Masks work!

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/sci...details-importance-fighting-covid-19-rcna1858

Evidence that masks work against COVID
A huge randomized study offers evidence that wearing masks reduces the spread of COVID-19, and that surgical masks work even better than cloth ones. The ambitious study involved more than 340,000 people in 600 villages in Bangladesh. Villages and households were randomly assigned to receive free cloth or surgical masks and other mask-promotion strategies, or no interventions at all. Researchers observed the impact on people’s behaviour at hotspots such as tea stalls and markets. Participants were quizzed about any coronavirus symptoms, and symptomatic individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The interventions tripled the proportion of people who wore masks correctly. Overall, in the villages where the team distributed masks, symptomatic infections were 9.3% lower. Where surgical masks were given out, the results were even better: infections dropped by 11%. Older people benefited most: symptomatic COVID-19 in people over 60 went down by 35% in the villages using surgical masks.
Thought I would put this in a new thread to hightlight that masks work!
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/sci...details-importance-fighting-covid-19-rcna1858



Thought I would put this in a new thread to hightlight that masks work!
Really! A study in Bangladesh, from random villages. A country where less than 1% of the population has ever been infected(1.5M/163M). Lets just Ignore the 816K people who have already recovered naturally. Lets just Ignore its mortality rate of 1.8%(98.2% survival rate). Were there any other variables that were included in this study, that you would like to deposit? Or, was wearing/not wearing masks, THE ONLY VARIABLE? Seems a bit of a conformation bias to me.

How many in this control group were even infected(remember the people were randomly selected from different villages)? Logically, less than 1% of the control group could have been infected. The assumption seems to have been based only on the conclusions. Not on any direct causes. Were there any other independent evidence used to explain this assumptive link? By ignoring any other causal links, this study becomes just another presumption fallacy. "We already know the conclusion, so lets just find the facts to support it".

Should our citizens continue to wear masks indefinitely? Should we continue to isolate our citizens indefinitely? Should we continue to destroy our society, economy, and country indefinitely? Especially, from a viral disease that has a mortality rate of less than 1%, for those who have not yet recovered? This is exactly the example where the treatment does not match the illness. Where the hype has now become the only truth.


We know that masks may afford some small protection against spreading this virus. But very little. Science tells us that viruses are just too small. They can linger in the air or on many surfaces. They can enter the body through the eyes, or the sides of any masks(fitted or not). My point is, if you want to wear a mask, or force your children to wear a mask, then that is YOUR business. But don't force me to participate in your madness. If light can go through a mask, then so can a virus.

But this all begs the simple and obvious question. If you believe that masks will ultimately protect you from this disease, or from spreading this disease, then are you NOT also protected from those who ARE infected and NOT wearing masks? So, what is your gripe against those who choose NOT to wear a mask? There are just as many reasons to justify NOT wearing a mask, as there are for wearing a mask. But for some biased reason, you seem to ignore the "cons" for wearing masks, and embrace only the "pros" for wearing masks.

People are now coming foreword. And, this madness is now being taken before the highest courts(Australia). NOTHING can stop something that can be dormant for millions of years. Nothing can stop something that is only alive when it has a host. NOTHING!! All we can do is treat the illness, not prevent the illness. And, it is delusional to think otherwise!
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
Masks help contain droplets we exhale and therefore help lower the spread of the virus.

But if we really want to stop wearing masks forever, we need our population to be vaccinated against the disease. We know that people who have had Covid have antibodies now, but unvaccinated people are filling our hospitals and ICUs.

Most vaccinated people have a shorter period of illness and with milder symptoms - like I did. If 100% of the population was vaccinated, there might not be any practical reason to have to wear masks.
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
Trouble is: viruses mutate. Delta variant and now a mu variant has popped up.

Vaccinate, wear masks, avoid crowds, socially distance where possible.
 

Texan

Active member
Masks help contain droplets we exhale and therefore help lower the spread of the virus.

But if we really want to stop wearing masks forever, we need our population to be vaccinated against the disease. We know that people who have had Covid have antibodies now, but unvaccinated people are filling our hospitals and ICUs.

