Masks-no discussion needed. Just vote and see where we really are.

[T.Lex]

And there are 10 other articles in these sub forums that prove they either don't work or the efficiency is not what that say it is.

For every pro article we can fins at least one or more con articles. Pick your poison.

I don't believe that's true. Well, there might be "articles" or "youtube videos" that make that case. But, there aren't any actual studies that show masks "don't work." In terms of efficiency, that isn't "what they say it is" - there may be debate about how much better they are than no mask, but again, there doesn't appear to be any scientific argument that even cloth masks are "the same as" no mask.

Surgical masks are an improvement over no mask at all, and those seem plentiful. Hough eloquently made that point with citations in a discussion thread, I believe.

With a downside risk that is significant, it seems like taking even small steps to improve the odds is a reasonable choice.

You know... kinda like carrying a handgun when the risk of actually using it is low. Or using seat belts for that matter. Or motorcycle helmets.

 

[T.Lex]

Good lord we have 47 posting members in a gun forum that believe that masks are useless.........The ice is cracking peoples.

 

[churchmouse]

I don't believe that's true. Well, there might be "articles" or "youtube videos" that make that case. But, there aren't any actual studies that show masks "don't work." In terms of efficiency, that isn't "what they say it is" - there may be debate about how much better they are than no mask, but again, there doesn't appear to be any scientific argument that even cloth masks are "the same as" no mask.

Surgical masks are an improvement over no mask at all, and those seem plentiful. Hough eloquently made that point with citations in a discussion thread, I believe.

With a downside risk that is significant, it seems like taking even small steps to improve the odds is a reasonable choice.

You know... kinda like carrying a handgun when the risk of actually using it is low. Or using seat belts for that matter. Or motorcycle helmets.

I don't care. It is everywhere. Pro-con articles and study's oozing out of the computer screen. Just look around. Believe what you want.
Like I said.....pick your poison. There is a lot to pic from.
Your analogy does not fit my comment.

And yes the ice is cracking my friend. Look past those 3 members.

 

[T.Lex]

I don't care. It is everywhere. Pro-con articles and study's oozing out of the computer screen. Just look around. Believe what you want.
Like I said.....pick your poison. There is a lot to pic from.
Your analogy does not fit my comment.

And yes the ice is cracking my friend. Look past those 3 members.

Past those 3 members are ~14x more people who are rejecting science, at least at some level. At least the way the question was worded.

Together, that's about 40% of posting INGOers that are having difficulty seeing the bigger picture about how disease spreads. Both the literal disease and the big government disease.

 

[JettaKnight]

I don't care. It is everywhere. Pro-con articles and study's oozing out of the computer screen. Just look around. Believe what you want.
Like I said.....pick your poison. There is a lot to pic from.
Your analogy does not fit my comment.

And yes the ice is cracking my friend. Look past those 3 members.

So, in other words, we've all staked out a position and become closed minded.

I'm willing to say that.
Are you?

 

[HoughMade]

So, in other words, we've all staked out a position and become closed minded.

I'm willing to say that.
Are you?

I'm not. I have a current position based upon actually reading scientific literature. I highly doubt that there will be equally compelling scientific literature that will go the opposite way (because the studies make sense), but if there is or the studies I have reviewed are later shown to be significantly flawed, I could go a different direction. I would hope that people would have this attitude.

There is no need to have a belief system built around masks one way or the other or to have a position based upon politics or whether there is a mandate.

 

[terrehautian]

Good lord we have 47 posting members in a gun forum that believe that masks are useless.........The ice is cracking peoples.

I voted this option because it depends on the mask, a cloth mask is partially beneficial but also useless. It may stop spit with a virus potentially but not every mask is filtering (either in or out). Now a n95 type mask is beneficial. A surgical mask could partially put but won’t filter any covid size particles in. Just saying a mask is beneficial, especially when the cdc recommends a cloth covering that if not cleaned right could in theory be harmful, is very misleading. My wife is a nurse so I have learned about all the different type of masks in recent months. You want true virus protect to a certain point, it has to be a n95 or papr type mask. Anything else is not really protective to the wearer.

 

[NKBJ]

Let's make everyone wear gumball machine helmets and rechargeable fanny packs to pump in filtered air. Chertoff and Soros could have another company to provide them like with the naked body scanners.

PS,
Kidding aside, there's no way for us to know if the masks are more injurious than beneficial so who's to say?

 

[Phase2]

So, in other words, we've all staked out a position and become closed minded.

I'm willing to say that.
Are you?

I'm not willing to say that. I have in fact changed my position based on information that has come in over time. I'd do so again if sufficient info came in to justify it.

 

[churchmouse]

So, in other words, we've all staked out a position and become closed minded.

I'm willing to say that.
Are you?

I am closed minded to any more Gov intervention without manipulation. It’s that simple. I more or less than that.
And yes. Pick your poison. What part of that is closed minded. I am saying choose your own path.
Where is the confusing.

 

[T.Lex]

I voted this option because it depends on the mask, a cloth mask is partially beneficial but also useless. It may stop spit with a virus potentially but not every mask is filtering (either in or out). Now a n95 type mask is beneficial. A surgical mask could partially put but won’t filter any covid size particles in. Just saying a mask is beneficial, especially when the cdc recommends a cloth covering that if not cleaned right could in theory be harmful, is very misleading. My wife is a nurse so I have learned about all the different type of masks in recent months. You want true virus protect to a certain point, it has to be a n95 or papr type mask. Anything else is not really protective to the wearer.

With respect, the "beneficial but useless" doesn't make sense to me.

Beneficial, even just nominally, makes something useful. Maybe not as useful as something else, but still useful.

How many of us have used a pocketknife instead of a screwdriver? The pocketknife isn't the best tool, but it is more beneficial than a fingernail. (Which, admittedly, has also been tried.)

"Useless" carries the meaning of "the same as" no mask. I do not believe there is any study or learned treatise that says a cloth mask is the same as no mask. And, I think we can have a consensus that a surgical mask, while not as good as an N95, is more useful than a cloth mask. But this is INGO, so maybe not.

 

[churchmouse]

I'm not willing to say that. I have in fact changed my position based on information that has come in over time. I'd do so again if sufficient info came in to justify it.

Bingo. Hough said it as did you. Pretty simple overall.

 

[NKBJ]

And yeah, I want me a tee shirt that says

WHEN BARE FACES ARE OUTLAWED ONLY
OUTLAWS WILL HAVE BARE FACES

 

[hoosierdoc]

Good lord we have 3 posting members in a gun forum that believe the Gov. should mandate masks.........The ice is cracking peoples.

well i bet more than three are OK with mandated firearm owning

 

[johny5]

Past those 3 members are ~14x more people who are rejecting science...

My entire career would not be possible were it not for a firm grasp of scientific principles. This is true for a host of others who are dubious about the purported (though largely unsupported) benefits of wearing masks.

To completely dismiss a group of people (many of whom you know nothing about) as 'rejecting science' because they are expressing skepticism (a hallmark of scientific inquiry) is the height of hubris.

 

[JettaKnight]

I am closed minded to any more Gov intervention without manipulation. It’s that simple. I more or less than that.
And yes. Pick your poison. What part of that is closed minded. I am saying choose your own path.
Where is the confusing.

What part is closed minded, you ask?


The part where you "pick" and go forth.

We've got, what now, three, four threads, where people are tossing out studies, and videos, and articles. Rarely does anyone say, "you might have a point, there."
No, it's a nuclear arms race to find another study to support our own camp.

At least that's what I see.

And the, "it's a government plot to destroy freedom", certainly makes the issue more convoluted. When someone has taken that stance, well, they're not open to saying mask are necessary because then they're at odds with freedom. Hence the closed minded position to mask usage.



I feel like I have to keep reiterating it: I'm not in favor of any mandates.

 

[T.Lex]

My entire career would not be possible were it not for a firm grasp of scientific principles. This is true for a host of others who are dubious about the purported (though largely unsupported) benefits of wearing masks.

To completely dismiss a group of people (many of whom you know nothing about) as 'rejecting science' because they are expressing skepticism (a hallmark of scientific inquiry) is the height of hubris.

Point, missed.

But, to address what you say, are you willing to stake out the scientific position that all masks, including cloth masks, are "useless"? That was the question posed in the poll.

If you are, please make reference to the scientific findings, not generic skepticism, that says masks are "useless." The question was not whether there genuine differences of opinion on the relative usefulness. Rather, the word used was "useless."

Some people are skeptical of the earth's roundness. That doesn't make their position scientifically sound.

As an aside, a helpful comment about quotes - the fuller the better. I did not say the people voting were "rejecting science." I said "rejecting science, at least at some level." That's not hubris; it is recognition of reality. There are studies showing masks to be more useful than no masks. Unless and until someone shows a study or finding in some journal that says certain masks are the equivalent of no masks, then ... well... saying masks are useless is rejecting, at some level, the science that says otherwise.

It just is.

ETA:
Following Jetta, I feel compelled to confirm that I am not advocating a mask mandate. That's a different issue. So, too, is the issue about whether people SHOULD wear masks. My position on that remains unchanged: each of us gets to make that decision based on our own judgment. Kinda like CC v. OC.

 

[churchmouse]

What part is closed minded, you ask?


The part where you "pick" and go forth.

We've got, what now, three, four threads, where people are tossing out studies, and videos, and articles. Rarely does anyone say, "you might have a point, there."
No, it's a nuclear arms race to find another study to support our own camp.

At least that's what I see.

And the, "it's a government plot to destroy freedom", certainly makes the issue more convoluted. When someone has taken that stance, well, they're not open to saying mask are necessary because then they're at odds with freedom. Hence the closed minded position to mask usage.



I feel like I have to keep reiterating it: I'm not in favor of any mandates.

OK that is a bit more clearly stated but read back and see that I agree with others that if the Gov. stopped the and there was solid science on this I would lean another way but there is none of that.
If masks truly work lets open the economy back up and get to living our lives and stop twisting up peoples minds with fear. If they truly work.
But no, Gov. has an agenda here and it is to stifle the Economy for a well defined end game. You either see this or you do not. Again, pick your poison. Read and believe what fits your life and belief's/feelings. I can not alter your thoughts or belief's any more than you can alter mine.

I am still of a mind this entire fiasco has stolen 6 months of my life and I am pi$$ed off about it. The terrorists need to be in school. They need to interact with other kids.

Show me the body's. Give me straight up info with no agenda twists please. That's a hell of a lot to ask these days when everything is driven by politics.

I can debate this all day but again just white noise. Pick your path and carry your own water.

 

[johny5]

I did not say the people voting were "rejecting science." I said "rejecting science, at least at some level."

Went back and read it. I will agree on that point. However, it does still not represent a 'rejection of science', at any level. The question of an entire populace wearing masks to ward off infections/viruses is something that has been little explored by scientists. Why? Because mandates of this type have not been implemented on this scale before.

We do not know the unintended consequences of large-scale mask use, nor have we proven to any satisfactory degree the benefits. To pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

 

[CindyE]

Maybe I'm the only one, but I mess with my face a lot more when I have to wear a damn mask.

Same here.