Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

tadmjones

Regulars
  • Posts

    2009
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

Everything posted by tadmjones

  1. What degree of negligence do you assign to someone becoming infected by a disease?
  2. If universal masking wasn’t only appropriate and polite but also possesses an appreciable efficacy , wouldn’t their use delay herd immunity, prolonging the danger to the vulnerable ?
  3. That’s precisely the point, without a mask I rarely spread snot and phlegm, I always cover my nose and mouth if I were to sneeze or cough . Cloth face masks don’t stop aerosolized particles , so how is it they help contain spread ?
  4. No what I am saying is that in the regard of this one thing to do , mask wearing, keeping my phlegm and snot on my face is not helping to ‘fight the spread’. I can and do interact with others without exchanging copious amounts of bodily fluid, without a face diaper. Cloth masks offer little to no filtration of aerosolized virus particles, and whatever spread stopping efficacy isn’t worth the effort. In fact given the oblivious amounts of misuse in the general public , they most likely increase germ spread.
  5. Properly fitted n95 and higher rated filtration devices could help prevent casual spread. Cloth mask efficacy doesn’t even come close. Any medical protection they provide against aerosolized virus particles is negligible. Just as the article in the OP states, their efficacy is the political statement they convey. There is very little that can be done in a practical way to stop viral spread, aside from physical isolation which is by definition impractical. Modalities that ensure air circulation to decrease viral load in the ambient environment would have more efficacy against spread. Regardless , concentrating energies on therapeutics and care for the medical consequences of infection should be the only political concern. Virtue signally won’t get you any closer to the futile goal of stopping the spread . It would be instructive to see how many cases of hospitalizations to treat pneumonia are currently from bacterial infections.Though given the level of trust I currently have in ‘official’ reports coming from our ‘institutions’, my confirmation bias will probably win out, lol. I wear a cloth mask where it is required for entry or participation, but not because I think that action has much medical significance, just because it is required.
  6. Germs accumulate on the outer surfaces and are more easily incorporated by virtue of concentration during handling. The inner surface will concentrate any germs that are normally carried away by normal expirations . Co2 is less easily expelled when exhalation is slowed. Is this the level of protection , or spread slowing effects proven to outweigh any negative effects? Are you guaranteed to be providing a meaningful benefit to your fellows and them to you by wearing a mask as a default action?
  7. Do you have research that shows long term cloth mask use is not unhealthy? I am under the impression that doing so increases chances of contracting bacterial infections and compromises proper gas exchange. The human population is constantly under threat of communicable disease , are you suggesting cloth face coverings should be worn at all times in public? Burkas for everyone ?
  8. People wear masks because they are in fear of the China Death Plague . It was never a social norm in the west to mask to prevent disease. Overhead fans in public areas would have more utility.
  9. So it was the fault of civil disobedience coupled with a fundamental lack of understanding of how masks work among the infectious disease experts?
  10. Refusing ? In the US at the start , the accepted counsel from the experts was that masks weren't necessary. So if there was a failure to contain spread due to a lack of masks or distancing it would be silly to blame it on civil disobedience.
  11. A year ago, in LA you could have got on your bicycle rode to a sidewalk cafe and Tweeted that and any other sentiment you liked.
  12. You can make allowances for any rules, as long as you are the rule maker. The question is whether or not these rules , the masking and the social distancing rules in place in the USA in 2020 are in anyway beneficial to anyone's health and well being. Personally I believe they are being imposed as a means of control, a way to train the populace for compliance. And it's working, a year ago if someone said the government were going to confiscate most privately held businesses and obliterate the middle class they would have been derided as paranoid. Now that it's happening , few are doing anything about it.
  13. The level of burden is relative and any is more than none. Asthmatic individuals can suffer adversely from breathing restrictions and care givers of the non-ambulatory disabled can not maintain distance. I find the level of compliance to be heavily burdensome just by virtue of the annoyance, my quality of life is affected by regulation and not the biology. One is and should be avoidable. Given the level of medical knowledge and technologies and a better current understanding of the China Death Plague almost all responses from government is overblown and it is becoming increasingly obvious purposefully so.
