The Logic of My Mind: Masks

[Cornell]

Totally inaccurate! and so are the ones who gave you a "Like" on that ill-conceived post.
(Reactions: mark201235, pittle, WinniWoman, TravelTime, Cornell.)
BTW, scientific studies show droplets and mist from cough or sneeze can travel 20+ feet (scientific video animations are rampant on the internet),
so social distancing definitely helps, but is not a guarantee by any means.
Even talking can cause breath to travel beyond 6 ft. Walking by someone in a store, etc does the same, or jogging behind them, etc.

And the real point is twofold, it benefits not only the mask wearer for prevention, but those that DON'T WEAR MASKS are more likely
to transmit the virus to others (might be asymptomatic), so it's really not a personal choice or "opinion" question anymore when it affects others.

(Good job, Panina)
Online this morning:
"Wearing a face mask can reduce coronavirus transmission
by up to 75 percent, study says"

More evidence that counters the non-believers (something we've known all along):

Wearing a surgical mask can reduce coronavirus transmission by up to 75 percent, study says

Researchers on Sunday found that wearing surgical masks can significantly reduce the rate of airborne COVID-19 transmission, amid a debate over the effectiveness of wearing them during the coronavirus pandemic.

www.foxnews.com

So now we are calling out people who like a given post? And the shouty all caps and air quotes?

Not that I owe you any information about my behavior, but yesterday when I picked my dog up from the vet that I wore a mask. Do I get a gold star on my behavior chart for that?

 

[presley]

Totally inaccurate! and so are the ones who gave you a "Like" on that ill-conceived post.
(Reactions: mark201235, pittle, WinniWoman, TravelTime, Cornell.)

Totally bizarre post. The person you quoted said that they think, not that they know or that they did a study or that it is a fact. The quoted material alludes a personal opinion. You are saying that their thinking/personal opinion is totally inaccurate and that anyone who likes their post is totally inaccurate. How can someone be wrong for liking something? I think pink yoga mats are better than black ones. Is that totally inaccurate? How can you be inside my head? And if anyone likes that I like pink Yoga mats better than black ones, are they totally inaccurate? Who is the ultimate authority and in control of what anyone else thinks about anything?

 

[Cornell]

Totally bizarre post. The person you quoted said that they think, not that they know or that they did a study or that it is a fact. The quoted material alludes a personal opinion. You are saying that their thinking/personal opinion is totally inaccurate and that anyone who likes their post is totally inaccurate. How can someone be wrong for liking something? I think pink yoga mats are better than black ones. Is that totally inaccurate? How can you be inside my head? And if anyone likes that I like pink Yoga mats better than black ones, are they totally inaccurate? Who is the ultimate authority and in control of what anyone else thinks about anything?

I just liked your post. Is that OK? Will I get called out?

 

[jme]

Totally bizarre post. The person you quoted said that they think, not that they know or that they did a study or that it is a fact. The quoted material alludes a personal opinion. You are saying that their thinking/personal opinion is totally inaccurate and that anyone who likes their post is totally inaccurate. How can someone be wrong for liking something? I think pink yoga mats are better than black ones. Is that totally inaccurate? How can you be inside my head? And if anyone likes that I like pink Yoga mats better than black ones, are they totally inaccurate? Who is the ultimate authority and in control of what anyone else thinks about anything?

If anyone "likes" a post, to me it means they agree with it. And if some says "I think", then whatever follows is their current interpretation of facts
and in a way, their belief. I'm simply trying to bring attention to a habitual practice of not giving due respect to recommendations and directives from qualified authorities that should be followed, not because I'm trying to butt in and restrict their freedoms, but if someone out there doesn't follow the accepted guidelines, they might just be affecting me and my family, and of course others. That is not good.
If it doesn't protect them, that's their choice, but obviously in this time of a world-wide pandemic which has not abated significantly,
it goes both ways.
I'll put it another way, protect yourself, and do no harm. Both. I'm not calling people out for not liking blue or red, or ranch or blue cheese dressing,
but for safe practices which could potentially cause severe sickness for someone else.
Not a time for going against the highest standard, and given my daily protocol as a healthcare provider, and what I happen to know,
I'm not apologizing for following the experts' advice or backing off.
I happen to have a family member who works at the highest level in epidemiological research at a major institution,
one of the nation's leading labs, and what they say carries some weight with me.
The ill-advised posters here who think this and think that are currently going against the grain of current knowledge, so I must speak out.
I am not trying to offend anyone, but I truly am trying to wake them up.
Some people ignore well-established facts, and that can be dangerous (in a worldwide ongoing pandemic, no less).

