Santelli vs Sorkin - Masking Debate

[Pekelo]

Yeah, right. Show me the stats, show me the proof. What if everyone is wearing a mask ?

Not sure whom you are addressing, but the obvious factual answer is that the spread is going to be much less.

Except it is really hard if not impossible to drink and eat in a mask, so a restaurant is different from an office, for example. Or in a church, there is a huge difference between a masked, music from the speaker service and an unmasked sing your heart out service.

Why do I have to explain this? But who knows maybe you were talking to someone else.

 

[SunTrader]

Yeah, right. Show me the stats, show me the proof. What if everyone is wearing a mask ?

LOL show you the stats ... that the more people cluster closely the more likely they are to catch something uhhhhhhhh contagious.

And its kinda hard for everyone wearing a mask in a restaurant to eat their food don't ya say?

Any other silly questions?

 

[d08]

Agreed, but why not institute a law requiring restaurant employees to be tested every day instead of shutting down the restaurants and bars ?
That's makes common sense, right ?
Oh, wait...that's gone out the window with this crisis. All of these mayors and governors are just "shooting from the hips".

That doesn't help. You can be a carrier and test negative, it doesn't show immediately. In a grocery you can manage to keep distance and avoid buying foods that have been handled by humans. In a restaurant that is impossible.

Emily Landon, MD, an epidemiologist and infectious diseases specialist at the University of Chicago Medicine, told NPR that the COVID-19 contagion takes at least three to five days after exposure to test positive. Given the lack of reliability for results, "a negative test shouldn't be seen as your ticket to stop being cautious," the outlet reports.

 

[Overnight]

...In a grocery you can manage to keep distance and avoid buying foods that have been handled by humans. In a restaurant that is impossible...

Are there no restaurants left that cook their food? Or even households for that matter.

 

[sysdevel99]

In a relatively small, closed space with a returning air via air condition one guest can easily infect a dozen other customers. Even testing employees everyday doesn't prevent them spreading it before the test actually shows positivity. not to mention we may don't have that many tests or who would apply those tests, the boss?

You'll have to ask yourself if you want the government to "control" this or decide this for yourself. If you feel this is too risky for you - nobody is forcing you to eat out. On the other hand if you've had the virus already and have anti-bodies you may not be that worried.

 

[Option_Attack]

 

[SunTrader]

This year ignorance has absolutely no limits.

Taking precautions is about not spreading the virus further and further. Not just about oneself getting it.

 

[d08]

You'll have to ask yourself if you want the government to "control" this or decide this for yourself. If you feel this is too risky for you - nobody is forcing you to eat out. On the other hand if you've had the virus already and have anti-bodies you may not be that worried.

Not so simple in an epidemic. When hospitals are full and there are no beds, idiots will still take risks and then cry being victims when hospitals leave them to die. This assumption that people are well informed and make balanced decisions is ludicrous, have you seen what's out there?

 

[d08]

Are there no restaurants left that cook their food? Or even households for that matter.

Doesn't matter. Parts of meals are typically lukewarm at best, one cough by the chef on it is enough. Even touching the side of the plate will do.

 

[traction]

From a complete numbers view it appears that the 2% at risk expect the 98% to support them without limits.
Risk reward skew, especially as the 2% don't appear to be trying to boost their immune system or health themselves. I haven't seen an increase in wheatgrass smoothies or gym memberships at least!