wouldn't wear a mask and now that COVID is growing exponentially he's suddenly "Patriotic". 

 

[Garufa]

4 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

What a guy. First he told us he wouldn't wear a mask and now that COVID is growing exponentially he's suddenly "Patriotic". 

 

There are plenty of Trumpeteers who might suddenly start wearing one now.

[Erik88]

3 minutes ago, Garufa said:

There are plenty of Trumpeteers who might suddenly start wearing one now.

Oh I firmly believe that if he had actually worn one from the start that the number of people against it would be substantially smaller. Trump is a very influential guy. There have been many, many times where he has said or tweeted something and within a few days I've seen those same words get repeated on this forum. People don't seem to realize just how much of an impact he has. 

[DWARREN123]

Also remember that the virus may be on your skin and clothing/shoes.

[Omega]

2 hours ago, Erik88 said:

Oh I firmly believe that if he had actually worn one from the start that the number of people against it would be substantially smaller. Trump is a very influential guy. There have been many, many times where he has said or tweeted something and within a few days I've seen those same words get repeated on this forum. People don't seem to realize just how much of an impact he has. 

Well since he is wearing one I guess I should ignore my instincts and mask up too 

[chances R]

folks, nothing is 100%, but if it decreases your odds of catching Covid, then, IMO it's worth it, especially combined with social distancing, hand washing,  hand sanitizer, etc.

 

[Smith]

12 minutes ago, chances R said:

folks, nothing is 100%, but if it decreases your odds of catching Covid, then, IMO it's worth it, especially combined with social distancing, hand washing,  hand sanitizer, etc.

 

Decreasing odds in one category often increases them in another. That's the nature of a dynamic relationship. 

For instance, reducing contamination in one category statistically increases the odds of contacting unforseen diseases in other categories. Not to mention weaking an immunity system designed around exposure. The best immunity is herd immunity and isolation is proven to be very bad for both the above.

While I am trying not to get it, the best thing I could do is get the virus. Statistically I'm better off that way than any other.

[chances R]

2 minutes ago, Smith said:

Decreasing odds in one category often increases them in another. That's the nature of a dynamic relationship. 

For instance, reducing contamination in one category statistically increases the odds of contacting unforseen diseases in other categories. Not to mention weaking an immunity system designed around exposure. The best immunity is herd immunity and isolation is proven to be very bad for both the above.

While I am trying not to get it, the best thing I could do is get the virus. Statistically I'm better off that way than any other.

Herd immunity naturally sacrifices many, and now some experts say it is not a practical way to fight Covid.  

[Smith]

1 minute ago, chances R said:

Herd immunity naturally sacrifices many, and now some experts say it is not a practical way to fight Covid.  

It's not the way you fight any disease, it is the result of fighting a disease. The purpose of reducing the curve is to let herd immunity develope while maximizing resources for those that need more intensive and invasive treatment. Meaning controlled exposure is necessary and as important as eliminating contact. You need both. 

[chances R]

As a PA who sees patients everyday, I believe I will trust the science and articles I receive daily to guide my safety and practice.  You may rely on whatever you feel gives you the best chance for your safety.

[Smith]

2 minutes ago, chances R said:

As a PA who sees patients everyday, I believe I will trust the science and articles I receive daily to guide my safety and practice.  You may rely on whatever you feel gives you the best chance for your safety.

Haha, than you shouldn't be in a gun forum, because "eliminating guns saves lives, so we shouldn't resist". It's literally the same argument on the same premise with identical moral and philosophical points. 

I can show you just as many studies, journals, physicians, articles, etc to the contrary. 

There is a reason doctors "practice" medicine. Arogance and assumptions in a dynamic event is not good medicine. Good doctors know that, bad doctors talk a lot.

[xsubsailor]

31 minutes ago, Smith said:

Haha, than you shouldn't be in a gun forum, because "eliminating guns saves lives, so we shouldn't resist". It's literally the same argument on the same premise with identical moral and philosophical points. 

I can show you just as many studies, journals, physicians, articles, etc to the contrary. 

There is a reason doctors "practice" medicine. Arogance and assumptions in a dynamic event is not good medicine. Good doctors know that, bad doctors talk a lot.

       IMHO

Edited July 21, 2020 by xsubsailor

[Smith]

8 minutes ago, xsubsailor said:

       IMHO

Interesting, care to elaborate?

[xsubsailor]

8 minutes ago, Smith said:

Interesting, care to elaborate?

NO

[E4 No More]

10 hours ago, chances R said:

As a PA who sees patients everyday, I believe I will trust the science and articles I receive daily to guide my safety and practice.  You may rely on whatever you feel gives you the best chance for your safety.

And which "science" would that be? I ask because "science" has been giving us conflicting information. Example: We were told that the virus is genetically stable making an eventual vaccine possible, but other reports say it's mutating easily like a cold virus does.

I also find it humorous that people will throw out the word "science" as if that is the trump card of truth. Scientists are wrong a lot. Scientist are all about shouting their theories and mumbling their retractions, and when you call them on it they simply say, "We were acting on the best evidence that we had at the time." They've even gone as far as to preempt being wrong by removing "scientific laws" from their verbiage so that they are covered in the event they are later proven wrong, or to justify a hypothesis like, "Gravity didn't exist in the singularity." Science has even replaced religion for many people, and they don't even realize it. For example, they preach that all of the matter in the universe was compressed into a singularity, and that thermodynamics and gravity didn't exist. Many don't question this because scientists said it was so, but those same people will attack people of faith for doing the same thing. Their god is science, and they'll believe ANYTHING as long as the word "science" is attached to it.

Don't get me wrong: science is mostly good, but it is not absolute.

[Omega]

Is this where we are headed?

https://fox17.com/news/local/kentucky-couple-placed-on-house-arrest-after-refusing-to-sign-self-quarantine-papers-07-20-2020-114710044?utm_source=second-street&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=COVID-19+House+Arrest