Proof of How Universal Mask Wearing Stops Covid Spread ?

[Tsing Tao]

Leg day, done.

It's interesting, writing down my "dilemma" seemed to help my rational brain win. I also used an old trick from Duhigg's book, The Power of Habit (make your kids read it today!):
"I'm not actually going to do legs, I'm just putting on my shorts." Lizard brain doesn't react.
"I'm not actually going to do legs, I'm just warming up with light, painless weights." Again, no reaction.
"I'm not actually going to do legs, I'm just going to do a couple of reps with this weight." Hmm.
"Hey, that wasn't bad, let's keep going...!"

I've used an old martial arts trick that implies a greater penalty for non-compliance than compliance

I've been running about 15-20 miles a week now. Probably for the last year and a half, gradually increasing distance with some off days built on speed. The knees have lodged a formal complaint but thus far, they've not refused to comply.

Neighbor saw me a week back and said "see you running all the time. You gettin' ready for something?" I looked at him thoughtfully and said "old age."

He nodded sagely.

I turn 50 in 5 months.

 

[userque]

We live in a society where medicalvrisk and health risks are accepted everyday. Why are you not arguing to ban left turns, driving over 20 mph, hang gliding, flying in planes. Driving in rain. Etc.

The risks an individual takes is up to them. A doctor can advise surgery, a patient can decline. Based on the odds, medical experts--if not just the patient's doctor--can conclude that the patient is making a poor assessment of the risks.

I argued that posters hear are arguing as though those who wear masks shouldn't worry, which doesn't take into account that there is still a probability of infection, even while wearing a mask. So maskers do indeed benefit if others also wear masks.

I argued the same regarding taking the vaccine.

I made no arguments regarding driving, hang gliding, planes, or rain.

You did not really make an argument if you are not putting the risk and the mitigation efforts and our rights and freedoms into the equation...plus I never read about the overall harm...nor the morality of destroying the lives of the young and healthy and all the businesses which were shut.

The risks associated with catching the virus while masked vs. unmasked; vaxxed vs unvaxxed; distance vs close; stand on their own, and are a matter of math and or experiments. They have nothing to do with some mathematical variable called 'freedom.'

We could have achieved the same results or better easily... without the non data based stupidity. Thankfully we have area which chose freedom.

You can't go back in time; do things your way; come back; and tell us how things would have turned out.

Freedom has restrictions; they are called laws, rules, regulations, and codes. If you don't like anyone of them, there is a process for you.

 

[wrbtrader]

The risks an individual takes is up to them. A doctor can advise surgery, a patient can decline. Based on the odds, medical experts--if not just the patient's doctor--can conclude that the patient is making a poor assessment of the risks.

I argued that posters hear are arguing as though those who wear masks shouldn't worry, which doesn't take into account that there is still a probability of infection, even while wearing a mask. So maskers do indeed benefit if others also wear masks.

I argued the same regarding taking the vaccine.

I made no arguments regarding driving, hang gliding, planes, or rain.

The risks associated with catching the virus while masked vs. unmasked; vaxxed vs unvaxxed; distance vs close; stand on their own, and are a matter of math and or experiments. They have nothing to do with some mathematical variable called 'freedom.'

You can't go back in time; do things your way; come back; and tell us how things would have turned out.

Freedom has restrictions; they are called laws, rules, regulations, and codes. If you don't like anyone of them, there is a process for you.

Best damn summary in a long while.

wrbtrader

 

[userque]

Best damn summary in a long while.

wrbtrader

Thanks Bro.

 

[jem]

Wow you are probably so compromised mentally you don't even understand you just made an argument for autocratic society not based on the good of the people.

Luckily we live in a Society in the west where the govt is supposed to serve the best interest of many while still protecting the rights of the few.

Your argument was right out of the Soviet Union play book.
Well done.


Obviously you did not understand the analogies I was making to the "risky" activities we allow (almost all activities carry risk to some) ... In the west we weigh the risk vs the reward before we restrict freedoms.

If you don't understand that point... you don't understand the point of living in the west and having freedom.

