Face Coverings - whose authority?

[ctwo]

The problem I have, bo, is with inconsistency, and whether a mask has any significant impact when worn outdoors. I believe DR SLO said that is unnecessary (is anyone going to argue with him?), and I think some others have said that those that are wearing them outdoors or while driving just don't get it... I can understand how it could be of benefit if walking around in crowded areas, but not as a blanket rule.

A related point is about who is making law? If this is a county health officer's jurisdiction then that is where direction should be coming from.

One last point is that everyone seemed to agree that masks increase the wearer's risk of infection. I think one of the Dr's or someone else here posted links to studies and other data supporting that.

Anyway, project all you want. Damn those headlines too!

 

[bojangle]

The problem I have, bo, is with inconsistency, and whether a mask has any significant impact when worn outdoors. I believe DR SLO said that is unnecessary (is anyone going to argue with him?), and I think some others have said that those that are wearing them outdoors or while driving just don't get it... I can understand how it could be of benefit if walking around in crowded areas, but not as a blanket rule.

A related point is about who is making law? If this is a county health officer's jurisdiction then that is where direction should be coming from.

One last point is that everyone seemed to agree that masks increase the wearer's risk of infection. I think one of the Dr's or someone else here posted links to studies and other data supporting that.

Anyway, project all you want. Damn those headlines too!

I don't believe masks are beneficial, or should be necessary, if driving alone in a car (or with household members) or when outside, if you can stay away from others. Mask orders I've seen don't require them in those circumstances either. I haven't read the one from Palo Alto and haven't seen the law they cite for it. It is a newly voted in municipal code? Something else?

I think having everyone wear non-PPE masks, or even PPE as long as there's no exhale valve, in crowded public spaces, and indoor public spaces and work spaces does help reduce transmission of the infection. This is important due to the spread by asymptmatic people. So if we hope to get back to something closer to normal, masks should become the new normal for a while.

I want things opened up as much as possible. If we don't take precautions, and infections spike up, it won't last long. Then we're back to full SIP.

 

[ctwo]

I don't believe masks are beneficial, or should be necessary, if driving alone in a car (or with household members) or when outside, if you can stay away from others. Mask orders I've seen don't require them in those circumstances either. I haven't read the one from Palo Alto and haven't seen the law they cite for it. It is a newly voted in municipal code? Something else?

I think having everyone wear non-PPE masks, or even PPE as long as there's no exhale valve, in crowded public spaces, and indoor public spaces and work spaces does help reduce transmission of the infection. This is important due to the spread by asymptmatic people. So if we hope to get back to something closer to normal, masks should become the new normal for a while.

I want things opened up as much as possible. If we don't take precautions, and infections spike up, it won't last long. Then we're back to full SIP.

The actions need to have sound basis and be effective.

It was a direct email from the city (news@cityofpaloalto.org). I get several from counties and cities due to being involved in a variety of locations, so not the specific order, but I copied some of the email text above. Maybe the email is hyped...

I'm all for taking the appropriate actions and support that. The info/direction from various levels of government are in contradiction and that is frustrating.

 

[Holeshot]

Ctwo, yes you should be alert about the legality of orders from any bureaucrat, directly and specifically, where the authority is derived from.

Supervisors and legislators are missing in action. Their role in our current world is to promulgate legislation and rule sets for this type of environment we're living in. Yet, they're not. They're letting this fall on department heads, mayors, and the Governors. The liability trail to these people is not a good thing for them.

Where are the lawmakers? Did I miss their legislating actions?

 

[littlebeast]

ffs - you’re standing on the tracks, and someone is yelling train TRAIN TRAIN, and the best you’ve got is getting into a protracted debate about the minutia of train avoidance? and who’s call that is. what. the. actual. fuck?!?!

 

[jpl]

From the World Health Organization website.

...the wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and carries uncertainties and critical risks.

 

[Abacinator]

I'll just cross post this

 

[Snaggy]

I put this in another thread too, but even speech is spreading thousands of infectious droplets per second from asymptomatic carriers. You know that moisture that condenses on the inside of your mask? That would contain viruses if you were a carrier, even if you weren't coughing or sneezing.This is why this thing is so very contagious.

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/05/12/2006874117



.

 

[Caddywumpus]

From the World Health Organization website.

...the wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and carries uncertainties and critical risks.

The WHO is a joke.

Masks prevent infected droplets from leaving and infecting others

 

[Climber]

The WHO is a joke.

