/sci/ - Science & Math

Here's my rule of thumb: if an authority has something to gain from you following its order, do the exact opposite of what they say. If the have nothing to gain from it, then it's probably wise to obey them.
Ask yourself, does CNN (and the media by proxy), benefit from you not wearing a mask?

>>11989033
lol even cucked numale network has to admit it now.

>>11989033
search on google scholar "pandemic mask use" retard it slows the spread rate during pandemics. you are a retard

Even your own thumbnail disagrees with what you're asserting. This kind of 30iq type of posting only works on /p*l/

>>11989056
How can it slow down the rate if they don't work?

>>11989062
they work a little bit. but they don't offer real protection. just reduction in some transmission probability. this will have an effect on the overall numbers.

>>11989033
>neck fleeces
>knitted masks
>folded bandanas
This is a meme study, testing fucking knitted masks?

Did you even read the article, you colossal inbred retard?

>>11989066
More dubious claims.

Well no shit they don't work. The masks 90% of society uses now are cheap disposable ones that you are supposed to destroy once you touch them or after ~2 hours. Otherwise you need a filter in a contained cartridge, the ones tradesmen use. But those generally cost around $40, are made in America, and do not lend themselves to cute designs.

>>11989033
The viral particle is much smaller than the aerosol it travels on, retard. And your link says the opposite.

The point of the mask isn't to protect the wearer, it's to protect people from the wearer if the wearer has covid and doesn't know.

The media don't want to mention this because people are going full retard when they think masks are for their safety, it would be even worst if they realized it was the safety of others.

>>11989033
>Mr. Jewberg what do we do? This whole pandemic hoax made us billions in mask sales but now all Americans already have masks. There is not any more money to be made!

>Silly Goystein, there's always more money to be made. Call CNN, tell them they now need a specific mask!

>>11989080
lmao why polacks too retarded research anything other then the last names of people they dont like. you made a retarded thread of something you can search on google scholar "pandemic mask use" do you really need someone to hold your hand to do that for you?

>>11989062
>if they don't work?
Stop black and white thinking. There are many possibilities between "doesn't work ever" and "works all the time", anything better than "doesn't work ever" is a huge benefit during a pandemic.

>>11989080
They are not tools of self protection. Imagine going into a potential toxic gas environment at work with a respirator which was only 20% effective. Such work would violate several worker safety regulations.
These unrated masks will reduce your risk of both getting and transmitting covid. Their effectiveness is unknown because it depends on the material and fit, and people wear them like retards. It's unlikely that they reduce particles by more than 20%. However that's a big enough difference to lower the Rt from over 1 to under 1 in many areas.
These shitty masks are NOT PPE. They are like everyone agreeing to put their trash in a trash can. If everyone does it, then there's less litter floating around. If you want to protect yourself then you need an N95 at a bare minimum, and you must ensure the fit is good. Complete protection requires the use of a full face respirator with N or P100 cartridge filters, or a positive pressure bottled gas system for the autistically paranoid.

>>11989033
>Ivy League
>Duke
>implying it matters anyway
But this isn't really telling us anything new, right? Masks that are designed for preventing the spread of respiratory droplets are good at preventing respiratory droplets. Putting a bandana on your face is not good at preventing respiratory droplets. People who do such a thing are retards anyway.

>>11989083
Cotton masks seemed to work fine.

Masks work. They offer modest protection for yourself, but are far better at protecting others. The reason for this discrepancy is that when you wear a mask, you are breathing out virus-laden droplets right into the mask, and droplets are much larger than viral particles alone. Wearing a mask means there are fewer viruses you're releasing into the environment, which means fewer people getting exposed and those exposed getting a lower viral load and therefore better prognosis. If enough people wear masks, that means less of the virus going around, meaning it spreads less, meaning it can get under control and OP's mom doesn't have to suck cocks to pay rent and can go back to welcoming customers at Walmart full time.

There is nothing controversial about this and this has been known long before the pandemic started (and it wasn't controversial back then). Why the fuck sub-80-IQ retards turned this into a political issue is beyond understanding.

this just in condoms dont work, lab tests find it is still possible to get sti's or pregnant by not using condoms correctly or them breaking.

Dont be a sheep anon stop using condoms

>>11989241
>1 in 100 chance of getting HIV from unprotected anal sex with infected person
>pretty much 100% of getting flu during unprotected anal sex with infected person
HIV is nothing to worry about, not even a flu!

>>11989273

HIV -approx 35 million deaths, makes corona virus look like a joke,

>>11989285
15,820 deaths in the US in 2018, COVID is actually 10-20x worse than HIV! Everyone panic!

>>11989296

HIV lockdown now, everybody must remain in there house and hot have sex for a year, this will eliminate the virus

>>11989033
I live in the Philippines where the vast majority (near 100%) of people here who go outside right now wear masks, and yet our daily case increase is still high (2 to 4%). Social distancing and mass disinfection are not always observed.

>>11989039
>Don't smoke inside
>Pay your taxes
>Wear a suit because your boss does
>Don't kill the POTUS
None of these is a good idea?

The mayor of New York is pleading with the public to not abandon using the subways and buses. Social distancing and hygiene have been completely abandoned in favor of the mask fetish. It's like it's some sort of magic force field that lets you do whatever you want and not get infected. You don't even need to wear it correctly, as long as it is visible, it's working. It's the perfect reflection of America's laziness and obsession with quick fixes.

>>11989581
Americans love their symbolism and the mask has become a symbol of trying to limit the spread.

>>11989555

Are people wearing masks in the workplace in Philippines?

Australia's contact tracing was showing once we had restraunts etc closed the majority of people where catching the virus in the workplace. We put in mandatory masks for everybody including in workplaces and our numbers have now stabilized after weeks of going upwards.