  14. I'd assume everyone who has so far contributed to this conversation has a general understanding of biology, I'll just go ahead and count myself as one. Viruses 'travel' through populations and there is in a very real practical sense, nothing that can be done about the spread. If the entire population were to maneuver around in positive pressure suits we may be able to slow spread to very appreciable amounts, but given the time, resources and energies required that solution is for all purposes impossible. So in the real everyday modern world, does social distancing @6 feet and cloth face coverings have an appreciable effect on spread ? I lean toward the effort not being worth it. Avoiding all human contact via self isolation would be the best approach sans special equipment for particulate filtration. The gist of the conversation , seems more geared toward what actions are required from individuals in order to be considered acting morally toward fellows. If requiring individuals to take heavily burdensome actions in some shared sense of safety is a moral and legitimate aim, is it for every instance of communicable disease or just 'this' one?( Notwithstanding any actions one may want to employ geared toward their own personal 'safety'.)
  15. So anytime there is evidence that a communicable disease is making its way through a population , face masks and social distancing are the rational and moral mode of behavior? Or just with the China Death Plague ? Is there any evidence that social distancing and face masks prevent spread?
  16. My estimation of Trump’s support led me to believe that he would win re-election and that if he didn’t win , it would be because of vote count manipulation. Sharing that sentiment cemented my conspiratorial nature and had me being branded as beyond naive and prey to vicious lies designed to overthrow the rule of law. I have to say I’m still comfortable in my deluded state and not ready to abandon it. The liars’ lies still seem plausible, the lies only seem to be more and more plausible , are they that well crafted ? Am I still blinded and completely deluded?
  17. I do like tactical deceptions, more to the point . How long has it been , since a billion dollars is just a billion dollars, seriously 10 yrs ? Biden's peacocking at the CFR about having the juice to withhold the billion from Ukraine.. " ..and son of bitch he got fired..." was an example of how endemic the corruption and pilfering of the US really is , no ? The right sees it as an excuse to voice an uproar against Biden's personal corruption but with no equal uproar about an aid package like that for Ukraine, and that was a billion in what 2015 or 14 ? How many packages are doled out like that every year to how many entities? Yeah Trump didn't convince enough of the electorate to win a second term, that's what got him.
  18. It’s only going one way Build Back Better . Enjoy
  19. I’m saying it is beyond obvious that the “media” colluded with Biden’s campaign to provide the most favorable coverage possible , including stifling information harmful to the campaign and Biden personally, while simultaneously attacking Trump. Odd that Trump’s impeachment wasn’t a talking point . One would think impeachment would cast doubt on a president’s credibility.
  20. So the DNC/ Biden persuaded a majority of voters to view their policies as good ? A majority of American voters back the Democrat Party platform? Biden as a leader articulated a cohesive enough argument to persuade a majority? The campaign had no advantage or assistance to their efforts in formulating the presentation and dissemination of their policies that Trump’s campaign did not enjoy to the same extent? The main media and social media platforms acted independently and covered the candidates in equitable fashion. Seeing or pointing out bias in treatment to the respective campaigns is fringe thinking ? Or is the argument that media plays a negligible role in affecting public opinion? Covid coverage, riot coverage none of it was slanted and or had little effect?
  21. I think you mean Tom Rorow. All the credible sources say he was fired for disputing the president’s false claim of fraudulent elections.
  22. DA I feel duped. From now on I’ll only trust the credible sources , I almost fell for the disinformation on Hunter Biden too. All that crap just to denigrate the most honorable majority vote getter, that extremely capable salt of the earth humble public servant.
  23. 3 hours ago, tadmjones said: I believe there is a concerted effort between the establishment/deep state/media/big tech to remove Trump and install Biden. I think the pandemic provided 'them' opportunity to increase the level of chicanery in the way the election was carried out. Okay, I wish we had a label that said "fringe nutjobs, do not feed". ok, Jack, I'll go on hunger strike
×
×
  • Create New...