Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by tadmjones

  1. How false flaggy would it get , if Congress was briefed on intel from FBI that said antifa was going to infiltrate and agitate the Trump supporters with the intent to target the Capitol? And then the Capitol Police refused help from different agencies the day of ? And then the Chief of the Capitol Police resigns after denying being read into the intel, does that get false flaggyish?
  2. If no one is being duped or tricked, why are they being told they risk death by living?
  3. The original function of cloth masks was to keep secretions from falling into open wounds during surgical procedures. The point of wearing cloth masks in public in 2020-01 is a political/virtue signal. The weak justification for the medical necessity of universal cloth masking is that they will stop infectious spread. You can do a quick test of the efficacy of cloth masks in stopping aerosolised particles by exhaling in frigid temperatures or say 'vaping' and seeing the 'trail' of suspended particles.
  4. My comment up thread was speaking to the efficacy of cloth masks re germ spread. Mask wearing tends to increase secretions of mucous, at least from what I’ve noticed. I never used to have a problem with keeping my secretions off of others. Thankfully now it’s even less a concern. Got your six bro, masked up! Alone together we’ll beat this !
  5. I still stand with my original remark . Of course no one can say there is no danger. I assess the danger of highway travel every time I go to the store and act accordingly.
  6. For the majority of the general public what is specifically dangerous re rapid transmission ? In the context of actual threat to health and safety , what makes this particular danger more dangerous than other dangers faced in a modern division of labor society with the given state of medical and technological sophistication we enjoy?
  7. Interacting with people in public without any symptoms of disease or infection isn’t dangerous to the public. The masks worn by the majority of the public have little or no medical efficacy. The majority of the public isn’t at risk of dying due to an infection. Face diapers say you care for people who for whatever reason believe or act as if covid is an actual reoccurrence of the Black Death.
  8. I’m my normal friendly and outgoing casual shopper and even more conspicuously, consciously while wearing my Trump 2020 mask.
  9. Would knowledge of the technicalities be a relevant factor in assigning negligence?
  10. What degree of negligence do you assign to someone becoming infected by a disease?
  11. 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 ?
  12. 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 ?
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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?
  16. 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 ?
  17. 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.
  18. So it was the fault of civil disobedience coupled with a fundamental lack of understanding of how masks work among the infectious disease experts?
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. 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'.)
  • Create New...