 

[Cornell]

If anyone "likes" a post, to me it means they agree with it. And if some says "I think", then whatever follows is their current interpretation of facts
and in a way, their belief. I'm simply trying to bring attention to a habitual practice of not giving due respect to recommendations and directives from qualified authorities that should be followed, not because I'm trying to butt in and restrict their freedoms, but if someone out there doesn't follow the accepted guidelines, they might just be affecting me and my family, and of course others. That is not good.
If it doesn't protect them, that's their choice, but obviously in this time of a world-wide pandemic which has not abated significantly,
it goes both ways.
I'll put it another way, protect yourself, and do no harm. Both. I'm not calling people out for not liking blue or red, or ranch or blue cheese dressing,
but for safe practices which could potentially cause severe sickness for someone else.
Not a time for going against the highest standard, and given my daily protocol as a healthcare provider, and what I happen to know,
I'm not apologizing for following the experts' advice or backing off.
I happen to have a family member who works at the highest level in epidemiological research at a major institution,
one of the nation's leading labs, and what they say carries some weight with me.
The ill-advised posters here who think this and think that are currently going against the grain of current knowledge, so I must speak out.
I am not trying to offend anyone, but I truly am trying to wake them up.
Some people ignore well-established facts, and that can be dangerous (in a worldwide ongoing pandemic, no less).

"I'm not trying to offend anyone". Well, you did without trying.

 

[WVBaker]

If I may jump in.

Why does it always seem that when someone says, "I am not trying to offend anyone", they know without any doubt whatsoever that they are indeed going to offend someone?

Anyway, "jme", not one person is expecting you to "apologize for following the experts' advice". You are quite free to do just that. What you're not free to do, without some response at Least, is to denounce someone for not. Your "expert's" advice seems to be ever changing day to day.

As for me, when you can come to me and say without any reservation whatsoever, that my actions are indeed infecting others, I'll agree with you. Now remember, don't fall back on, "... might just be affecting me and my family" or "... could potentially cause..". So very many choices anyone makes in life may affect your life. We don't go through life enclosed in bubble wrap.

 

[Cornell]

@WVBaker That's exactly it -- the experts have changed their opinions / directives throughout this adventure. Which makes me a bit suspect of their advice.

 

[jme]

@WVBaker That's exactly it -- the experts have changed their opinions / directives throughout this adventure. Which makes me a bit suspect of their advice.

They have not changed the general thrust of their advice on wearing masks, or hand-washing, or safe distancing, or wiping down surfaces....
these basic principles have been going from the start, and of late have even been reinforced even more.
They may have disagreed along the way on the "correct and proper way" to go about it, but the general premise was the same.
Along the way there were indeed those who decided to go against the recommendations and to minimize the importance, sure,
even out-and-out protest,
but there were no reliable major scientific studies that effectively refuted it, that is, enough to throw out the directives.
Some minor studies came out questioning the effectiveness of the guidelines, but they were soon debunked.
At every turn, the original studies were again cited, and the proponents adamantly reasserted the same advice.
I know because I've followed the major scientific outlets since the onset because it directly affects my profession in a major way.
I contend that the noncompliance to these things by individuals based on faulty advice was the major factor
that caused the worldwide spread so quickly. And the major city spreads. And that same "no fear" attitude goes on today on a lesser scale.

On a larger scale......Look at one example of the masses of Spring Breakers in Florida who afterward returned home
to all areas of the country, mainly up north, and the situation regarding new cases of infection exploded as a result.
Could have been avoided, even by nothing other than common sense.
We're not nearly far enough along in this to let our guards down, believe me, so don't misinterpret people's desire
to get out more, and things opening up, as a confirmation that it's about to go away, or that the numbers are still not significant.

