- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why Haven’t We Been Able to Develop a Mask that Protects the Wearer?
Posted on 3/4/21 at 10:28 am to Ingeniero
Posted on 3/4/21 at 10:28 am to Ingeniero
quote:
You can believe in the efficacy of masks in reducing transmission while still supporting your statement. I don't want to rely on other people doing something properly to protect myself, which is why I'll get the vaccine when it's available to me.
The masks probably help some but creating a “law” that is totally unenforceable to “mandate” the use just causes another set of problems. At the end of the day, we are a YEAR into this. We know WHO is very vulnerable to Covid and who is not. We ALSO know how to better treat it as well if you get it. We ALSO have a very effective vaccine to prevent it.
People like to compare Covid to the Bubonic Plague. Hell Greg Popovich just went on a rant about all the deaths that will be caused by lifting the TX mask mandate even though the data from GA and Fl says otherwise.
A N95 mask is more effective to not catch the virus than relying on someone to wear the 20-40% effective mask to protect you. Could we do both sure but you are in the realm of diminishing returns. We could require our kids to walk around knee pads and elbow pads to prevent a bunch of injuries but is it worth the hassle.
Plus I just really hate the waste associated with all the disposable masks. We were worried about straws but now we have millions of masks thrown in the trash everyday.
This post was edited on 3/4/21 at 11:31 am
0
Posted on 3/4/21 at 11:19 am to STEVED00
Stay home and you won’t need a mask. That way the rest of us that don’t give a shite about wearing mask could enjoy life like it used to be
Posted on 3/4/21 at 11:28 am to Salmon
quote:Which? Genuinely interested and will check out later.
not all of them, no
Posted on 3/4/21 at 11:30 am to Ingeniero
quote:
This board would conclude that because condoms aren't 100% effective, they're 0% effective.
States with strict mask rules aren’t outperforming states with limited restrictions.
This post was edited on 3/4/21 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 3/4/21 at 11:34 am to Lima Whiskey
quote:
States with strict mask rules aren’t outperforming states with loose rules.
This. Also In the condom scenario, is the woman in this situation expecting the man to be the sole preventer of her getting pregnant? She can do other more effective things in order to ensure that doesn’t happen.
This post was edited on 3/4/21 at 11:58 am
Posted on 3/4/21 at 12:17 pm to Landmass
quote:
Even if masks did work, which they don't, it's not the government's role to mandate them.
3. "Wear yours to protect others" is a socialist propaganda tactic.
What are they gonna do next? Make us wear seatbelts or obey speed limits! fricking Commies!!!!
Posted on 3/4/21 at 12:29 pm to Bert Macklin FBI
quote:
Make us wear seatbelts or obey speed limits! fricking Commies!!!!
Laws were actually drafted by the legislative processes and enacted prior to seat belts being “required”. None of that happened with the “mask”. Also let’s not forget the seat belt protects the wearer and not the person in the car next to you.
Maybe the actual mandate should be that we REQUIRE declared vulnerable people to wear an N95 or better mask for their OWN PROTECTION. Wouldn’t that be more logical??
While we are at it. Why don’t we mandate declared vulnerable people to stay at home for their own protection. Wouldn’t that be more logical since they are the small amount of actual people we are trying to protect!!
That’s not what we did. We forced everyone to wear marginally effective PPE (and lockdown society in general) instead of forcing vulnerable people to take effective actions (PPE and self isolation) to prevent themselves from getting the virus.
This post was edited on 3/4/21 at 12:33 pm
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:17 pm to Lima Whiskey
quote:
States with strict mask rules aren’t outperforming states with limited restrictions.
Multiple studies say differently. You can't just look at "do they have a mask mandate" vs cases per capita.
quote:
Regression analysis demonstrated that weekly hospitalization growth rates declined by 2.9 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.3–5.5) among adults aged 40–64 years during the first 2 weeks after implementing statewide mask mandates. After mask mandates had been implemented for =3 weeks, hospitalization growth rates declined by 5.6 percentage points among persons aged 18–39 years (95% CI = 0.9–10.4) and those aged 40–64 years (95% CI = 1.0–10.2). Statewide mask mandates might be associated with reductions in SARS-CoV-2 transmission and might contribute to reductions in COVID-19 hospitalization growth rates, compared with growth rates during <4 weeks before implementation of the mandate and the implementation week.