Most vaccinated people have a shorter period of illness and with milder symptoms - like I did. If 100% of the population was vaccinated, there might not be any practical reason to have to wear masks.
I've had dozens of vaccines. I am not an anti-vaxxer, but I am against mandatory vaccination. Big pharma is not held responsible for any ill effects. I don't need a vaccine and don't want to take the risk. This is a slippery slope and it leads to many more forced vaccinations. The newest studies out of Israel show that those with natural immunity are more than 6X less likely to get sick with covid than those fully vaccinated. Why don't they mandate "antibody ID cards? Answer: They don't care about our health. They only care about public compliance and big pharma dollars pouring into their pockets through lobbyists.


Also, I can't spread something I don't have.
 
Last edited:

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
I've had dozens of vaccines. I am not an anti-vaxxer, but I am against mandatory vaccination. Big pharma is not held responsible for any ill effects. I don't need a vaccine and don't want to take the risk. This is a slippery slope and it leads to many more forced vaccinations. The newest studies out of Israel show that those with natural immunity are more than 6X less likely to get sick with covid than those fully vaccinated. Why don't they mandate "antibody ID cards? Answer: They don't care about our health. They only care about public compliance and big pharma dollars pouring into their pockets through lobbyists.


Also, I can't spread something I don't have.
Finally someone who is NOT mindlessly parroting government hype, or trying to rationalize what is obviously irrational.

If you duct-taped layers of toilet paper across your face, government sycophants and toadies could make the same claims that they are making now. Both masks and toilet paper slow the spread of Covid-19. Both masks and toilet paper keep mucus trapped within the masks. They both offer some protection from you being infected with Covid-19. They both offer some protection from you infecting others. And, they both in the most general sense, could be said to be slowing the spread of this disease.

But why are they NOT addressing these most obvious questions?

If over 98% of the Australians population are NOT infected with the virus, have tested negative for the virus, or have recovered from the virus, then why are they wearing masks?

What are people without Covid-19 wearing masks for? What are they protecting other people from? Bad breath?

Should people be forced to stick something in their bodies, just because the government tells them that they must do so? Can anyone see the slippery slope that this will obviously lead to? This natural right of deciding what goes into our bodies should always be sacrosanct.

Why are we destroying our country and our society? Because of a virus, with a mortality rate less than that of the measles?

Why would anyone listen to a government, that has millions invested in mRNA research and in Pfizer Pharmaceuticals?

Why should 98% of the population need to suffer, because of less than 1% of the population with a less than 2% mortality rate?

If people choose to stick genetically-altering drugs into their bodies, that is their right. If people want to wear mask to feel secure from this illness, that is also their right. But don't shame or force me to do the same. I actually KNOW what these vaccines do, and how ineffective masks are. Just look at how many healthcare workers have been infected(the 2nd most infected group)! And, they use the best masks available.

Please Vote these idiots out!! They care only about money, power, and their own legacy. The people are just sheep to them. And, the people certainly act like sheep. Sit. Stay. Good Boy.
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
I've had dozens of vaccines. I am not an anti-vaxxer, but I am against mandatory vaccination. Big pharma is not held responsible for any ill effects. I don't need a vaccine and don't want to take the risk. This is a slippery slope and it leads to many more forced vaccinations. The newest studies out of Israel show that those with natural immunity are more than 6X less likely to get sick with covid than those fully vaccinated. Why don't they mandate "antibody ID cards? Answer: They don't care about our health. They only care about public compliance and big pharma dollars pouring into their pockets through lobbyists.


Also, I can't spread something I don't have.
I think that, unless a person chooses to live like a hermit for the rest of their life, most everyone is going to get Covid sooner or later. Therefore, I think we are heading towards having certain groups of people.

Those who haven't gotten it yet,
Those who have gotten it while vaccinated,
Those who have gotten it while unvaccinated,
Those who have survived it, whether vaccinated or not,
Those who have survived it with no long term bad effect,
Those who have survived it with long term bad effect,
And those who didn't survive it.

I got it while vaccinated, and my illness was short with mild symptoms and no long term effect. I believe the vaccination helped me fight the illness. I think it would be fair to say that I am a pro-vaxxer.

But I'm still an American, and I don't care for coercive measures, like threatening people with their jobs if they don't vaccinate.

