CDC release study on masks during covid. Efficacy is 0.5-1.9 percent.

[Rockie]

Rockie is this guy published and qualified enough times for you to take the time to listen to his interview?

That boomer will dismiss it because he already made up his mind and he operates on beliefs.

Sounds like ageism to me. Personally I don't think brains/ignorance have anything to do with age, and as an atheist beliefs aren't something I dabble in either.

[OneYonge]

Sounds like ageism to me. Personally I don't think brains/ignorance have anything to do with age, and as an atheist beliefs aren't something I dabble in either.

Are you offended? The word millenial doesn't bother me. There are plenty of things to be said about millenials.

You have obvious religious beliefs toward partisan politics.

When a Scientist says "here is some data, evidence, and a debate to be had"....you insist religiously that "NO a debate on this does not exist"

Ignoring evidence is not SCIENCE.

[montado]

I'm going to be very frank there's no politician in this country that's going to disagree with their chief medical officer uh they just aren't going to do it. They might as well throw a rope around their neck and jump off a bridge. They're done, I'm telling you the facts. It's very simple. - Doug Ford

Doug ain't worried about lives. He's worried about the next election. And there you have it, it's just politics, and the chief medical officer is currently running the province.

You know what this means Ontario!

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/strict-three ... -1.5351152

We are headed back to lockdown! A strict lockdown! Gawd you know after 12 months of this you would think we would have found a way to function... either increase hospital capacity or public measures that effectively stop the spread. Why aren’t masks working? Why 12 months in are we still cycling in and out of lockdown? Many small businesses have net even been able to open up yet and we are already talking about shutting down. Meanwhile life in Texas is normal.

[Rockie]

Are you offended?

About being a boomer or you using the term as an epithet?

You have obvious religious beliefs toward partisan politics.

As I said to someone else earlier, maybe even you, you don't know shit.

Ignoring evidence is not SCIENCE.

Agreed. However giving an outlier dissenting opinion equal weight as a consensus isn't either. Nor does the existence of one mean there's a debate, it's just distracting noise.

[Ruddervator]

I wonder how history will remember us? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_izG_anXpPY

[montado]

I wonder how history will remember us? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_izG_anXpPY

Maybe they will remember those who said 184 million Canadians would be dead if we didn’t have mandatory mask policy... you know the genius people who chime in here to try and change my mind.

Maybe they will remember those who compared covid to Spanish flu, where Spanish flu killed 80x more people per capita.


All the hysterical idiots who acted like they were experiencing the equivalent of WW2. Yeah they will remember the idiots.

[Ruddervator]

you know the genius people who chime in here to try and change my mind.

Nah, I've stopped trying to change your Libertarian mind a long time ago. You'll oppose anything the government does.

I'm just showing all the lurkers that not everyone here shares your beliefs.

Honestly with all the dumpster fires going on here, I should probably go back to lurking too. This place doesn't represent me.

[Rockie]

you know the genius people who chime in here to try and change my mind.

Don’t include me in that group either. I show people that you don’t have a mind.

[OneYonge]

You have obvious religious beliefs toward partisan politics.

As I said to someone else earlier, maybe even you, you don't know shit.

Exactly my point. But I haven't shown any beliefs. You have. That's why it is risk management.
I agree with your current risk decisions, but not when you are also promoting for people to look the other way, against new research.

When you stop looking and just operate on belief...That is religion.

Ignoring evidence is not SCIENCE.

Agreed. However giving an outlier dissenting opinion equal weight as a consensus isn't either. Nor does the existence of one mean there's a debate, it's just distracting noise.

There it is.

Science is NOT about popular votes. "97% vs 3%, therefore 97% is the winner".... That is POLITICS. Not SCIENCE

Noone claimed any dissenting opinion is equal weight. Only the STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE does that.
And that ISN'T up to you. We don't have the tools to evaluate evidence.

It is just "distracting noise"... That is YOUR assessment. In terms of your own time and risk management, that is YOUR CALL.
But in terms of SCIENCE, you don't have a say in it.

Don't fool yourself that you are actually Following the Science by repeating phrases you've just heard.... like "there is no debate".

[Rockie]

Exactly my point. But I haven't shown any beliefs. You have. That's why it is risk management.
I agree with your risk decisions, but you are also promoting for people to look the other way, against new research.
Stop looking and operate on belief...That is religion.