Also the mask is def only part of the solution, we are also social distancing, good hygiene etc

One other thing that turned up was people who get the virus in Australia need to self isolate in there home. The army checked on 3000 people with the virus who were supposed to be isolating in their houses and 800 where not home. So thats also a massive issue, people with the virus not isolating.
So now we also brought in random visits from the army for every single person infected at random times to ensure they are home and anybody not gets referred to the police and massive fine.
I think those 2 things are critically important to getting the virus under control.

>>11989033
N95 masks don't filter small particles using the physical gaps you retard, it's not like a sieve.

>>11989635
Masks are always mandatory in every establishments here. Our problem is that, a lot of people became too complacent after our government eased our community quarantine. i.e. People acted like it's back to normal, they immediately flocked the restaurants, bars, malls, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XOzpjuPGlE&t=244

>>11989635
Does the government deliver food to the people under mandatory isolation?

>>11989957

there are helplines you can call to get supplies, also the army checks you are ok and if you need any supplies when they do there random checks on people (so that its not full police state and keeps some first world democracy to it)

And finally all supermarkets here do contact less delivery where you can select you have corona virus and they have a system to deliver food to you with zero contact

>>11989789

restraunts and bars are massive vectors for transmission and i just dont understand why govts keep fucking this up.

Malls dont seem quite as bad but anything sitting indoors eating is highly risky.

And same thing happend in aus, we were down to 50 cases in total, people relaxed there guard and before you know it we are getting 700 new cases per day.

No doubt the same thing will happen again in a few months time once we have contained this outbreak...

>>11989972
If "containing the outbreak" means that it just goes back a bit later, then such containment is fully useless.

>>11989635
That's the reason why if you get corona or corona-like stuff, you should absolutely avoid going to doctors. Unless of course you enjoy house arrest and army visits.

>>11989033
Did you even read the article you posted?

>>11990009

We already thought of that, you get paid $300 to get tested here if you have to miss work for it, you get paid $1500 instantly if you test positive.

stick and carrot in play, hopefully does the job

>>11989569
The second point obviously gives profit to authorities and half of America will probably be happy about the last. Others are about various degrees of submission.

>>11990002

na those couple of months with low cases are pretty chill, its nice to relax for a bit before having to go back into playing russian roulette going out in public

>>11989273
Sounds homophobic.

>>11989302
I'm doing my part!

>>11989033
>Covid-19 particle is smaller than the N95 mask gaps.
not how it works, surprisingly
5min of googling would have taught you that, but it's more fun to shitpost isn't it

>>11990056
He's not doing it for fun, he's doing it (knowingly or otherwise) to help accelerate the spread of COVID 19 throughout the USA, weakening it in preparation for China's attempt at establishing a global hegemon

Why are conservatives having such a retarded meltdown about having to wear a fucking mask?

>>11990066
If you want to wear a mask, wear it yourself (or better don't leave home).

>>11989033
>".. very simple masks, like these homemade cotton masks, do really well to stop the majority of these respiratory droplets," Fischer said.

Why would you link this article when it doesn't even support your argument? It says even homemade masks perform quite well, couldn't you have found something better?

>>11989033
it catches the shit thats coming out of your mouth.

They work.

>>11990066
Boy who cried wolf. Kikes lied too many times so nobody will believe them when they (>implying) tell the truth
Social Distancing meme died instantly when blacks were going to be uppity.

Rate my mask bros

>>11989033
Your fucking study doesn't even say what you're claiming. Do you expect no one to actually read the link?

Works:
>surgical masks
>respirators
>cotton masks

Doesn't work:
>bandanas
>neck fleeces

The CDC and WHO are both recommending multi-layer masks, which wouldn't fall under the latter category.

10.1126/sciadv.abd3083
"In proof-of-principle studies, we compared a variety of commonly available mask types and observed that some mask types approach the performance of standard surgical masks, while some mask alternatives, such as neck fleece or bandanas, offer very little protection."

>>11989033
>Because the size of the Covid-19 particle is smaller than the N95 mask gaps

It was happeningtards that suggested only n95 masks worked. many people tried to design masks that tried to force you to breath trough a filter, as if the entire atmosphere was full of loose virions

>>11990066
Because the Dems said you should. That's really all there is to it. I could explain more in depth, but the tl;dr really is just that CNN said to do it, ergo fuck them. CNN also says that your children should be taken from you and ritually mutilated and you're a bad person if you disagree, so Cletus's kneejerk reaction to this is entirely morally valid, it just happens to be over something that's actually the wrong thing to do (the correct answer is to wear a mask AND say fuck CNN, because they were the ones saying you're a bad person for wearing a mask for like, four months straight).

>>11990180
>Because the Dems said you should.
Sounds like a valid heuristics already.

>>11990066
They are being covertly encouraged by hostile foreign governments through an extensive misinformation and propaganda campaign designed to play on their per-existing mistrust of governments and scientists.

>>11990209
Lockdown and mask proponents were bribed by China.

>>11989581
>The mayor of New York is pleading with the public to not abandon using the subways and buses. Social distancing and hygiene have been completely abandoned in favor of the mask fetish.
NYC never shut down the subway.

>>11989972
>people relaxed there guard and before you know it we are getting 700 new cases per day.
Light weights!

>>11990212
Which is an important part of the overall strategy.
By backing both sides of a given partisan divide, you can rapidly escalate the situation by feeding propaganda to both sides about how the other side is growing in strength and planning to destroy them, whilst simultaneously encouraging that very same growth in both sides to ensure that they believe you.

>>11990209
Woah, cool it with the Anti-Semitism there bud, AIPAC is an American Institution and every dollar they give to the re-election campaigns of various congressmen is funded with American Tax Dollars. You're LITERALLY being Anti-American here bud.

