Mask vs Corona virus. Wear or Not.

[Jon]

What CURRENT advice should we not follow?

Should I always follow the current advice of medical experts, even though their "current" advice back in April was not to wear a mask, while my advice back then was to wear them?

 

[Jon]

Also, you have to consider lack of supplies at the time. I know the US was at risk of hospitals running out of supplies early on. The advice at the time was sound with that taken into consideration. Now homemade masks are rampant and the instruction has changed.

So their advice was that they can reduce transmission but save them for the medics? Are you sure about that?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

we made a personal decision based not only on Covid safety, but all of our other values as well.

That is the problem we face. This pandemic has forced so many changes in life styles that we begin to question whether we like what we are becoming. Even with the threat of the disease, we have to be true to ourselves as well. While I think they are short-sighted, I have to say that I understand those who object to wearing masks. People are not simple automatons. We are about as complex as you could imagine. It is hard to say when someone has "had enough" due to the virus. And sometimes we have to say "Damn the virus, full speed ahead." Trump is familiar with this and understands that life has to go on. But the USA is a place where people speak their mind (whether they have one or not...) and it is clear that the hardships are mounting.

I have no problem with anyone visiting anyone as long as they are rational about what they do. Good luck to your wife regarding that visit! I know I had to pass on this year's family reunion because of corona virus and my wife's knee surgery. If we had the chance now, we could make the trip, but this year's gathering was cancelled so it is a moot point.

 

[Vassago]

No, I'm not conceding they were wrong. I don't think they were. At the time, lack of supplies and needing to protect the healthcare workers took precedent. They overwhelmingly suggested staying home at the time until supplies could be made available. They are now.

 

[Vassago]

Are you saying we shouldn't listen to their advice because someone else might know better? Of course they are not always right, but they are the best source of information regarding protecting society from this virus. We should listen.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

It should be noted that Dr. Fauci is now leaning towards a national mask mandate. I have a feeling THAT will go over like a lead balloon despite any scientific reasoning on the subject.

 

[Jon]

Because people can social distance and avoid going out. Medics are at higher risk by simply doing their jobs. There can't be any disputing they are clearly at the highest risk.

Medics are at higher risk. But that isn't anything to do with my question. My question was about whether or not masks work. The medical advice was that they are ineffective. That means ineffective for humans, whether a medic, a social worker or the unemployed. That is not sound advice since it was wrong advice.

 

[Jon]

Are you saying we shouldn't listen to their advice because someone else might know better? Of course they are not always right, but they are the best source of information regarding protecting society from this virus. We should listen.

You haven't explained how the medical community have said masks do not reduce transmission but save them for the medics. You have only said they are at higher risk. But if masks are ineffective at reducing transmission, then they are ineffective for the medics too.

 

[Jon]

but they are the best source of information regarding protecting society from this virus. We should listen.

Which medics should we listen to? The ones like the WHO who were saying masks are ineffective, or the medics in Asia who were saying they are effective?

 

[Vassago]

Because medics needed masks to stop the spread of other diseases, same as they always wear masks for. I don't understand why that is confusing.

 

[Vassago]

I'm not going to stay and argue just for the sake of arguing. Have a good one.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Which medics should we listen to? The ones like the WHO who were saying masks are ineffective, or the medics in Asia who were saying they are effective

Jon, there is always the Yale Law of Experts - "You can take all of the experts in a particular field and ask them a question with complex elements. You can then lay them end to end and they still won't reach a conclusion."

 

[Jon]

Because medics needed masks to stop the spread of other diseases, same as they always wear masks for. I don't understand why that is confusing.

It is very simple. You stated you should listen to the medical experts. I pointed out that they were wrong about masks back in April. See my statement below:

So you concede that their advice was wrong before and therefore you cannot always trust the advice of medical experts.

There is nothing controversial about my statement. It is obvious that they were wrong about masks back in April.

Then you argued that their advice was correct. But we all know that their advice was: "Masks are ineffective, save them for the medics."