People can look at anything they like, but when the consensus says the opposite (and guidelines) I expect people to follow that as does society. Believe what you want but at a bare minimum you are expected to comply with the guidelines. Not too hard is it OneYonge? I don't see any religion in there.

because you aren't FOLLOWING the SCIENCE. You are doing as I said, Risk Management like everyone else

Complete nonsense. WHEN the consensus says masks are no longer required I will accept that. I will not accept outlier studies going against the consensus saying the same thing. What is so damn hard to understand about something as simple as that? Do I need to know how to build a house in order to live in one? Am I doing a risk assessment that the roof isn't going to collapse on my head? Do you question the viability of GPS because some people with letters behind their name say the world is flat?

Stop making this complicated...it isn't.

[OneYonge]

People can look at anything they like, but when the consensus says the opposite (and guidelines) I expect people to follow that as does society. Believe what you want but at a bare minimum you are expected to comply with the guidelines. Not too hard is it OneYonge? I don't see any religion in there.

I agree. This is my point as well. No arguement here. Except Im not interested in the politics or telling people what to do. That is not up to the Scientists. Science is just a tool. That is the leaders job.

The Religion part is when you are so set in your belief and lie to yourself that experts are not really challenging each other. This is just an act of FAITH.

A new contrarian document comes it...dismiss it! Fine, you aren't the expert, it isn't your job to evaluate.

This has NOTHING to do with the validity of the evidence. So don't pretend it didn't happen.

Go back to my first sentence on the first page.

It is up to the expert making claims, to convince the other scientists...if it is new information... I do not need to pretend that "no debate is happening" just because some journalist or politician said so.

[OneYonge]

WHEN the consensus says masks are no longer required I will accept that.

This is my assessment too. We agree. But you are confusing SCIENCE with POLICY.

The "requirement to wear a mask".. is Policy. Not SCIENCE.

I'm just not interested in fooling people into thinking that experts are not debating, researching and looking into it.

The Science changes. Don't compare this to other things that no experts are currently challenging.

Flat Earthers are conspiracy theorists who IGNORE evidence. This is the dumbest comparison yet.

[OneYonge]

Do I need to know how to build a house in order to live in one? Am I doing a risk assessment that the roof isn't going to collapse on my head?

Did a license carpenter and experts in construction build your house? Or is it some millenial who never touched a hammer before?

I say your decision to live in it was a RISK ASSESSMENT even if you didn't know anything about construction.

[Rockie]

The Religion part is when you are so set in your belief and lie to yourself that experts are not really challenging each other. This is just an act of FAITH.

Science constantly challenges their findings as new evidence is gathered. It's the basis of discovering the evidence based truth which is what science is all about, and I've said so repeatedly. Belief, faith, whatever you want to call it is the fuel of religion, not science. I do not know why you get the impression I think otherwise.

I am not qualified to judge the efficacy of outlier studies and usually don't waste my time reading scientific papers I couldn't possibly understand. The experts do that. I read articles. I watch the news. I watch news conferences. I see what the consensus is of the people who know what they're talking about. Unlike deciphering scientific papers I lack the education for, finding out the scientific consensus is not at all difficult. You just have to be willing to accept it. Many prominent contributors here never seem to be able to do that.

But you are confusing SCIENCE with POLICY.

Again, I don't know where you get that idea. I've said repeatedly government sets policies and guidelines which must first and foremost be based on science. Texas, Minnesota and South Dakota are jurisdictions that do not. Do you not remember me saying that at least twice?

[montado]

I've said repeatedly government sets policies and guidelines which must first and foremost be based on science. Texas, Minnesota and South Dakota are jurisdictions that do not.

Doug Ford has admitted his decisions are based on getting votes in the next election. I am almost certain this is the same reasons politicians in Florida and Texas are making their policy a certain way. Its based on the values of who they represent, not the science.

If 50 percent of Canadians are afraid and want lockdown... you can bet politicians will create policy that solidifies the next election.

Tam didn't change her mind on masks because of science, the science has not changed. She changed her mind on masks because the public had already made up their mind that masks should be worn, as people were afraid and needed something to feel safe.

[trey kule]

893D220D-5678-4CC8-93E6-FBC78D049BAA.jpeg (1.52 MiB) Viewed 2712 times

[complexintentions]

Why is this thread even still continuing?

RedandWhiteBaron ended it with math, on the first page.

The rest is just noise.

Rockie et all: do not give credence to the nutjobs by continuing to engage with them. There is zero to be gained with trying to reason with those of questionable mental stability. Spend your logical resources on something worthy.

[montado]

Why is this thread even still continuing?

RedandWhiteBaron ended it with math, on the first page.

The rest is just noise.