>>11990251
AIPAC?
I was talking about the united front project

>>11990261
Wait my bad, it's called the 'united front work department' not 'united front project'

>>11990261
>>11990266
>>11990251
so, what you are telling me is that america is caught between israeli and chinese interests, neither of which are actually at all beneficial to the american people? it's almost like americans need to take a... third position, or something...

>>11990251
>Anti-American
And that's a good thing.

>>11990280
No, what I am telling you is that America is caught between a clusterfuck of foreign interests including (but not limited to) China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Pakistan and many others, operating separately but with the joint goal of undermining the stability of the United States of America.
Recently, these actors have taken advantage of the coronavirus pandemic by spreading misinformation and propaganda aimed at encouraging the spread of the virus and more generally sowing confusion and hostility amongst the general public.

>>11989039
Delete yourself from the genpool.

>>11990330
Don't worry m8 he's well on the way to doing that already

>>11989193
why the thread continued past this post is beyond me. Everything that needs to be said and read is is in it.

>>11989039
>if an authority has something to gain
>does CNN (and the media by proxy), benefit from you not wearing a mask?
Since when is the media an authority? Even the majority of Republican politicians believe people should be wearing masks.

>>11990321
Diversity is our strength! Interesting that most of the countries manipulating the United States have very little diversity.

>>11990369
>Republican politicians
All politicians, regardless of party, are sociopaths.

>>11990232
Which shows they were never serious about containing the virus. Masks are a red herring to hide the fact that population density is the main culprit, made worse by those living in such areas refusing the social distance properly.

>>11990145
Poor. Infections through the eyes are almost as common as through the mouth and nose.

>>11990063
pretty based honestly

>>11990876
>Which shows they were never serious about containing the virus.
I mean, you have people throwing a fit over masks, you don't think there'd be rioting if public transportation was shut down in NYC? Mask mandates are a result of people refusing to socially distance (just look at the acceleration of cases and deaths stemming from Independence Day celebrations).

>>11989033
It doesn't matter whether they work against COVID or not. As long as they hide my acne, they work for me.

>>11989033
>We already knew why they don't work. Because the size of the Covid-19 particle is smaller than the N95 mask gaps.
In those threads, you were told that viruses don't fly but travel on water, making the particle much larger than the virus itself.
Even if your conclusion had been correct (it isn't, you're just incapable of reading and comprehending), your reasoning was retarded.
Also read what it says in the pic. Does it say masks don't work?
Please leave this board.

>>11989033
>We already knew why they don't work. Because the size of the Covid-19 particle is smaller than the N95 mask gaps.
I have a better answer. People keep lifting their mask, pulling down below nose, or wearing the mask around their neck. We have to remind patients not to do that even if it's uncomfortable to breathe through masks.
>t. healthcare

>>11990016
>Did you even read the article you posted?
Ha apparently not

This is proof that masks work.

Just that shitty masks like neck gaiters and knitted masks don't

>>11991037
>People keep lifting their mask, pulling down below nose, or wearing the mask around their neck.
What are the risks for a person who takes off their mask, plays with it for a while in their hands, then puts it back on? Could they reasonably be infected from passing germs from the mask to their hands and vice versa? I'm anal about not touching my mask unless I clean my hands first, and I clean my hands immediately after handling my mask, but I see people constantly messing with their masks and it drives me nuts as a germaphobe. I feel like the risk must be overall quite low, otherwise masks wouldn't show the efficacy that they do, or maybe people from other countries aren't so careless with their mask habits.

>>11990996
Urbanites are selfish retards. Make them wear masks and leave the rest of the country alone since people in rural areas naturally social distance and understand what soap and water are for.

>>11989033
I was buying a load of medical grade FFP3 masks in January. The messaging of other types of masks being viable stems from the unavailability of enough masks and is a tradeoff. A tradeoff that is not good enough for me so I keep using the good stuff. Tried stocking up again but FFP3 is impossible to order even now...sucks to be a normie. Think for yourself and take care of your loved ones, trusting in present day society or government will fuck you over.

>>11990996
They can throw a fit all they like, it won't make the trains run.

>>11989789
Going to bars and generally enjoying life when you're young is more important than trying to prolong the lives of the elderly.

>>11989033
Point isn't to stop it 100% but the reduce the distance the virus travels in air

>go to the doctor for an ear ache
>wear an n95 mask
>sorry sir, we require everyone to wear one of our certified masks
>hands me a shitty blue surgical mask
>doesn't even remotely seal to my face
>go check in
>the receptionist, who is clearly sick, coughs and sneezes all over me
>a week later I'm starting to feel the coronachan
Nice.

>>11989039
When the outbreak started they said not to wear masks, now they say we should. So which opposite is the right one?

>>11991122
>since people in rural areas naturally social distance and understand what soap and water are for.
Rural areas are spreading the virus, though...

>>11991220
If old people go to bars and party hard, then the risk is obvious.

>>11989062(OP)
>>11989033(fag)

They prevent YOU from spreading YOUR germs in aerosol form, by covering your coughs and sneezes etc. Everyone in an area containing themselves with any material is effectively the same as everyone wearing gas masks.

>>11991679
I am healthy though.
>but you can be sick!
What is the presumption of innocence?
>it's some nonsense! we'll force you to wear a muzzle
Ok, good luck with that.

>>11991666
Frankly that's their business.

I don't know if it is all media bullshit in other countries, but the doctor who has been the main voice in all of the pandemic has clearly stated that there is insufficient epidemiological evidence (not the fucking spray study, obviously a mask is a barrier for your spit and snot lmao the study only tests effectiveness of materials, it is not epidemiological data) of the mask as an effective tool, mainly over concerns that it makes people overconfident about their actions and the mask alone doesn't protect other other pathways for the virus. He also has some issue that because it is uncomfortable, people tend to adjust it and this increases how much you touch your face with your hand. So he basically said that he just recommends it as obligatory for people who already have symptoms and medical personnel, but says that for the general population the thing that is key is to practice social distancing, avoid mobilization anytime you can, and continuously wash your hands. Most of this comes from CDC and other health organizations. Now, from these pretty sensible words, why is everyone losing their shit over the fucking mask? In my country it is pretty obvious people are just reading the retarded take from the press, but it doesn't take too much research to find these points.