 

[dayooper]

@WVBaker That's exactly it -- the experts have changed their opinions / directives throughout this adventure. Which makes me a bit suspect of their advice.

Just curious, where do you get your advice from?

 

[Laurie]

The post jme originally called out wasn't just an opinion - the OP also said

I wear a mask here because they are mandatory. As soon as they are not, I will not be wearing one.

So yes, the action based on the personal opinion potentially affects everyone else. "Liking" the statement kinda implies approval for the behavior.

Initially there *was* some "official" advice (from the administration, more than from the medical community) that masks weren't effective. That was back when the severity of the outbreak was officially being minimized and brushed off. I'm betting these folks said masks weren't effective only because they already knew about the extent of the PPE shortage, and didn't want masses to go buy out all the N95's and surgical masks. Now that cloth masks are widely available, and that more is known about the virus and transmission, and the death toll keeps mounting, advice is different.

Even if medical opinion were evenly divided (it's not!), and there'd be a 50% chance it is correct that your mask will save lives, and wearing one doesn't adversely affect your own health or safety, what is the rationale for not wearing one? If you leave a candle burning in your home when you leave, and doing so only has a 50% chance of burning down your house, wouldn't you blow it out before you leave? What if it were only a 10% chance of burning down your house? Wouldn't you still blow it out? Is someone else's life as valuable as your house?

Edited to add: by the way, I personally hate wearing one, I feel like I'm suffocating. Therefore I'm not going anywhere unneccessary for any period of time right now. If they'll be required on flights, I probably won't fly until the pandemic is over.

 

[Cornell]

Just curious, where do you get your advice from?

At the beginning of C19 , Dr. Fauci advised the public not to wear masks.

Later we were told that that advice was given to preserve PPE.

Now people are told masks are effective and you can just use a bandana, scarf, whatever you have laying around. That's not PPE.

This is what I'm referring to when the advice, guidance has not been consistent .

I'm done commenting on this. The "call outs" on this are really more than I can stomach.

 

[dayooper]

At the beginning of C19 , Dr. Fauci advised the public not to wear masks.

Later we were told that that advice was given to preserve PPE.

Now people are told masks are effective and you can just use a bandana, scarf, whatever you have laying around. That's not PPE.

This is what I'm referring to when the advice, guidance has not been consistent .

I'm done commenting on this. The "call outs" on this are really more than I can stomach.

FYI - I wasn’t calling you out. I am legitimately curious on where your advice comes from.

I agree the advice hasn’t been consistent, and that’s a problem.

 

[Panina]

So I started this post and I am chiming in. Everyone is allowed their opinion. I know I have liked a post that I disagreed with as that was me showing you I understood your reasons even if I disagreed with them.

If we just take a moment and reread our posts and ask, how would I feel if someone wrote this about me? Many of these posts wouldn’t be posted the way they are.

Going against other people opinions is difficult and should be respected but arguing, belittling, being rude, etc. is uncalled for. There are many posts that debate subjects with dignity, respect, without being rude that clearly show a differing opinion.

 

[slip]

The post jme originally called out wasn't just an opinion - the OP also said


So yes, the action based on the personal opinion potentially affects everyone else. "Liking" the statement kinda implies approval for the behavior.

Initially there *was* some "official" advice (from the administration, more than from the medical community) that masks weren't effective. That was back when the severity of the outbreak was officially being minimized and brushed off. I'm betting these folks said masks weren't effective only because they already knew about the extent of the PPE shortage, and didn't want masses to go buy out all the N95's and surgical masks. Now that cloth masks are widely available, and that more is known about the virus and transmission, and the death toll keeps mounting, advice is different.

Even if medical opinion were evenly divided (it's not!), and there'd be a 50% chance it is correct that your mask will save lives, and wearing one doesn't adversely affect your own health or safety, what is the rationale for not wearing one? If you leave a candle burning in your home when you leave, and doing so only has a 50% chance of burning down your house, wouldn't you blow it out before you leave? What if it were only a 10% chance of burning down your house? Wouldn't you still blow it out? Is someone else's life as valuable as your house?

