Masks, why not just have a national referendum?

[Thinkinoutsidethebox]

We have the technology, it could be an online vote, majority rules and let the chips fall where they may. It could be binding for a month, six months, a year, whatever.

Actually how come nobody has created a "live" pole for this, everybody gets to vote something like once each month and there is a live tally of the pro and anti mask positions. It would be interesting to see how it would ebb and flow over time. 

If no mask wins and many die as a result it's on the majority. 

What do you think? 

[Argus]

9 minutes ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

We have the technology, it could be an online vote, majority rules and let the chips fall where they may. It could be binding for a month, six months, a year, whatever.

Actually how come nobody has created a "live" pole for this, everybody gets to vote something like once each month and there is a live tally of the pro and anti mask positions. It would be interesting to see how it would ebb and flow over time. 

If no mask wins and many die as a result it's on the majority. 

What do you think? 

The last poll I saw said 83% of Canadians want government to order people to wear masks. So I'm not sure why we would waste the time and money doing an online vote.

[OftenWrong]

I don't think there's an argument for no masks, that's just not on. The masks are already being worn to the extent they can be, and with good compliance, so what is there to be gained here?

[Infidel Dog]

Here ya go...you got another vote:

 

[Thinkinoutsidethebox]

The idea would be the public votes, it's official and we can shut the hell up about it till a week or two before the next vote. 

Quess I'm just being an idealist eh? 

Infidel Dog, if this was the seatbelt law we'd be seeing exactly the same video. 

[dialamah]

7 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Here ya go...you got another vote:

 

OMG.  We have a vaccine on the way, mask wearing is a limited time effort.  Kids aren't going to be traumatized by mask wearing for a few months; they'll be more traumatized by dead relatives.  

And toilet paper shortage = communism?  How absolutely f#cking stupid can anti-maskers get?

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

The idea would be the public votes, it's official and we can shut the hell up about it till a week or two before the next vote. 

Anti-maskers would lose in a landslide; only the moronic minority think masks are some kind of plot.  Most people understand that masks help reduce the spread of Covid, that they aren't a cure or foolproof, and that its a small inconvenience to help protect "the vulnerable".

[Infidel Dog]

My new favorite YouTube commentator up there makes a fun comment when she's talking about the elitist perpetrated conspiracy theory of a global warming apocalypse.

"Now why anyone in their right mind would think it's a good idea to give the very elitists who destroyed the planet more power to now save the planet is beyond me, but hey, we're talking about the same species who eats tide pods and thinks polyester can protect you from a virus."

 

 

Edited November 25, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

My new favorite YouTube commentator up there makes a fun comment when she's talking about the elitist perpetrated conspiracy theory of a global warming apocalypse.

"Now why anyone in their right mind would think it's a good idea to give the very elitists who destroyed the planet more power to now save the planet is beyond me, but hey, we're talking about the same species who eats tide pods and thinks polyester can protect you from a virus."

 

 

As has been mentioned before, masks are not the only thing you should do, it's only an assist.

This anti-mask campaign is stupid.  You may as well tell people to not bother washing their hands, because even people who wash their hands get sick; same with social distancing.  As a matter of fact, nothing is 100% foolproof, so why bother trying to reduce the spread at all?

The lack of ability of anti-maskers to figure out that mitigation of risk is a valid objective, and is not the same as eliminating risk, is astounding.

 

Edited November 25, 2020 by dialamah

[dialamah]

From the Lancet.

TLDR:  putting masks on patients can help protect healthcare workers from getting TB, influenza and Covid. 

Masks to prevent transmission from the wearer

Although surgical masks offer little protection from inhaled agents, they have a role in protecting health-care workers when worn by patients. Placing surgical masks on patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis decreased transmission to guinea pigs by 56%,

¹³⁸

 and masking of patients with cystic fibrosis reduced P aeruginosa air contamination by 8%.

¹³⁹

 Surgical masks reduced the quantity of influenza viral RNA by 2·8 times in small particles and by 25 times in large ones.

⁴⁵

 More recently, surgical masks effectively reduced large droplets (>5 μm) of seasonal coronaviruses from three of ten patients to 0 of 11 (p=0·09) and small aerosols (<5 μm) from four of ten patients to 0 of 11 (p=0·04).

⁴⁷

 Similarly, surgical masks reduced droplets of influenza from six of 23 to one of 27 (p=0·04). However, the reduction in influenza small aerosols (<5 μm) was not significant. There is mounting evidence suggesting that the wearing of masks can reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in community and health-care settings.

[Infidel Dog]

54 minutes ago, dialamah said:

As has been mentioned before, masks are not the only thing you should do, it's only an assist.

This anti-mask campaign is stupid.  You may as well tell people to not bother washing their hands, because even people who wash their hands get sick; same with social distancing.  As a matter of fact, nothing is 100% foolproof, so why bother trying to reduce the spread at all?

The lack of ability of anti-maskers to figure out that mitigation of risk is a valid objective, and is not the same as eliminating risk, is astounding.

 

I'd be happy to talk about some of the other things.

For example give me the science behind shutting down schools - if you want to go there?

Or you could address the concerns of the guy below on lock downs in general.

Or do you just mean common sense stuff like wash you hands? Because nobody's critiquing that.

It isn't ant-masking that's the line many don't want to cross. If you want to wear a bacteria catcher that should be up to you. What might be opposed would be "mask mandates."

Are you saying opposing "mask mandates" is stupid?

I won't say supporting the questionable effectiveness of masks with mask mandates is stupid. It's very clever if what you want to do is show evidence of your ability to exercise excessive authority and from there push lock downs and from there, who knows.