>>11991693
>What is the presumption of innocence?
This isn't a court of law, you're not "guilty" if you're unknowingly sick. If you commit a crime, you know whether or not you've committed it. You can't know whether or not you're harboring a virus that could kill someone else.

>>11991709
If you are a serial murderer, you can possibly kill someone, but you will not kill them if you will stay home (or in prison). Therefore it is wise to put you under arrest (but not as a punishment, just as a safety measure).

>>11989033
The viruses are floating around in saliva and mucus, not on their own, you utter fucking imbecile.

>>11991661
Urbanites are fleeing their infested cities and spreading their filth into rural areas.

>>11991654
Both.

>>11991679
Masks can't block aerosols, which aren't the same thing as droplets.

>>11991722
>Therefore it is wise to put you under arrest (but not as a punishment, just as a safety measure).
Really bad analogy considering you're not being constrained to your home. Try to figure out how to work a serial murderer into wearing a mask and I'll give it some thought.

>>11991742
But you're distancing, so you can't get it from an infected person, right?

>>11991750
>considering you're not being constrained to your home.
Lockdown in many places included demands to stay home and ask for permission to get out.
> Try to figure out how to work a serial murderer into wearing a mask
Well, serial murderer is more dangerous for people he meets than a certain cold. So the murderer example is even more strong.

>>11991761
>Lockdown in many places included demands to stay home and ask for permission to get out.
Besides China, where? Certainly not in the USA.

>>11991765
Vietnam.

>>11991761
>Well, serial murderer is more dangerous for people he meets than a certain cold. So the murderer example is even more strong.
I don't know of any serial killer who killed 730k people.

>>11991771
I can kill 730k people by not wearing a mask? That's badass.

>>11991775
The virus can, and you may be harboring it, so wear a mask to keep it in your mouth and nose.

>>11991765
France, India, Russia, Italy, Australia and so on.

>>11991779
So when I don't want to kill people, I'm given credit for killing people.
But when I do want to kill people, I'm denied credit for killing people?

This is lame. You know this is lame.

>>11991771
Various murderers killed millions of people throughout the world.

>>11991783
So it turns out it's true for France at least. People literally needing permission to leave their homes, yet Americans are throwing a fit over needing to wear a mask.

>>11991779
If I MAY be harboring it, then I MAY be wearing the mask (but I probably will not in both cases).

>>11991787
"so what if you are raped? some people are murdered" is not a very convincing argument.

>>11991784
>So when I don't want to kill people, I'm given credit for killing people.
You're not, the virus is. You're not constricted by a mask, the virus is.

>>11991785
No, they may have ordered murders, but no serial killer directly killed that many people.

You guys realize they linked the study, right?

>>11991792
It's a very convincing argument that Americans are screaming while other countries have much tighter restrictions...and when you look at the results, clearly the USA's approach is failing. Maybe it really does need to lock everyone down, no choice given.

>>11991794
If I'm not killing anybody, then why do I have any obligation to wear a mask? What the virus does is the virus's business, not mine.

>>11991794
Just like no one did infect, let alone kill any significant number of people.

>>11991790
And if you have three beers, you MAY be drunk, but if you get pulled over it won't matter to the cop.

>>11991796
>none
>fleece
holy based, I'm going to get a fleece mask and become a covid super spreader.

>>11991803
>What the virus does is the virus's business, not mine.
Aiding and abetting. Harboring criminals is a crime.

>>11991799
>clearly the USA's approach is failing
Since "contain the corona" isn't a desired goal compared to "fight for your freedom", they are clearly not failing. But North Korea supposedly has very little cases, so they must be the best nation in the world.

>>11991799
That's not a convincing argument when I'd rather have more people die than be personally inconvenienced.

>>11991811
The virus never paid me rent, it was squatting. I cannot therefore be said to have harbored it.

>>11991806
>Just like no one did infect, let alone kill any significant number of people.
Kek, single people have been found to have directly infected hundreds of other people, resulting in numerous deaths.

>>11991807
Then it's a practical question whether the cops will be able to force masks everywhere. But they actually should force all the covid truthers under a house arrest instead. That will benefit everyone.

>>11991816
>it was squatting.
You didn't wear a mask, you left the door open and invited it in, you're guilty, go to jail.

>>11991817
Then complain about these specific people.

>>11991820
Leaving a door unlocked doesn't make trespassing and squatting legal.

>>11991813
>Since "contain the corona" isn't a desired goal compared to "fight for your freedom"
American citizens have less freedom now than European countries that lifted many of their restrictions. Great job guys, you fucked it up for everyone in the long term because you couldn't tolerate some short term discomfort.

>>11991820
You exited your house, you increased the corona chances, go to jail.

>>11991822
>Leaving a door unlocked
No, wide open, didn't even have a door.

>>11991823
If you are abused by some force, then complying with its demands isn't the best strategy.

>>11991827
Changes nothing. Even if your property has no fence, it's still your property.

>>11991825
So did you. So you're cool with mandatory lockdown, yes? Me too, we agree that's the right approach.

>>11991823
If most of their citizens already got corona, then its mortality turns out to be no worse than flu.

>>11991839
>If most of their citizens already got corona
They didn't. Not even 5%.

>then its mortality turns out to be no worse than flu.
The flu annually kills 5k Americans.

>>11991838
I'm absolutely pro-lockdown for corona truthers. Meanwhile corona denialists should continue their lives as usual.

