Quote (MildlyInappropriate @ Aug 4 2022 03:02am)
video gone :(
the first one?
-----------------------------------------------------
i know how fraud lefties like to go off topic on threads to get them cancelled so i am moving your arguing here.
Quote
Well played sir. Finally something that is not complete Ti bullshit.
I don't want to discuss global warming because otherwise we would never be able to focus on one single topic.
So back to covid masks and our 2 research paper links:
First of all, your research paper was published in March 2021. The one I sent was published Dec 2020 and revised in January 2021. So not much difference there.
Now, before you look at the verdict of a research paper, you need to check what a paper tries to solve:
My paper:
Quote
In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission characteristics, source control, wearer protection, sociological considerations, and implementation considerations.
Your paper:
Quote
The purpose of this study was to find if mandatory masking influences the case fatality rate.
So in short, my is focusing on transmission and protection of those who don't have the virus. Yours on the other hand focuses on the health of people who have Covid and are using masks but has nothing to say about the effects of masks in regards to transmission.
This is why the verdict seem so different... Because they try to solve different questions.
So both articles are right in what they try to achieve.
The logical conclusion is:
* Masks are very effective in stopping the spread.
* Stay home if you have covid and if you don't want to wear a mask.
* If you have covid and must leave the house wear a mask for the sake of your community. As per your own paper "high death rate occurs when you wear facemasks over many hours despite being ill (example given: medical personnel)."
Was a good read, thanks!
"First of all, your research paper was published in March 2021. The one I sent was published Dec 2020 and revised in January 2021. So not much difference there."
(my paper was made after mask mandates and based on hard data. yours appears to be some whipped up bullchit to enforce the face diaper)
"My paper:
Quote
In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission characteristics, source control, wearer protection, sociological considerations, and implementation considerations."
(thats the claim and i asked you to represent said claims you didnt. represent one claim in the paper that makes a positive argument for the mask. at this point I am betting you didnt even read the thing)
"Your paper:
Quote
The purpose of this study was to find if mandatory masking influences the case fatality rate."
(false, i clearly stated it was the latest on masks. the mask argument is an accumulation of arguments as represented in this thread which is over a year old now.)
"So in short, my is focusing on transmission and protection of those who don't have the virus. Yours on the other hand focuses on the health of people who have Covid and are using masks but has nothing to say about the effects of masks in regards to transmission."
(like i said. what i offered was just the latest on masks. its dishonest of you to try to make it the sole argument. perhaps that is why you posted your argument off topic in that other thread? now the argument is here. a thread about masks and the accumulation of arguments going back over a year.
This post was edited by TiStuff on Aug 4 2022 05:26pm