Rockie et all: do not give credence to the nutjobs by continuing to engage with them. There is zero to be gained with trying to reason with those of questionable mental stability. Spend your logical resources on something worthy.

Pretty sure cdc ended it with the science with one of the first studies specifically about mask policy during covid. And the results of the science is that mask policy is only 0.5 to 1.9 percent effective at stopping the spread of covid.

Now knowing that science everyone is telling us their values. Rockie really values mask policy. Others think that every Canadian would be dead 10x if we didn't have mask policy. follow the science.

[ReserveTank]

Why is this thread even still continuing?

RedandWhiteBaron ended it with math, on the first page.

The rest is just noise.

Rockie et all: do not give credence to the nutjobs by continuing to engage with them. There is zero to be gained with trying to reason with those of questionable mental stability. Spend your logical resources on something worthy.

Pretty sure cdc ended it with the science with one of the first studies specifically about mask policy during covid. And the results of the science is that mask policy is only 0.5 to 1.9 percent effective at stopping the spread of covid.

An average of 1.2% efficacy for 0.058% risk. Negligible efficacy, negligible results. Ridiculous statistical insignificance. They do not work in the general public.

Math doesn't lie, but here's the problem: It's the mid-wit population. Smart enough to follow orders, not smart enough to know when they're being swindled. This is the problem with mass culture. People raised on Disney, TV, and McBurgers become addicted and fully dependent on the mass culture complex to feed them everything. It doesn't matter if it's news, entertainment, or terrible food. They are dependent on the state (through these large enterprises), just as a baby bird with its mouth wide open waiting for Parent Government Bird to vomit pablum in its mouth.

Science constantly challenges their findings as new evidence is gathered

Nice try, baby bird. Mask science has not changed in decades. They were meant for surgeons not to breathe bacteria into your open guts, not for general practice.

WHEN the consensus says masks are no longer required I will accept that.

You mean the POLITICAL consensus.

[Rockie]

Rockie et all: do not give credence to the nutjobs by continuing to engage with them.

I don't think OneYonge is a nutjob. Reservetank, Montado, Rjguy....definitely. Those guys are too far gone for reason and just need to be ridiculed.

[OneYonge]

I do not know why you get the impression I think otherwise.

Only because you keep insisting "there is no debate". That was your response when I said there are Scientists who don't agree with each other.

It doesn't if matter if it is 97% vs 3%. It isn't based on popular vote.

Like yourself, I'll bet on the 97% if that is even current.

But I'm not digging my heels in. If they get swayed by new research, I won't ignore it.

Science and research, is ONGOING. When you say it is already DONE, that says you think research should stop.

Acknowledge that, and I know for sure you aren't just believing things blindly.

[Rockie]

You like your semantics OneYonge. 97/3 means the debate is effectively over and decisions need to be made. Those decisions are made on the consensus, so until the consensus changes we go with plan "A" or "B" or whatever. Will you accept that policy needs to be made at some point and the consensus scientific opinion is what it should be made from? If so then let's stop dancing around semantics when we ultimately agree.

[OneYonge]

Why is this thread even still continuing?

I'm not sure to be honest. Rockie and I agree pretty much, but for different reasons.

The guy insists on fighting me because he thinks he understands Science but he is just talking politics.

The angry schoolmarming tactics of "just do as you are told" type of politics isn't really helpful either. Some folks think just this is persuasive.

[OneYonge]

97/3 means the debate is effectively over and decisions need to be made.

That isn't how it works. Science isn't settled by popular vote. How many times do you want to read that?

Did you know that Scientists have standards? Widespread Randomized Clinical Trials are the gold standard. But they can't do that for logisticsl/ethical reasons.

So Scientists do the best they can with what research they have. Unfortunately, the pandemic necessitates decisions with limited information.

Everyone will have to make decisions based on RISK MANAGEMENT. The political leaders....their job is to look at a bigger picture than just science.

The science however...is ONGOING.

[OneYonge]

Will you accept that policy needs to be made at some point and the consensus scientific opinion is what it should be made from?

Yes I agree policies have to be made. And we do agree that choosing to wear a mask sounds like a pretty good idea.

But I told you, MANDATES and POLICIES are a different subject. POLITICS depends on where you are. I have no opinion on that.

If you are implying that Science ultimately gives political prescriptions....I disagree.

Science is just a tool, they present data. Whether something needs to be a policy or not..that is the area of POLITICS. So stop confusing SCIENCE with POLITICS.

This whole "follow the science" line and "believe in SCIENCE" lines....are POLITICAL slogans. That can be thrown right back at you.
You'll always find contrarians who can present you with Science the says to OPPOSITE.