Masks reduce (to varying degrees, depending on mask material) infected droplets from leaving and infecting others

FTFY

 

[Climber]

Sign of the (selfish) times...

Airlines have instructed flight crews to not let masks lead to in-flight disruptions

U.S. airlines have all rolled out new policies requiring travelers to wear masks when they board and fly in an effort to keep passengers and employees as safe as possible from the coronavirus.

But crew members are being told to avoid escalating a situation once in the air if a passenger refuses to keep the mask on. There are exceptions for those who are very young or who have a medical condition.

I wonder if the Execs putting out that memo would feel the same if they were on the same flight, flying coach. I sincerely doubt it.

 

[Archimedes]

I'm not going to respond to most of your weird diatribe. But I will address the last sentence. SIP is working.

How do you know that it's 'working' and how do you define that? What data do you have to support the case that social distancing and aggressive cleaning could have achieved largely the same ends? Other than the predictions of so called 'experts'?

 

[Archimedes]

The WHO is a joke.

Masks prevent infected droplets from leaving and infecting others

In their defense, they said 'by healthy people'. If one knows that they are not a carrier, there would be no real benefit to wearing a mask, as it is not keeping the virus out if it is in the air around your mouth. The benefit is in having sick and asymptomatic carriers wear one.

 

[bojangle]

In their defense, they said 'by healthy people'. If one knows that they are not a carrier, there would be no real benefit to wearing a mask, as it is not keeping the virus out if it is in the air around your mouth. The benefit is in having sick and asymptomatic carriers wear one.

How does one know if they're an asymptomatic carrier? If they got tested and found out (which you've said they don't) they would need to quarantine themselves. Otherwise, the only people who can really say they're likely not an asymptomatic carrier are those who were sick and recovered, and those who got reliable positive antibody test results. So, not to many people.

No one else knows for sure.

 

[Archimedes]

How does one know if they're an asymptomatic carrier? If they got tested and found out (which you've said they don't) they would need to quarantine themselves. Otherwise, the only people who can really say they're likely not an asymptomatic carrier are those who were sick and recovered, and those who got reliable positive antibody test results. So, not to many people.

No one else knows for sure.

Totally agree. But that wasn't my point. My point was that he was misinterpreting the statement made by the WHO. The statement was simple. There is no evidence of there being any benefit to healthy people by wearing a mask. If one does so, it is for the benefit of others, on the chance that one is infected but simply asymptomatic. If one knows for certain that they are not infected, the use of a mask is totally unnecessary.

Sad thing is I think most people now think that the masks are protecting them and will likely lower their guard in other areas, like distancing and washing their hands.

 

[Kornholio]

From the World Health Organization website.

...the wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and carries uncertainties and critical risks.

The wide testing of everyone to prove they're actually healthy is not available, though.

Sad thing is I think most people now think that the masks are protecting them and will likely lower their guard in other areas, like distancing and washing their hands.

I don't think that at all. What I know is that I can't get tested unless I have symptoms, which I do not and so therefore I'm supposed to assume I'm virus-free? AFAIC, I'm a carrier of the virus until proven otherwise and don't mind wearing a mask to enter public places. I do agree with you that the public consensus is likely the opposite, though.

 

[Melissa]

Mr. Archimedes,
do you post on other internet boards about the same topics that you post in BARF?
Thank You,
Melissa

 

[Archimedes]

Your backyard is still at your home, so no, faces masks don't apply. Though you can still voluntarily wear one. The government can't make me not wear a face mask at my own house, damn it!

SIP is working.

On what basis do you make such a blanket statement? Is it working for the poor people sitting at home being denied a chance to make a living because the wealthy and the bureaucrats are too afraid to come out of their homes? The college grads that won't have jobs when they graduate this year?

Again, should we outlaw automobiles because people die in them? If we did so and motorvehicle fatalities dropped to zero, would we conclude that the 'Automobile Ban' is working, even if it destroyed our economy and forced millions into poverty?

I know, I know, it's not a valid analogy because it's not an infectious disease...:rolleyes

And face coverings outdoors? :facepalm They can go fuck themselves. I'll gladly wear one indoors in a public space or private business, but it's never going on outdoors.

 

[Blankpage]

I was in the park today and overhead a couple of women talking. One was complementing the other on her face mask, looked it all over from front to back. She liked it because it had dragons on it haha. Wearing it like a fashion accessory.
Whatever makes it cool I guess. No I wasn't wearing one.

 

[Holeshot]

My go-to mask lately has been this: