Weird Time for Christians

[RedDenver]

Just now, Bledred said:

So we need to wear googles too?  Where do you draw the line?

If touching eyes was a major source of spread of covid, then it would be worth considering. But the science thus far shows that's not of major concern.

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, Bledred said:

Asking the why question and critical thinking are imperative in this place.  Why are medical staff wearing masks?  I can tell you it is not to prevent them from getting an air borne virus that is more contagious than the common flu/cold.  Those parts of the hospital have people in full-body air tight bio suits.  Medical staff wear masks (during surgery and other up-close procedures) so that big stuff in their mouth (saliva, sneezing or coughing etc.) does not fall into or on the patient.  Yes, even medical staff can have a sneeze or cough that comes on so quick they do not have time to turn their head away.  My physician (and millions like him) never wears a mask during my yearly physical, standing right next to me checking my reflexes and listening to my heart, their office takes the correct approach in giving the individual the right, freedom, and choice to wear a mask or not.  Forcing people to do anything to their body against their will is totalitarianism, which is where we are at with the Fauci admitted ineffective masks.

 

You claimed wearing masks was hurting people. They aren't. 

[Bledred]

Just now, RedDenver said:

@Bledred here's an article from last year describing how N95 masks work and how they can counter-intuitively collect particles smaller than the holes in the mask (brownian motion and electrostatic adsorption):

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/11/fact-check-n-95-filters-not-too-large-stop-covid-19-particles/5343537002/

 

The physics of how tiny particles interact with a mask is much more complex than just comparing the size of the smallest hole in the mask to the size of the particle being filtered.

I am very aware that N95 masks are the ONLY mask that are able to block the size of the virus from entering the mask.  99.99% of the masks I see day in and day out in are NOT N95 masks.  My stance that the current mask mandates are worthless is very sound and solid.

 

[Bledred]

26 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

 

False. There's a lot of unsupported conjecture/conspiracy theories that masks are bad for people, but the science shows that there's virtually no risk.

 

What science are you referring to?  I would love to see a link to a long-term study showing that the vast majority of the carbon dioxide a person normally exhaled for good is instead being inhaled again for years and that it has absolutely no effect on their brain, lungs and body.  I am pretty sure no study exists and you are quoting main stream propaganda "news" who have an agenda. 

[knapplc]

1 minute ago, Bledred said:

What science are you referring to?  I would love to see a link to a long-term study showing that the vast majority of the carbon dioxide a person normally exhaled for good is instead being inhaled again for years and that it has absolutely no effect on their brain, lungs and body.  I am pretty sure no study exists and you are quoting main stream propaganda "news" who have an agenda. 

 

What study shows that the bold is true? Because, again, medical staff have been wearing masks for a century without issue. When did masks suddenly become a health hazard?

[Bledred]

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

What study shows that the bold is true? Because, again, medical staff have been wearing masks for a century without issue. When did masks suddenly become a health hazard?

When every adult and child started wearing masks 8+ hours a day 40+ hours a week.  The breathing of a doctor standing at a surgery table barely moving their hands is slightly different than the common blue collar worker engaged in hard labor. 

[RedDenver]

2 minutes ago, Bledred said:

I am very aware that N95 masks are the ONLY mask that are able to block the size of the virus from entering the mask.  99.99% of the masks I see day in and day out in are NOT N95 masks.  My stance that the current mask mandates are worthless is very sound and solid.

You've shown absolutely no evidence to back that claim, and it's ridiculous to compare the virus size to the filter size of a mask for a variety of reasons. From the article I linked:

Quote

“COVID 19 virus particle size is 125 nanometers (0.125 microns); the range is 0.06 microns to .14 microns,” the post said. “The N95 mask filters down to 0.3 microns. So, N95 masks block few, if any, virions (virus particles).”

So based on your logic even the N95 mask shouldn't work. But the virus size is not the size that matters:

Quote

 

The COVID-19 particle is indeed around 0.1 microns in size, but it is always bonded to something larger.

“There is never a naked virus floating in the air or released by people,” said Linsey Marr, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech who specializes in airborne transmission of viruses.

The virus attaches to water droplets or aerosols (i.e. really small droplets) that are generated by breathing, talking, coughing, etc. These consist of water, mucus protein and other biological material and are all larger than 1 micron.

 

It's the size of the droplets that contain the virus that matter. And when humans breath they expel droplets of many different sizes, including very large droplets that even cotton cloth can filter.

 

But it goes further than that, because it's not just how many particles are filtered, but also how far those particles are expelled and remain air borne for another person to breath. A mask reduces the velocity of the air leaving the body, so that the droplets that do escape do go as far and are therefore less likely to be inhaled by another person.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/masking-science-sars-cov2.html

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

 

Your stance is based on faulty logic and lack of evidence, so it's neither sound nor solid. Mask mandates may very well be ineffective but not due to anything you've suggested.

[knapplc]

Just now, Bledred said:

When every adult and child started wearing masks 8+ hours a day 40+ hours a week.  The breathing of a doctor standing at a surgery table barely moving their hands is slightly different than the common blue collar worker engaged in hard labor. 

 

Link to study, please.

[RedDenver]

Just now, Bledred said:

When every adult and child started wearing masks 8+ hours a day 40+ hours a week.  The breathing of a doctor standing at a surgery table barely moving their hands is slightly different than the common blue collar worker engaged in hard labor. 

Are you unaware that blue collar workers in a variety of industries where masks all day?

 

And here's a debunk of a study that purported to show that masks were unhealthy (and links to a bunch of other debunks of various health issues related to masks:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/24/fact-check-study-falsely-claiming-masks-harmful-isnt-stanfords/7353629002/

[commando]

2 minutes ago, Bledred said:

When every adult and child started wearing masks 8+ hours a day 40+ hours a week.  The breathing of a doctor standing at a surgery table barely moving their hands is slightly different than the common blue collar worker engaged in hard labor. 

i am a home contractor  when i tear out plaster, sand drywall, install fiberglass insulation, etc....i wear a n-95 mask all freaking day and i have never had any issues.   it is hard labor and dirty work....i should be dead many times over if your claim held any water.

[Bledred]

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

Link to study, please.

"In addition to hypoxia and hypercapnia, breathing through facemask residues bacterial and germs components on the inner and outside layer of the facemask. These toxic components are repeatedly rebreathed back into the body, causing self-contamination. Breathing through facemasks also increases temperature and humidity in the space between the mouth and the mask, resulting in a release of toxic particles from the mask’s materials. A systematic literature review estimated that aerosol contamination levels of facemasks including 13 to 202,549 different viruses. Rebreathing contaminated air with high bacterial and toxic particle concentrations along with low O2 and high CO2 levels continuously challenge the body homeostasis, causing self-toxicity and immunosuppression."

 

https://www.aier.org/article/medical-journal-warns-about-maskss-potentially-devastating-consequences/

 

 

[Bledred]

7 minutes ago, commando said:

i am a home contractor  when i tear out plaster, sand drywall, install fiberglass insulation, etc....i wear a n-95 mask all freaking day and i have never had any issues.   it is hard labor and dirty work....i should be dead many times over if your claim held any water.

I am concerned about long-term health effects for wearing a mask all the time.  We have no clue what the long-term health effects are and you have yet to find out.

[knapplc]

1 minute ago, Bledred said:

"In addition to hypoxia and hypercapnia, breathing through facemask residues bacterial and germs components on the inner and outside layer of the facemask. These toxic components are repeatedly rebreathed back into the body, causing self-contamination. Breathing through facemasks also increases temperature and humidity in the space between the mouth and the mask, resulting in a release of toxic particles from the mask’s materials. A systematic literature review estimated that aerosol contamination levels of facemasks including 13 to 202,549 different viruses. Rebreathing contaminated air with high bacterial and toxic particle concentrations along with low O2 and high CO2 levels continuously challenge the body homeostasis, causing self-toxicity and immunosuppression."

 

https://www.aier.org/article/medical-journal-warns-about-maskss-potentially-devastating-consequences/

 

 

 

Can you link to a study by an accredited organization, not one funded by the right-wing Koch empire? This is the kind of biased nonsense you've been ranting against the last few pages. Why offer such a biased source with a straight face?

[commando]

Just now, Bledred said:

I am concerned about long-term health effects for wearing a mask all the time.  We have no clue what the long-term health effects are and you have yet to find out.

i am 59 now and still wearing mask with no problems.   tell me when the long term effects will come into play.

[RedDenver]

4 minutes ago, Bledred said:

"In addition to hypoxia and hypercapnia, breathing through facemask residues bacterial and germs components on the inner and outside layer of the facemask. These toxic components are repeatedly rebreathed back into the body, causing self-contamination. Breathing through facemasks also increases temperature and humidity in the space between the mouth and the mask, resulting in a release of toxic particles from the mask’s materials. A systematic literature review estimated that aerosol contamination levels of facemasks including 13 to 202,549 different viruses. Rebreathing contaminated air with high bacterial and toxic particle concentrations along with low O2 and high CO2 levels continuously challenge the body homeostasis, causing self-toxicity and immunosuppression."

 

https://www.aier.org/article/medical-journal-warns-about-maskss-potentially-devastating-consequences/

 

 

You might try reading that article as it's been updated because the paper it was based on has been withdrawn. From your link:

Quote

[UPDATE: The paper discussed below was withdrawn from the journal following an editorial investigation. RetractionWatch explains the reasons for this decision. The authors of this article defer to the editors of the journal. We leave the text intact for reference purposes only.]

 

Plus the author falsely claimed he was affiliated with Stanford and the research has been debunked:

Quote

Three days after we reported that Elsevier would be retracting a paper about COVID-19 and masks whose author claimed a false affiliation with Stanford, the publisher tells us that the “paper is misleading,” “misquotes and selectively cites published papers,” and that the data in one table is “unverified.”

https://retractionwatch.com/2021/04/29/mask-study-was-misleading-and-misquotes-citations-says-elsevier/

 

And guess what? An article I linked earlier was specifically about how that paper was debunked:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/24/fact-check-study-falsely-claiming-masks-harmful-isnt-stanfords/7353629002/