Decline in COVID-19 Hospitalization Growth Rates Associated with Statewide Mask Mandates — 10 States, March–October 2020
quote:
The study provides direct evidence on the effectiveness of widespread community use of face masks from a natural experiment that evaluated the effects of state government mandates in the US for face mask use in public on COVID-19 spread. Fifteen states plus Washington, D.C., mandated face mask use between April 8 and May 15. Using an event study that examined daily changes in county-level COVID-19 growth rates, the study found that mandating public use of face masks was associated with a reduction in the COVID-19 daily growth rate. Specifically, we found that the average daily county-level growth rate decreases by 0.9, 1.1, 1.4, 1.7, and 2.0 percentage points in 1–5, 6–10, 11–15, 16–20, and 21 or more days after signing, respectively.
Community Use Of Face Masks And COVID-19: Evidence From A Natural Experiment Of State Mandates In The US
Again, none of this is to say that mandates need to continue or that masking needs to be enforced by fines, etc.
This post was edited on 3/4/21 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:18 pm to TaderSalad
quote:
No it doesn't. You ever check out what the folks that work in labs wear when dealing with viruses?
Yes, when fit properly, they do.
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:18 pm to STEVED00
a plastic bag would do just fine
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:22 pm to Ingeniero
That literally proves nothing. There was a slight decline in case percentage after a mask mandate.
Who is to say they wouldn’t have decreased without the mandate?
Just sounds reasonable so we’ll attribute it to a mask mandate despite no evidence
Who is to say they wouldn’t have decreased without the mandate?
Just sounds reasonable so we’ll attribute it to a mask mandate despite no evidence
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:25 pm to Ingeniero
Could this be that many states that have mask mandates ALSO are very restrictive in what you can and cannot do. Social distancing is a much BETTER way to prevent spread than wearing a mask. If a state has a mask mandate and also restricts gathering sizes than you would be comparing apples to oranges if the state allowed larger gatherings as long as a mask is worn.
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:30 pm to STEVED00
Those studies are useless
Could be people acting more cautiously when in public, deciding to stay at home more often, having less options to go out and do things, literally many other things. No way to possibly prove its from mask use. Its all bullshite to try to justify more bull shite
Could be people acting more cautiously when in public, deciding to stay at home more often, having less options to go out and do things, literally many other things. No way to possibly prove its from mask use. Its all bullshite to try to justify more bull shite
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:45 pm to WaydownSouth
Totally non scientific opinion.
I think if you are face to face, inside, with someone else and one of you have COVID, you'd be better off with both of you wearing a mask. even a surgical one.
I doubt masks have much of an effect when you are out in public, in grocery stores, passing on a sidewalk etc. Places where you aren't around random people for more than a few seconds at a time.
The place where masks would probably help the most, is the place no one, including me, wants to wear them, at home.
I think if you are face to face, inside, with someone else and one of you have COVID, you'd be better off with both of you wearing a mask. even a surgical one.
I doubt masks have much of an effect when you are out in public, in grocery stores, passing on a sidewalk etc. Places where you aren't around random people for more than a few seconds at a time.
The place where masks would probably help the most, is the place no one, including me, wants to wear them, at home.
Posted on 3/4/21 at 1:59 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
Regression analysis demonstrated that weekly hospitalization growth rates declined by 2.9 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.3–5.5) among adults aged 40–64 years during the first 2 weeks after implementing statewide mask mandates
You realize that when you add in all of the other variables such as more social distancing, fewer public events, more scared people, etc. that a 2.9% decrease is absolutely pathetic right?
I mean at what point do we actually admit that masks and scaring people are worth something?
ETA: Oh shite the governments scared a huge portion of the population into just staying at home and being scared, that was sooo worth a 1% decrease!!! Winning!
I think Masks help, certainly. I don't think they help enough to be any sort of a big deal.
This post was edited on 3/4/21 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 3/4/21 at 2:03 pm to heatom2
quote:
The place where masks would probably help the most, is the place no one, including me, wants to wear them, at home.
100%
and this is something that both the pro mandate and "masks do nothing" crowd don't want to admit
Posted on 3/4/21 at 2:07 pm to Tony The Tiger
N95 is 95% particulates. Not airborne virus.
There still isn’t a reputable study out there that proves it’s effectiveness against viral transmission. Mandates are purely a “it can’t hurt” type of measure.
There still isn’t a reputable study out there that proves it’s effectiveness against viral transmission. Mandates are purely a “it can’t hurt” type of measure.
Posted on 3/4/21 at 2:09 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
N95 is 95% particulates. Not airborne virus.
there is no evidence that COVID is airborne FWIW
Posted on 3/4/21 at 2:41 pm to Salmon
A lot fewer people in Baton Rouge are wearing masks today.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News