News0 min ago
Here Is Proof, Proof, That Face Masks...........
49 Answers
...........are useless. If they do the job they're supposed to, why is there such a big increase in positive tests? Admit it; they don't serve any purpose do they?
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 10ClarionSt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's proof of no such thing, and, as usual, you're misunderstanding both the statistics and the role that masks are expected to play.
What is true, and has never been in dispute, is that face masks *alone* provide only partial protection, and should be considered only a part of a wider package of measures. These have now been relaxed in the UK, which, coupled with the arrival of the more infectious Delta Variant, is responsible for driving the spread of the disease currently, over and above the effects that mask-wearing is capable of controlling.
What is true, and has never been in dispute, is that face masks *alone* provide only partial protection, and should be considered only a part of a wider package of measures. These have now been relaxed in the UK, which, coupled with the arrival of the more infectious Delta Variant, is responsible for driving the spread of the disease currently, over and above the effects that mask-wearing is capable of controlling.
No, of course they don't. Never thought they did. Fortunately I'm exempt. OH drags his crumpled on out of his pocked when necessary.
It's about getting people to comply, power exercise, appease the plebs., whatever you want to call it. I've even abandoned my 'excused mask' lanyard now. Totally pointless, which is why most governments hesitated a long time before imposing them.
It's about getting people to comply, power exercise, appease the plebs., whatever you want to call it. I've even abandoned my 'excused mask' lanyard now. Totally pointless, which is why most governments hesitated a long time before imposing them.
You said the other day,
"I've done a lot of shopping in my local convenience store where the staff have never worn one and none of the shoppers have either, not when I've been in, anyway. They weren't necessary."
If others elsewhere are behaving in a similar manner, could that be a possible reason for the increase?
"I've done a lot of shopping in my local convenience store where the staff have never worn one and none of the shoppers have either, not when I've been in, anyway. They weren't necessary."
If others elsewhere are behaving in a similar manner, could that be a possible reason for the increase?
As usual jim, you're right aren't you? It's got to be others reading the figures differently to you and getting it wrong, eh jim? Because you say so. Facemasks have done nothing and are ineffective. As far as I can see, there is no clarifying statement on the govt website about how jim interprets the figures.
Also, a more significant factor in the early refusal to recommend mask use was that the more effective N95 masks were in short supply, and clearly needed to be diverted to frontline medical staff. Any disruption to that supply would likely have been disastrous. Since the supply problems have been eased, and since we have a better understanding of the relative effectiveness of simpler masks, the recommendations have changed.
One particular problem, that I can only assume is driving the distrust of their effectiveness, is that cloth masks block around 70% of small particles, compared to approximately 99.6% for the more sophisticated masks. There is no dispute, then, which is better, but 70% protection is still significantly more than 0%.
One particular problem, that I can only assume is driving the distrust of their effectiveness, is that cloth masks block around 70% of small particles, compared to approximately 99.6% for the more sophisticated masks. There is no dispute, then, which is better, but 70% protection is still significantly more than 0%.
The difference is that I'm not just looking at the figures you are providing, but also relying on sources as widespread as the WHO, CDC, BMJ, and other medical authorities, all of whom recommend mask-wearing, and all of whom agree that the claim that masks are "useless" is unsupported by evidence.
See, for example: https:/
See, for example: https:/
I'd also like to point out one thing, that clearly goes missing. I'm just the messenger. This isn't *my* interpretation. I don't own it. I am not claiming that *I* am right. I am claiming only that the medical experts, whose opinion I am reporting as accurately as possible, are right. There is a significant distinction.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
Crosswords12 mins ago
Tory Donor Lord Bamford Funds The Reform...
News13 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.