>>11991845
>They didn't. Not even 5%.
Then it looks like the lockdown isn't necessary against corona (and was in fact, criminal). When the lockdown authors will go into jail then?

>>11991847
>Meanwhile corona denialists should continue their lives as usual.
I hope you've stocked up on supplies, because the country would be shut down if half the nation quit working.

>>11991851
>When the lockdown authors will go into jail then?
You think Trump should go to jail?

>>11991856
Population should be voluntarily divided in two groups: corona truthers (who think that it's a big deal) and corona denialists (who don't think that it is dangerous or are willing to take the risk). Then the first group should absolutely be forced to stay at home (and if absolutely necessary, transported to other place in hazmat suit). Meanwhile the second should do what they want and take the risk.

>>11991862
>Meanwhile the second should do what they want and take the risk.
What will you do? Stores will be closed, supplies won't be available. Many businesses can't function without most of their staff. I guess you could go to a park, which was allowed during the lockdown anyway, so i'm not sure why you'd care about that.

>>11991868
If some store owner (or a store clerk) does not want to go to work and wants to permanently stay home, how can I forbid him to do that? In fact, he is perfectly able to do it now. But it also doesn't look like most of people want to do that.

>>11991873
>If some store owner (or a store clerk) does not want to go to work and wants to permanently stay home, how can I forbid him to do that?
That's changing the scenario, yes? You were talking about corona truthers and deniers. Many people are fearful of corona but continue working because they need to make a living. Those people in your scenario would have to stay home.

>>11991878
No, it's not:
>and corona denialists (who don't think that it is dangerous or are willing to take the risk)
If you are ready to go out, then you are willing to take the risk. If you are in this group, no one prohibits you from staying at home or wearing the mask whenever you want. So get in this group and then make further choices (but for yourself only).

>>11991883
Dude, that's the situation we're already in. Great plan!

>>11991886
Wonderful! Then stay at home/go out, wear a mask/don't wear a mask. World is full of choices and if you make them for yourself only, then no one will mind.

>>11991654
They said that because they didn’t want people buying out the mask supply that they needed for healthcare workers

>>11991890
Exactly. If you don't want to wear a mask, don't go to places that require masks. You don't have to wear a mask if you don't go to those places. It works for everyone. :-)

>>11991893
No, it's clearly you who should not go to places where there is a chance to meet someone without a mask. If you will meet him, you can catch corona, and then you can kill someone! Better stay at home because otherwise you can become a killer. ;-)

>>11991898
>No, it's clearly you who should not go to places where there is a chance to meet someone without a mask.
I don't, I only go where mask rules are enforced. You should only go where you're not required to wear a mask. It works for everyone.

>>11991905
Well, it seems like in almost all places wearing masks is not enforced. So I'll continue to avoid wearing them (and so can you if you wish). Good the we came to a certain conclusion.

>>11991909
>Well, it seems like in almost all places wearing masks is not enforced.
I'm sorry you live in a place like that. Fortunately I don't and the cases are low.

>>11991913
Well, if the whole world is like your place and almost everyone everywhere wears masks now, then you have no reason to be concerned. Judging by my observations, masks are almost ignored (and that trend is increasing in the world). So both of us now can be happy about the world we live in and continue to do what we are doing.

Do people in the United States just randomly spit on each other? All of these videos and studies show people expelling rather large quantities of spit. Is that how American people talk? Do you all cough all over each other all the time? I don't get how any of this represents the typical activities of civilized humans but maybe my culture is different than American culture. Some women here wear masks, especially the young women, but that seems to be as much about having a new opportunity to accessorize than out of fear of a virus. No one spits on each other. Not a lot of coughing or sneezing this time of year. All this talk about droplets and aerosols makes me wonder if you people who use umbrellas instead of masks.

>>11991966
Per >>11991941 they yell at each other.

>>11991966
A common American rebuttal to wearing masks is that when they shit themselves you still smell it so masks don't work. Very few wash their hands, and if they aren't using their hands to cough they just don't cover it at all. It should not be surprising that Americans spit on each other.

>>11991966
>All of these videos and studies show people expelling rather large quantities of spit.
Plosives and fricatives will always release spit by their very nature, and I'm not aware of a human language that lacks them.

>>11989080
Yeah and I 110% agree and I also think doctors shouldn't wear masks during surgery or operations too. I also think construction workers, laboratory scientists, and Halloween lovers should forego their masks.

Why are some establishments allowed to have a face mask policy for their clientele without having a conspicuous sign saying so? If covid-19 is such a big deal then they should be everywhere and government subsidized.

>>11989033
The article you're citing is referencing an experiment saying the N95s do work. Did you even read that article? It's saying SOME of the masks that people wear don't work.

>>11992398
Except literally no one wears n95s where I live (American city). It’s all bandanas, shirts pulled up, cheap disposable Chinese paper things. “Masks” might as well refer to these improvised things, so, for all intents and purposes, masks do not work.

>>11991654

researching is constantly evolving. you shouldn't let the knowledge of the past limit your ability to understand the knowledge of the present

>>11992631
Same. In my state the governor's mask order specifically discourages us from wearing medical masks.

>>11989033
Why do you think you know better than the CDC and WHO on how to prevent Covid?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.13553.pdf
There's a study on how masks work. I'll await your peer-reviewed rebuttal champ.
Also an implied, in my opinion, strawman in the OP is that the masks help YOU stay uninfected. In reality, they help to stop you spreading COVID-19 more than the other way around.