Edited to add: by the way, I personally hate wearing one, I feel like I'm suffocating. Therefore I'm not going anywhere unneccessary for any period of time right now. If they'll be required on flights, I probably won't fly until the pandemic is over.

If you are saying that I am the OP that is incorrect. I did post that though and have not changed my mind. That statement still stands for me.

 

[WVBaker]

The post jme originally called out wasn't just an opinion - the OP also said


So yes, the action based on the personal opinion potentially affects everyone else. "Liking" the statement kinda implies approval for the behavior.

Initially there *was* some "official" advice (from the administration, more than from the medical community) that masks weren't effective. That was back when the severity of the outbreak was officially being minimized and brushed off. I'm betting these folks said masks weren't effective only because they already knew about the extent of the PPE shortage, and didn't want masses to go buy out all the N95's and surgical masks. Now that cloth masks are widely available, and that more is known about the virus and transmission, and the death toll keeps mounting, advice is different.

Even if medical opinion were evenly divided (it's not!), and there'd be a 50% chance it is correct that your mask will save lives, and wearing one doesn't adversely affect your own health or safety, what is the rationale for not wearing one? If you leave a candle burning in your home when you leave, and doing so only has a 50% chance of burning down your house, wouldn't you blow it out before you leave? What if it were only a 10% chance of burning down your house? Wouldn't you still blow it out? Is someone else's life as valuable as your house?

Edited to add: by the way, I personally hate wearing one, I feel like I'm suffocating. Therefore I'm not going anywhere unneccessary for any period of time right now. If they'll be required on flights, I probably won't fly until the pandemic is over.

We were doing so well in not bringing politics into this but, like a moth attracted to a bright light.

I don't recall any advice being labeled, "official". Yes, we had advice from politicians or "the administration" as you put it, and yes, we had advice from the medical field. Any advice given is just that, advice. Follow it if you choose to and don't, should you not. As a betting individual you're speculating that, "these folks", who ever they are, were in some dark collusion to distribute information based solely on a supply issue? While an interesting theory, it's simply that, a theory. I don't know if I agree however, please feel free to speculate.

You're correct, medical opinion is divided. I certainly have no idea of the exact percentage, but nonetheless, it is. You're well within your right to listen to whatever opinion you choose. I still remember that humorous saying about opinions and yes, everyone does have one. Well, except for certain medical procedures of course.

One final thought. That whole candle question can be used for just the opposite conclusion as well.

 

[Panina]

I am pro mask but this makes me think. Still pro mask but need to be careful.

Could wearing a mask for long periods be detrimental to health?

Retired neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock has highlighted a number of studies linking prolonged mask use to headaches and lowered blood oxygen levels, which can weaken the immune system.

www.jpost.com

 

[TravelTime]

I am pro mask but this makes me think. Still pro mask but need to be careful.

Could wearing a mask for long periods be detrimental to health?

Retired neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock has highlighted a number of studies linking prolonged mask use to headaches and lowered blood oxygen levels, which can weaken the immune system.

www.jpost.com

Thanks for posting this. I am impressed that you posted this, knowing that you are pro-mask. It is nice that you are open to looking at both sides of the issue and not just evidence that supports being pro-mask. Like you, I try to look at both sides and my opinions evolve as the science and data evolves. In the meantime, I am wearing a mask when I go out.

 

[Luanne]

I am pro mask but this makes me think. Still pro mask but need to be careful.

Could wearing a mask for long periods be detrimental to health?

Retired neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock has highlighted a number of studies linking prolonged mask use to headaches and lowered blood oxygen levels, which can weaken the immune system.

www.jpost.com

I'm thinking this applies to those who are wearing a mask all day long, like those who are required to do so by their business. I know dh told me one of the clerks at Sprouts, where he does our grocery shopping, told him she has a headache every day. I wonder if there is anything that can be done for these people, like a break where they can go and be without the mask? Would breaks like that help? And medical personnel? Maybe in "normal" times they're not wearing a mask all day, but some of them are most likely wearing them for long periods.

