Santelli vs Sorkin - Masking Debate

[sysdevel99]

have you seen what's out there?

What I see is out there is ridiculous forecasts based on fear mongering
https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news...21-20-intl/h_6f8ce2cf0a4ff534fc8bbf48f4374250
I also see a lot of inconsistencies in how countries handle that (remember sweden) with no significant difference in outcome. For someone who understands randomness in trading you have a lot of faith in government messaging and models

 

[d08]

What I see is out there is ridiculous forecasts based on fear mongering
https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news...21-20-intl/h_6f8ce2cf0a4ff534fc8bbf48f4374250
I also see a lot of inconsistencies in how countries handle that (remember sweden) with no significant difference in outcome. For someone who understands randomness in trading you have a lot of faith in government messaging and models

As I'm presently living in a shithole country where the government is a complete failure, I have no faith in government at all, not least in their models because they have none.

The controls here are very strict but many people simply do not follow them, as is typical for developing countries. Officially the city borders are closed, yet people pop out for a day without testing, so the regulation is a joke.

That doesn't change a fact that a simple face mask makes a difference when someone is coughing.

I'm glad you brought up Sweden. They've had the least restrictive policies and the most casualties in the region by far:

Sweden 7,200
Finland 424
Norway 361
Denmark 901​

You can adjust for population but that doesn't change much.

 

[Pekelo]

You'll have to ask yourself if you want the government

It is not a free choice it is a fucking PANDEMIC.

 

[Same Lazy Element]

You'll have to ask yourself if you want the government to "control" this or decide this for yourself.

Cloth masks do not protect the wearer, but rather they prevent the exhalation of the vapor droplets and thus reduce the probability of person to person transmission. So you are not really deciding it for yourself but for others. It's an infectious disease, so if even if you are comfortable with the risk, you can be infecting someone else who is at risk.

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!

LOL, what? We are probably talking about 20% of American population who are at risk based on the pre-existing conditions combined with the age group. But point taken, I have not seen Amerifats trying to eat healthy because of the COVID.

PS. I don't get the whole debate about masks. If we can avoid bigger economic issues by simply wearing masks indoors, isn't it a smart thing to do?

 

[Same Lazy Element]

I'm glad you brought up Sweden. They've had the least restrictive policies and the most casualties in the region by far:

Sweden 7,200
Finland 424
Norway 361
Denmark 901​

You can adjust for population but that doesn't change much.

Well, in fairness, deaths in Sweden are likely to be front-loaded while every other country is spreading them over time in hopes of a better treatment or vaccine. It's not clear if their approach was wrong, to be honest, it was just different. It was a consistent policy and they have stressed that they are doing it to prevent longer term social issues that lockdown-countries will probably have to face.

 

[Overnight]

HUH?

Cloth masks do not protect the wearer, but rather they prevent the exhalation of the vapor droplets and thus reduce the probability of person to person transmission...

FALSE

Masks protect the people wearing them also. Masks do not work one-way only. They protect both inhales and exhales. Fauci and the CDC were fucking morons to say for the past 10 months that masks are to protect other people, not the wearer. Utter idiots. If they had simply stated that masks are to protect yourself, then maybe many more people would have worn them?!?

PS. I don't get the whole debate about masks. If we can avoid bigger economic issues by simply wearing masks indoors, isn't it a smart thing to do?

See above. People are not smart. They think of only themselves, and their "freedom to get sick and die." Take down as many as they can through ignorance? It is the way. Like sugar.

 

[sysdevel99]

Masks protect the people wearing them also. Masks do not work one-way only. They protect both inhales and exhales.

Granted everyone seems to be an infectious disease expert here but some "science" studies tend to find something different
https://fee.org/articles/new-danish-study-finds-masks-don-t-protect-wearers-from-covid-infection/
It's just the largest study on this subject to date - so I'm sure we're better off going with your gut feel on this

 

[Same Lazy Element]

HUH?
FALSE

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/10/20-0948_article

Nobody is saying that it's 1-way filtering, however, as per this paper from CDC it does not provide adequate protection when exposed to the infected people. So the general idea that it is not a PPE, but is an important component for the community spread prevention. I don't see a problem with that.

PS. this paper from 2015 is making the same point pre-COVID: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

HUH?
If they had simply stated that masks are to protect yourself, then maybe many more people would have worn them?!?

It would be yet another bit of COIVD theater. Not that there is anything wrong with that, if it did get people to wear masks.

HUH?
See above. People are not smart. They think of only themselves, and their "freedom to get sick and die." Take down as many as they can through ignorance? It is the way. Like sugar.

That's just bizarre to me. A shutdown of a city is certainly worse than wearing a mask when going shopping. People understand degrees, don't they?

 

[Same Lazy Element]

Granted everyone seems to be an infectious disease expert here but some "science" studies tend to find something different
https://fee.org/articles/new-danish-study-finds-masks-don-t-protect-wearers-from-covid-infection/
It's just the largest study on this subject to date - so I'm sure we're better off going with your gut feel on this

The fact that the mask does not provide protection does not mean you should not wear one. Just like clothing. For example, your pants not only keep you warm but also prevent me from seeing your ugly butt.

 

[Overnight]

...
It's just the largest study on this subject to date - so I'm sure we're better off going with your gut feel on this

Then why don't you read the actual study, instead of politicized Cliffs notes, man?

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

Seriously, read the whole thing, to get some perspective.

The bottom line? Wear the damned mask. It works.