>>11992631
Yes you retard. They're measuring the admittance of particulate through the mask through passive diffusion from talking. Their conclusion is that N95s, cotton masks and surgical masks all work well. Bandanas and cable-knit masks did nothing. This is not at all what you're saying. Their conclusion is that good, well made masks work. Your grandmas wool-knitted mask to keep your mouth warm in winter does not block COVID.
>Bringing up that viral particulate is smaller than the filter
That's not the point you retard. Pushing high volumes through narrow spaces causes turbulence via entrance-effects of fluid dynamics. This turbulence keeps your sneezing ass from projecting spit in a huge cone and makes it more of a flaccid rain in front of you.
>Americans buy shit products
Yes

And most importantly
>MAKING ME READ CNN
FIRE A ROUND THROUGH YOUR FUCKING TEMPLE FOR MAKING ME DO THIS OP

did everyone just forget that the virus has a 2 week period where you won't notice if you have it? Isn't that the point of the masks? To slow the spread of the virus because it's really hard to tell who has it and when they do have it it's already too late to know how many people it could have possibly spread to. Amongst all this bickering about the masks themselves it's like people have forgotten the purpose they served in the first place, it's fucking insanity.

>>11991654
Many years ago bloodletting was used as treatment and now we have pharmaceuticals. Ugh, so confusing!

>>11991891
>they just lied to the populace
>but this time it's the truth
Ahh of course, now it's just solid science.

>>11992726
It's. Been. Five. Fucking. Months.
How fucking long are you goddamn idiots going to keep this shit up? You going to live in fear for the rest of your fucking life you fucking pussy? Is that what you're going to do? After we've been straight up lied to constantly and consistently? While there are a metric fuckton of hypocrisies made on a daily basis? Where people are allowed to riot for some black guy no one knew or cared about, but not be able to protest for losing their fucking jobs and livelihoods because of being shut down and completely throwing peoples rights out the window? And for what exactly? A chest cold with a mortality rate that not only has been largely artificially inflated and lied about, but is 0.5%? It's time to stop living in fear. The only fucking reason this shit is even being given the time of day it is right now is because it's an election year. If you can't understand or comprehend the clear narratives people are trying to push, you're fucking blind.

>>11989033
>It's now confirmed by an Ivy League University and the argument that masks work is now dead
>>11991796
This

at least look at the pretty pictures in the article sweety

>>11989039
>Ask yourself, does CNN (and the media by proxy), benefit from you not wearing a mask?
They get better ratings when masked people are fomenting protest from a thin veil of perceived anonymity, so they lose out when people don't wear masks.

>>11989241
>A certain grade of condom works, so that means any piece of cylindrical plastic you put on your penis is just as good as a condom.

>>11990056
>the "N95" is a government efficiency rating that means the mask blocks about 95 percent of particles that are 0.3 microns in size or larger.

The average diameter of the virus particles is around 120 nm (.12 microns).

The virus is 1/3 of the size of what 95 masks filter out only 95%.

>>11990176
>as if the entire atmosphere was full of loose virions
It is, the largest mass of organisms on earth is the virus.

>>11992738
So you are saying we gave gained a century's worth of revolutionary knowledge regarding fluid dynamics and particle physics in the last 3 months?

>>11991679
>prevent
They don't prevent anything, they slightly hinder.

>>11991709
>This isn't a court of law,
Yes, they are literally shutting down courts of law over presumptions.

>>11991834
You still need a no trespassing sign or you may be held legally liable for what people do on your property or if some kid hurts themselves on your trampoline or something.

>>11991868
>Stores will be closed, supplies won't be available.
Some stores will be closed, some will remain open and the ones that remain open will profit from the sale of excessive supplies that other stores refused to make available.

>>11992178
None of those people are told to just put a piece of reused tshirt cloth over their mouth.

>>11989039

pretty dumb rule desu

>>11991654
nothing wrong with wearing a mask, something very strange about telling people not to wear masks though.

>>11992738
If some doctor will recommend bloodletting now and will curse it month later, I'll avoid him.

>>11992726
I don't mind getting a virus. If you don't mind getting a virus too, welcome, and if you are afraid of it, stay home.

>>11992859
sauce? that's a pretty interesting stat

>>11992854
that's still not how it works, masks fliter respiratory droplets, not airborne virus particles. I don't know what the relative saturation between the two states is but i have no problem following a professional recommendation in a bit of darkness, like all of scientific work.

>>11993548
you're a retarded faggot who has the luxury of being able to stay at home, people who need to work don't have that choice and you're exposing them because "muh my face gets swedi"

You guys have convinced me about mask magic. I probably have COVID19, I have many of the symptoms. I'm going to Home Depot and Wal-Mart wearing my N95 vented mask. This is acceptable at both places. I thought social distancing and hygiene was the answer but /sci/ has convinced me the magic mask is the answer. Hope to see some of you at the store.

>>11994003
Also I have a huge beard but that's ok because, mask magic.

>>11994003
>I thought social distancing and hygiene was the answer
If you needed a pandemic to tell you to wash your hands and not get right next to people then you're already a lost cause. Those should be minimum requirements at all times.

>>11989033
50% pathogens of original is still something imunity system can create reaction to and you became immune, because more pathogenst means they grow faster by geometrical sequence, therefore any protection is better than no protection.

You actually need SOME pathogens to survive a big dose of pathogens latter.

this is beyond my circle of competence, so I will not type out opinions and guesses.

The one thing that bothers me is the tendency to conflate different masks and ventilators.

I have to abstain from posting on this comment, because I experience a lot of irrational emotions, and cognitive biases, related to different triggers, such as 'politics'. I never want to type things that I don't have a strong rational understanding of.

>>11993952
>you're exposing them because "muh my face gets swedi"
no, cus they'll have a magical virus mask on (that totally works cus the gov said so). only one exposed is me by your logic so why do you give a shit.

>>11989033
>We already knew why they don't work. Because the size of the Covid-19 particle is smaller than the N95 mask gaps.
Congratulations, you're a complete and utter brainlet.
YOUR PRIZE FOR WINNING THIS COMPETITION: go back to >>>/b/ and don't leave there again

>>11995285
Anon, wear a hazmat suit.