So if they are ineffective, why do medics need them? If medics are at higher risk, why do they need the ineffective masks?

You can see now why I found what you said confusing.

 

[Jon]

Jon, there is always the Yale Law of Experts - "You can take all of the experts in a particular field and ask them a question with complex elements. You can then lay them end to end and they still won't reach a conclusion."

I often have a suspicion of experts. Take football pundits. They are supposed to be "experts", but none of them agree with one another. How many truths are true?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

There are ALWAYS people going around claiming to have some "truth" but all too often, their truth is actually just an opinion.

 

[Jon]

I think you have to look at these things probabilistically. What weight should you give to different opinions? What authority should you attribute towards an "expert"? If we operated within a vacuum, you might choose to listen to the top expert in the field. But we don't. There are other factors. Was it not Fauci himself who admitted they lied about how effective masks were at reducing the spread of Covid because they feared a shortage?

Dr. Fauci admits health experts lied about masks at the beginning of coronavirus pandemic - Tech Startups

In the early weeks of the coronavirus epidemic, the question many Americans were asking was: Should we be wearing masks? In response, U.S. public health officials including theU.S. Surgeon, said that masks weren't necessary for the general public. “The data doesn’t show that wearing masks in...

techstartups.com

 

[Vassago]

They said masks are ineffective at protecting the wearer. THEY STILL SAY THAT. Since then, they have found that masks are effective in HELPING prevent spread by potentially protecting those around you. It's more of an amendment than a change.

ORIGINAL: Masks are ineffective in protecting the wearer.

NOW: Masks are ineffective in protecting the wearer. HOWEVER, they can help limit the spread by limiting the viral spray from those wearing them.

I can't make it less confusing than that.

 

[Vassago]

In his actual quote, he didn't admit he "lied." He stated that they were concerned about the lack of supplies and already "knew" it wasn't very effective at protecting the wearer. The misleading is in that they didn't take into consideration that it could help protect others from the wearer. It again goes back to what we learn as we go. It wasn't a tactical misleading, it was one with a lack of understanding.

You still haven't answered any of my questions either. What CURRENT advice shouldn't we listen to? Debating about past statements doesn't make the current guidance the best guidance to follow to not only protect the public, but also keep the economy open.

 

[Jon]

ORIGINAL: Masks are ineffective in protecting the wearer.

But Fauci said this:

“And we wanted to make sure that the people namely, the health care workers, who were brave enough to put themselves in a harm way, to take care of people who you know were infected with the coronavirus and the danger of them getting infected.”

Source: https://techstartups.com/2020/06/17...sks-at-the-beginning-of-coronavirus-pandemic/

He wanted to avoid the medical staff getting infected, in his own words. So my question is still, if masks are ineffective, why did they want the ineffective masks for the medics?

Edit: I will give you a helping hand. They all lied to avoid a shortage. And this leads to the conclusion that it is naive to believe you should always trust the medical experts.

 

[Jon]

In his actual quote, he didn't admit he "lied." He stated that they were concerned about the lack of supplies and already "knew" it wasn't very effective at protecting the wearer. The misleading is in that they didn't take into consideration that it could help protect others from the wearer. It again goes back to what we learn as we go. It wasn't a tactical misleading, it was one with a lack of understanding.

He doesn't need to admit it, because he has been caught in a lie. You cannot advise the public not to wear masks because they are ineffective and at the same time say we need the ineffective masks for the medics. I am not sure what part of that you aren't getting!!

You still haven't answered any of my questions either. What CURRENT advice shouldn't we listen to? Debating about past statements doesn't make the current guidance the best guidance to follow to not only protect the public, but also keep the economy open.

Regarding current advice, I have already answered that. See this post: https://www.access-programmers.co.u...-virus-wear-or-not.314456/page-3#post-1727454

And here: https://www.access-programmers.co.u...-virus-wear-or-not.314456/page-3#post-1727465