Quote (TiStuff @ Feb 17 2021 11:15pm)
you never researched chit. you slapped it right on there. tell your self what you need to tell your self
i didnt need to. you provided the research that proved my point. youre just too stupid to understand why. youre cherry picking a single limited statement in the paper and applying it broadly to all masks, even though thats not what the paper says or is dealing with, and even though it concludes that DESPITE that, theres still no significant harmful physiological effects to wearing a mask.
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 17 2021 10:14pm)
"Many" is a meaningless number. What percentage? What ages? I've yet to see a number that indicates hospitalizations of working aged people would put a strain on hospitals, and certainly not children. Further, the cases of long term effects are more limited than the cases of deaths, by all data I've been able to find.
And old people die. Everyone, for that matter, dies. Incentivizing the old people to self-quarantine and utilizing alternative methods to provide them needed goods is a meaningful way to keep them as safe as we can until they can get a vaccine. Why is the solution on this subject to quarantine the healthy to protect the sick? That's not how life works. That's how you destroy economies.
wearing a mask doesnt destroy economies, and thats what we're dealing with here. lockdowns are another matter, and i dont entirely agree with those. those DO kill economies. masks, however, are the subject of this thread, and they remain an easy way to limit the spread with little to no harmful effects. the only issue with them is that selfish idiots like you and ti dont want to wear them cause "muh rights, derp".