>>11995188
>only one exposed is me by your logic so why do you give a shit.
>(that totally works cus the gov said so)
If you're going to tell us what the government says, then you could at least get it right.

-Masks may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others.

-Masks are most likely to reduce the spread of COVID-19 when they are widely used by people in public settings.

-Masks with exhalation valves or vents should NOT be worn to help prevent the person wearing the mask from spreading COVID-19 to others (source control).

All from the CDC.

>>11995291
>ONE OF US
>ONE OF US
>ONE OF US
>ONE OF US
>ONE OF US
...
>ONE OF US

>>11995294
>Masks may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others.
ya I say bullshit. show me the proof it works. I can easily show you it makes zero difference. *see swedens reaction to covid

>>11995338
>*see swedens reaction to covid
Yeah, their numbers falling when everyone is on summer vacation is really impressive, meanwhile they still have ten times the infection and fatality rate of their nearest neighbors. With their approach, the USA would be over a million deaths.

>>11995338
Okay. Go lick an escalator rail and report back to us in 2 weeks.

>>11995347
>With their approach, the USA would be over a million deaths.
USA rates are the same with Sweden. Looks like lockdowns are useless.

>>11993952
>the luxury of being able to stay at home
But I go out every day.

>>11995394
>USA rates are the same with Sweden.
And Sweden is very different from the USA in many ways, making it difficult to compare. You know what places Sweden is similar to? Finland, Denmark, and Norway, all geographic neighbors that did lock down, and Sweden has fared significantly worse than all of them. Millions would have died in the USA with Sweden's approach.

>>11995414
>we will cherrypick cases to prove whatever we want
No, we will not. Anyway, if Sweden would have fared literally worse than every other country and not barely worse, but ten times worse, then the argument for lockdown would have a certain (not decisive) weight. In our case it has no weight at all.
>Millions would have died in the USA with Sweden's approach.
No, as we see, lockdowns and masks are useless or even malignant.

Russia introduced full lockdown with house exit permits and has 15K deaths. Very similar Belarus had no lockdown at all (it ignored covid even more than Sweden) and it has ~500 deaths. Looks like lockdowns are harmful.

>>11995440
Kek, yeah, sure, it's cherrypicking to choose countries in a similar geographic location, with similar population densities, and similar social customs. It's *not* cherrypicking to choose a country in a different geographical area, with different social customs, and many cities with much higher population densities than the most populated city in Sweden.

Do you smoke a lot of crack?

>if Sweden would have fared literally worse than every other country and not barely worse, but ten times worse
And they literally did just that when comparing to their immediate neighbors. It was a perfect experiment, three serving as controls while the other tested out its own approach, and it was a fucking disaster.

Lockdowns are not long-term effective because national economies can't be kept afloat by web developers and paper-shufflers, people have to physically do work, which ironically also includes having the necessities of life delivered PHYSICALLY to your door, which involves quite a few people PHYSICALLY moving objects around and PHYSICALLY interacting with each other on the regular.

..oh and anyone citing New Zealand as an example can consider themselves slapped, NZ is an island so sure it's easy to control it there!

>>11995455
Yes, when we are comparing countries with lockdowns to countries with no lockdowns (and also talking about specifically USA) you can't just cherrypick numbers to your taste. But you can compare with other no-lockdown countries. Sweden, Belarus, who else?
>and it was a fucking disaster.
Every country which introduced a grotesque abuse of citizen rights due to a cold is a fucking disaster. Sweden is a shining beacon of freedom solely because it did not do that.

>>11995479
>you can't just cherrypick numbers to your taste.
You're the jackass cherry picking the USA and Sweden and ignoring Norway, Finland, and Denmark.

>But you can compare with other no-lockdown countries. Sweden, Belarus, who else?
You compared Belarus and Russia. So let's see, we have Minsk, with a population of 1.8 million, and the next largest city has 150k people. Yeah, what a great comparison when Russia has a single city with a larger population than all of Belarus, and 15 cities with over a million people. I wonder why Russia may be doing worse? It's almost like having a shitload of people confined to small areas spreads disease or something.

>>11995479
>Sweden is a shining beacon of freedom solely because it did not do that.
Sweden straight up murdered their elderly population when their neighbors shown it didn't have to be that way, and Sweden's economy didn't even benefit from it. But being inconvenienced is more important than the significant loss of lives.

>>11995493
We are picking USA because USA is the most discussed country ITT and most posters are American, and we are picking Sweden because it's the most famous no-lockdown country. But OK, we can switch to Belarus.
>You compared Belarus and Russia.
Yes, Russia has 15 times larger population than Belarus. It also has 30 times more deaths (still a negligible number compared to its size). But it also had full 1984 for a few months and Belarus did not. Looks like a pure victory.
Anyway, your direct comparisons of country populations do matter only if majority (or at least tens of percents) already got covid. If that's true, then covid death rates fall even further down. Judging by the current slowing of new cases it may well be the case.

>>11995497
>murdered their elderly population
Sounds like Cuomo of New York who forced to send sick people to nursing homes back in April and even May.
But you are also correct about covid being dangerous only to a very small elderly subset of population. So instead of putting all population under a house arrest and exposing the vulnerable people you can do the reverse and get almost no negatives.

>>11995513
>We are picking USA because USA is the most discussed country ITT
And it has absolutely nothing in common with Sweden. If you're running an experiment, you need a control that's similar to the test group. It's common sense that had Sweden adopted the same approach as its neighbors, given they have so much in common, that Sweden's mortality rate would be about 10% of what it is right now.

>But it also had full 1984 for a few months and Belarus did not.
Because the majority of Belarus doesn't live in a populated area. The majority of Russians do (a large portion of Russia is basically uninhabitable).

>>11995011
Go talk to the urbanites since they aren't able to handle either one of those very well.