The risks an individual takes is up to them. A doctor can advise surgery, a patient can decline. Based on the odds, medical experts--if not just the patient's doctor--can conclude that the patient is making a poor assessment of the risks.

I argued that posters hear are arguing as though those who wear masks shouldn't worry, which doesn't take into account that there is still a probability of infection, even while wearing a mask. So maskers do indeed benefit if others also wear masks.

I argued the same regarding taking the vaccine.

I made no arguments regarding driving, hang gliding, planes, or rain.

The risks associated with catching the virus while masked vs. unmasked; vaxxed vs unvaxxed; distance vs close; stand on their own, and are a matter of math and or experiments. They have nothing to do with some mathematical variable called 'freedom.'

You can't go back in time; do things your way; come back; and tell us how things would have turned out.

Freedom has restrictions; they are called laws, rules, regulations, and codes. If you don't like anyone of them, there is a process for you.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

Wow you are probably so compromised mentally you don't even understand you just made an argument for autocratic society not based on the good of the people.

Luckily we live in a Society in the west where the govt is supposed to serve the best interest of them many while still protecting the basic rights of the few.

Your argument was right out of the Soviet Union play book.
Well done.


Obviously you did not understand the analogies I was making to risky activities we allow... In the west we weigh the risk vs the reward before we restrict freedoms.

If you don't understand that point... you don't understand the point of living in the west and having freedom.

 

[userque]

Wow you are probably so compromised mentally you don't even understand you just made an argument for autocratic society not based on the good of the people.

Luckily we live in a Society in the west where the govt is supposed to serve the best interest of many while still protecting the rights of the few.

Your argument was right out of the Soviet Union play book.
Well done.


Obviously you did not understand the analogies I was making to the "risky" activities we allow (almost all activities carry risk to some) ... In the west we weigh the risk vs the reward before we restrict freedoms.

If you don't understand that point... you don't understand the point of living in the west and having freedom.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[jem]

This is for anyone?
When does this end?
There will always be risk. Introverts may love this shit... but its not normal.
It does harm.

Are we going to have to wear masks and deal other freedom destructions to protect the immuno compromised the rest of our lives? is that what you pro Covid fear type all desire?


Can you even quantify the risk of Covid to a healthy person who has been vaccinated?
Do they have to fear Covid more than the flu or shingles?

 

[Cuddles]

If you ever source any COVID information from reliable mainstream sources then we can have a discussion. It is not worth the time to discuss nonsense from COVID-deniers on Twitter and FB that have already been marked as FALSE INFORMATION. Once again I will encourage you to educate yourself with science-based facts about COVID instead of the drivel you have been promoting.

CITATION NEEDED --- otherwise it's bullshiat.

and we mean main stream media -- not internet nut sites.

Are you attacking the source again --- rather than refuting the FACTS provided by a well-respected main stream media source.

Let's take a look at the media source you are claiming is a "Florida paper who hates DeSantis and has a narrative to push".

South Florida Sun-Sentinel
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/south-florida-sun-sentinel/

Overall, we rate the South Florida Sun-Sentinel Least Biased based on balanced editorials. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record.

Find a source from a main stream news site rather than the twisted fringe pushing this.

Navid Keshavarz-Nia does not even have a LinkedIn profile. He has one published work in 2011 which was his dissertation. His one man firm, Black Key Solutions, ran out of his house appears to earn a mere $148K per year. He tries to sell himself as an expert security speaker -- yet he has been invited to only one security conference in 2017 over the past decade. Yet he claims to have 30 years vice president and senior director in INFOSEC (Information Security)--- yet can't name a single company he has worked for -- beyond his consulting firm. The guy is a self-pumped up nobody with a questionable "resume".

The claims made in his affidavit don't even rise to the minimum acceptable evidence for information security assertions. No proper details. No proper technology terms describing his "proof".

interesting

Look at Slartibartfast once again quoting the Onion like it was actual news while hiding the url.

Well to be fair, the Onion is more factual then CNN, MSNBC and CBS.