I don't think (and again these are my thoughts and opinions) those of use who use a mask periodically and not for long periods of time wouldn't be affected. Or at least not affected to the degree long term mask users are.

 

[Brett]

Masks Become a Flash Point in the Virus Culture Wars
As people resume going out in public in the middle of a pandemic, to wear or not to wear a face mask has become a personal statement and sometimes a political one

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/03/us/coronavirus-masks-protests.html

 

[Laurie]

If you are saying that I am the OP that is incorrect. I did post that though and have not changed my mind. That statement still stands for me.

Guess I used an inaccurate term - not OP as in first person on this whole thread, but the person who originally posted the comment referred to by jme, and was subsequently commented on by others. Sorry I got the terminology wrong.

 

[slip]

Guess I used an inaccurate term - not OP as in first person on this whole thread, but the person who originally posted the comment referred to by jme, and was subsequently commented on by others. Sorry I got the terminology wrong.

No worries, I just didn’t want any confusion on who started the thread.

 

[slip]

They have not changed the general thrust of their advice on wearing masks, or hand-washing, or safe distancing, or wiping down surfaces....
these basic principles have been going from the start

Dr Fauci is on record early in the pandemic as saying there is no reason for everyone to be out wearing masks.

I will wear my mask when they mandatory and will not wear them when they are not mandatory.

 

[Laurie]

I don't recall any advice being labeled, "official". Yes, we had advice from politicians or "the administration" as you put it, and yes, we had advice from the medical field. Any advice given is just that, advice. Follow it if you choose to and don't, should you not. As a betting individual you're speculating that, "these folks", who ever they are, were in some dark collusion to distribute information based solely on a supply issue? While an interesting theory, it's simply that, a theory. I don't know if I agree however, please feel free to speculate.

You're correct, medical opinion is divided. I certainly have no idea of the exact percentage, but nonetheless, it is. You're well within your right to listen to whatever opinion you choose. I still remember that humorous saying about opinions and yes, everyone does have one. Well, except for certain medical procedures of course.

One final thought. That whole candle question can be used for just the opposite conclusion as well.

To clarify: by "official" I mean the advice dispensed during the daily briefings from the WH. I think the term "official" can apply.

Not sure what you mean by the candle question being used for the opposite conclusion, but my point was/is this: we all choose in various ways to mitigate certain risks. Most of us pay for fire insurance on our homes, for instance, even tho it costs hundreds of dollars. We don't balk when auto inspection is required for license plate renewal, since safety is potentially compromised by an unsafe vehicle - even though we have to pay for the inspection, and it's an inconvenience. We don't mind being required by local or state or federal law to wear shoes into a restaurant or shop.

When the risk is potentially high, as in life or death for some, and the cost is almost nothing, as in the case with masks, it's interesting to me that there is such widespread resistance, as if this is an unforgiveable threat to our freedom. Why is this so different than my examples above?

 

[TravelTime]

I think I finally figured out one possible reason why masks have become a source of controversy. It is one of the only visible pieces of evidence anyone has to judge if someone is complying with the guidelines. That and the 6' spacing. However, 6' spacing is harder to judge. Many people stay away from others without these guidelines in place so it is harder to judge if someone is complying or not simply based on physical distance. We can only judge social distancing compliance if someone gets directly in our space but we do not know if someone far away from us is following the guidelines or not. But if that person far away from us is not wearing a mask, we instantly can judge them as not complying even though they are far away. No one knows if other people are washing their hands or not. It is a private behavior. Since humans are biologically wired to avoid illness and disease, the mask has become the symbol of cleanliness, safety and caring. Unconsciously, we may think: Mask wearers are safe people. They do not want to harm me or anyone else. They are good people who I can trust.

 

[geekette]

Dr Fauci is on record early in the pandemic as saying there is no reason for everyone to be out wearing masks.

Early in the pandemic, we didn't know of asymptomatic spread. He's wearing a mask now.

As info changes, so do people's opinions and advice. Even Dr Fauci.