Vaccination doesn't prevent a person from getting sick. It didn't stop me from getting sick. I do believe it helps fight off the illness when you get sick. The vast majority of people who are being hospitalized or who are dying are unvaccinated. But that was their choice. I know that sounds cold, but it is true.

The rationale behind forcing people to vaccinate is that it will stop the spread. Vaccinating may slow the spread but it will not stop it. I think it will lessen the effect of the spread, but not stop it. There is no question that vaccinated people have a much higher survival rate and a much lower rate of hospitalization than unvaccinated people. So vaccinating is really not so much about stopping the spread and protecting others, but, instead, about protecting oneself and surviving the illness when you get it.

I think people who choose not to vaccinate are taking a risk. I don't agree with that choice. But life is full of risks, and this is a risk people should be free to take.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
I think that, unless a person chooses to live like a hermit for the rest of their life, most everyone is going to get Covid sooner or later. Therefore, I think we are heading towards having certain groups of people.
Even if not one person ever recovered naturally from Covid-19. Even if not one person ever was vaccinated specifically for Covid-19. Even if not one person ever wore a mask, or kept 2 meters apart from each other. Even if the "herd immunity" was never reached. And, even if we use todays population stats, and the total number of those infected,

It would still take over 6 centuries for this virus to infect everyone in Australia(if Australia was completely isolated).

593 days(Jan 26th, 2020-Selt 10th, 2021)/69,923 total Australian Covid-19 cases x No. of days to infect everyone/26M Australians x 1 year/ No. of days in a year = 604.10 years(or over 6 centuries).

For America it would take13.17 years. For the world it would take 56.9 years(or almost six decades).

But of course, this is not how nature works is it? We all have our NATURAL immune system to protect us from dying from ANY pathogen, right? Therefore, the overwhelming majority of victims will survive. They will also pass on this trait to their offspring. Herd immunity will always be achieved naturally. Whether people are vaccinated or not. Therefore it is a fact, that over time NO ONE would be infected, rather than everyone would be infected. So, fear-mongering that everyone will inevitably become infected is irresponsible, misleading, and totally inaccurate. Unless you have any objective data that can supports this claim?

I think people who choose not to vaccinate are taking a risk. I don't agree with that choice. But life is full of risks, and this is a risk people should be free to take.
If you had a 95%+ chance of NOT becoming infected, and an over 98%+ chance of surviving anyway, I certainly would not call that a risk in any sense. If you had an over 95% chance of winning the lottery, would you buy a ticket? Of course you would. So why are you saying this?

I think it would be fair to say that I am a pro-vaxxer.
I would prefer to be an "informed" vaxxer. You can't just make the false assumption, that those unvaccinated people who have died from Covid-19 in hospitals, died because they were NOT vaccinated. This is a logical fallacy(argument from ignorance). These people may have died from another illness. This information is not mentioned to avoid context. And, I certainly don't care how inconvenienced a hospital is by the number of patients. Or, the patient's decisions. Even mass murderers are treated.

There is no question that vaccinated people have a much higher survival rate and a much lower rate of hospitalization than unvaccinated people
There are no definitive studies that proves this! This is just another conclusion based on self-serving assumptions. I bet if we took the survival rate of all the unvaccinated people BEFORE vaccines were even thought of, and compared it to the survival rate of vaccinated people, I think that the survival rate of unvaccinated people would be greater hands down.

I agree that, as long as your immune system is healthy, creating covid-19 specific antibodies will certainly lessen the symptoms for this disease. But it will do nothing for the symptoms caused by the cold, or the flu viruses. Or, for any of their variants, or for any other pathogen. We are trying to tailor our immune system to become only pathogen-specific. Unless you are aged, have an already compromised immune system, or are fighting some chronic illness, the immune system doesn't need any help. So, I prefer to let my natural antibodies fight ALL the pathogens(and their variants), that try to attack my body. Not to genetically instruct my cells to create antigens, to make my immune system attack them.

Why do you talk as though it is the vaccine that is stopping, or slowing down this virus? It is ONLY our immune system that fights this virus(or any virus). If it is weak, then you are screwed, VACCINATED OR NOT!! Who do you think is making out like a fat rat, because of our ignorance and gullibility? Sit. Stay. Good Boy.
 
Last edited:
Top