[Infidel Dog]

I countered the claims on the efficacy of masks once before. I suspect you didn't see it Di, because I didn't get a reply.

No problem. Here it is again beginning with the most recent study from Denmark:

Quote

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/18/major-study-finds-masks-dont-reduce-covid-19-infection-rates/

Doesn't sound like the Dutch are big maskers:

Dutch Medical Experts Have Said That Masks Don’t Stop The Spread Of COVID

And we know Sweden's not.

So you know what would be interesting?

Comparing place like that in Northern Europe where they don't appear to be pushing for masks to places in Southern Europe where they have mask mandates like Spain and Italy

So here's where you can find the data and see the graphs for:

Denmark: Population about 6 million

Sweden: Sweden Population about 10 million

Netherlands: Population about 17 million

Versus:

Spain: Population about 47 million

and 

Italy: Population about 60 million

I looked it over and it doesn't inspire me to run to the drug store for masks.

 

[Thinkinoutsidethebox]

23 hours ago, dialamah said:

Anti-maskers would lose in a landslide; only the moronic minority think masks are some kind of plot.  Most people understand that masks help reduce the spread of Covid, that they aren't a cure or foolproof, and that its a small inconvenience to help protect "the vulnerable".

Problem solved 

[dialamah]

18 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Are you saying opposing "mask mandates" is stupid?

Mask mandates wouldn't be required if the moronic minority weren't advocating against masks and social distancing.  There wouldn't need to be businesses closed down or curfews if people, even the young and "invulnerable" had paid attention to Public Health advice to avoid crowds and wear a mask.  Its the irresponsible among us that ultimately requires mandates and causes businesses to have to shutter.

Edited November 26, 2020 by dialamah

[Infidel Dog]

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

There wouldn't need to be businesses closed down or curfews if people, even the young and "invulnerable" had paid attention to Public Health advice to avoid crowds and wear a mask.

You mean unlike in Sweden where they don't pay much attention to regulating mask wearing but can wear them if they want to? Because I heard they're currently doing much better than us or Southern Europe where there are mask mandates.

I don't get the impression Anti-lockdown protesters are opposing social distancing, hand washing or even wearing masks if one chooses to. It's the unnecessary authoritarianism of lockdown regulations and the practice of making the cure worse than the disease  (unless you happen to be one of the elite on top making the rules and not necessarily obeying them) the anti-lockdown people are against.

Edited November 26, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Boges]

5 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

You mean unlike in Sweden where they don't pay much attention to regulating mask wearing but can wear them if they want to? Because I heard they're currently doing much better than us or Southern Europe where there are mask mandates.

I don't get the impression Anti-lockdown protesters are opposing social distancing, hand washing or even wearing masks if one chooses to. It's the unnecessary authoritarianism of lockdown regulations and the practice of making the cure worse than the disease  (unless you happen to be one of the elite on top making the rules and not necessarily obeying them) the anti-lockdown people are against.

Sweden is not doing well with COVID-19 right now. Need a new talking point. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/covid-19-case-surge-forces-sweden-rethink-strategy-praised-u-n1248545

Edited November 26, 2020 by Boges

[Infidel Dog]

I think you need to reread the quote. I said:

Quote

I heard they're currently doing much better than us or Southern Europe

So if you want to disprove that you could click on the links I gave above for Mask mandate countries like Spain or Italy.

Sweden has a population of about 10 million. Spain about 50 million and Italy about 60 million. I rounded them out so you can do the math.

Sweden had 236 thousand cases. Spain has had about 7 times as many Chi-Comm cases as Sweden and about 7 times as many deaths. You would expect them to have only about 5 times as many by population.

Italy has about 6 times as many cases as Sweden and about 8 times as many deaths.

No great advantage to masks there.

It's true there was a recent wave of cases in Sweden. The cases peak averaged around 5 thousand. Deaths during the same period were around 30. What you forgot to show us is there were also waves in Spain and Italy. Spain peak averaged about 20,000 cases which compares well with Sweden by population but it had about 400 average deaths for the peak which doesn't. Italy peak averaged about 6 times as many cases but about 20 times as many deaths as Sweden. Not so good. One might even say Sweden did much better during the recent European peak than Italy.

So what was that you were saying about needing a new talking point? Why would I need that when the old one works so well when all the data is considered?

Edited November 26, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Infidel Dog]

Thanks for making me look though Boges. I'd never noticed the discrepancy between cases to deaths / non-mask mandate to mask mandate. I think deaths are the stat that matters. I wonder why Sweden did so much better with a low death count during the recent wave although not so good with cases.

[Boges]

You could also compare Sweden to a country like Canada where mask wearing is generally universal. It doesn't compare nearly as favourably. Ditto with a countries like Denmark and Germany. To focus it only Southern Europe nations would be a very narrow focus. The UK is also struggling with the disease. 

The point is that Sweden has enforced Social Distancing and small group mandates because of a recent spike. Personal responsibility can only do so much. 

I think it's evident that co-morbidities and age of those infected play a huge factor in death rate of Covid-19. New treatments also reduce death rates. 

Which is why America's resistance to Mask wearing and social distancing is so perplexing. Their death rate has reached the point is was in May where there wasn't any proven treatment for the disease. 

 

[OftenWrong]

On 11/26/2020 at 1:44 PM, Boges said:

Sweden is not doing well with COVID-19 right now. Need a new talking point. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/covid-19-case-surge-forces-sweden-rethink-strategy-praised-u-n1248545

Good news for Sweden is, as a country, they're only 20-30 deaths per day.

It proves the infection is difficult to control, but the damage it does to society can be controlled.

We are worse.