>>11995526
>So instead of putting all population under a house arrest and exposing the vulnerable people you can do the reverse and get almost no negatives.
That's what Sweden did, and their elderly population got nuked. It's almost impossible not to expose the vulnerable when the majority of the population is spreading it. All it takes is a few infected family members or workers to infect entire communities.

>Sounds like Cuomo of New York who forced to send sick people to nursing homes back in April and even May.
He messed up big time, no argument there.

>>11995526
>But you are also correct about covid being dangerous only to a very small elderly subset of population.
A recent study on asymptomatics showed the majority had heart and lung damage. Just because you don't see the danger doesn't mean it isn't there. There could be long term consequences that we won't see until years down the road.

>>11995533
>Because the majority of Belarus doesn't live in a populated area. The majority of Russians do (a large portion of Russia is basically uninhabitable).
20% of Belarus lives in Minsk, meanwhile only 12% of Russia lives in Moscow. Total population density of Belarus is also 5-6 times larger than Russian one. Congrats on proving the opposite of what you claim.
By the way, USA population density is comparable with Sweden and smaller fraction of USA lives in New York and Los Angeles combined compared to Stockholm. Does not exactly fit your claims again. That's also an answer to your "you're running an experiment, you need a control that's similar to the test group."

>>11995561
Did you just stop reading halfway through my sentence? The bulk of Russia isn't even inhabited, which throws off the population density. Look at the city statistics, far more Russians are urbanites. Look at a heat map of the two countries based on population density, Belarus is sparsely populated, whereas the bulk of Russians live near the western border.

>By the way, USA population density is comparable with Sweden
Same point as above.

>smaller fraction of USA lives in New York and Los Angeles combined compared to Stockholm.
And the other major US cities? What about the fact that NYC and LA have triple the population densities as Stockholm? An back to my original point, yet again, Oslo, Norway is very similar to Stockholm. Now compare those numbers, or you can be a jackass and keep comparing disparate things.

>>11995558
No,
>we should be under house arrest because this cold is very very deadly!
>it's actually not that deadly, but maybe in the future it will become very deadly!
already got old. By the way, it's the another destruction lockdowns brought: now if we'll get some pandemics which is really bad and deadly, people will just ignore it because of the current fiasco.

>>11995582
Haha, now you're trivializing heart and lung damage. That's rich.

>now if we'll get some pandemics which is really bad and deadly, people will just ignore it because of the current fiasco.
Stupid people will be stupid, you're proving that.

>>11995541
I want to tell you an incredibly sad and scary truth: around 90K Swedes die each year! And most of these deaths are coming from the old population! Looks like a continuous and neverending genocide!
But if you want to fight it, you should go to transhumanist thread.

>>11995589
So if I were to shoot and kill your grandparents, you wouldn't mind because they're old anyway? You're basically saying it's fine if your actions kill the elderly because they were close to death anyway.

>>11995586
Yes. I didn't barricade myself in a cave because there is flu or tuberculosis outside. I also didn't wear a muzzle because of that danger. And I will certainly avoid wearing it now even if Someday In The Far Future my lungs can become trivialized.

>>11995598
>Yes. I didn't barricade myself in a cave because there is flu or tuberculosis outside.
If you're in the USA, there is no tuberculosis, and COVID-19 has killed 15x more people than the annual flu. Real comparable. You like shitty comparisons, huh?

>>11995580
No, you can take away half of Russia and it will still be less dense than Belarus. You can then take another half of the remainder and it still will be less dense. So your population density argument fails even if you push it hard.
>far more Russians are urbanites.
Russia urbanization rate is 74.
Belarus urbanization rate is 79.
Belarus is more urbanized.
>Same point as above.
USA urbanization rate is 82.
Sweden urbanization rate is 88.
Looks like it proves my point again.
>And the other major US cities?
Why not take every inhabited area in the country then?
>Norway
It has half of the Swedish population density.

>>11995594
How will your grandparents catch the disease?(let's pretend they are not in a nursing home with sick patients sent from hospitals).

>>11995604
No, it is a great comparison. If going outside should be banned because you have a chance to die, then it works for every cause. And if it doesn't, then decide that for yourself.

>>11995643
You can pretend that the extent to which going outside endangers you doesn't play a role at all in deciding whether or not to lock down but it's a ridiculous premise. Plenty of municipalities establish curfews when hurricanes are about to strike for public safety, and I don't think anyone regards it as controversial that they do so. It's not inconceivable that a biological danger could merit the same action.

>>11995628
>How will your grandparents catch the disease?
Ask Sweden.

>>11995643
>If going outside should be banned
The thread is about masks.

>>11989033
>https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/08/us/duke-university-face-mask-test-trnd/index.html
>https://web.archive.org/web/20200809003731/https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/08/us/duke-university-face-mask-test-trnd/index.html
Hey retard, I think your article and your picture don't match. You need to have that checked.

>>11995800
Your grandparents are in Sweden?

The government can make you wear clothes.
Okay!
The government can make you wear a mask
Communism!

https://www.law.com/therecorder/2020/06/29/can-the-government-force-americans-to-wear-masks/?slreturn=20200710222230

>>11995819
This thread is about specific context of 2020. If it's about some abstract masks in abstract year, then we'll wear them like we did in 2019.

>>11995833
I thought you might like to talk to them about all the dead grandparents.

>>11995840
>The government can make you wear a burqa
>Akbar!

>>11995848
>This thread is about specific context of 2020.
No, it's about the efficacy of masks and the refusal of some to use them despite the adverse effects it could have on others.

>>11995849
You should ask Democrats (and especially Cuomo) about that.

>>11995856
And it exists in the context of 2020. Also if you will not leave your home, then you will get no adverse effects both for yourself and for others.

>>11995857
Why are you making it partisan? I don't agree with how Cuomo's handled the situation.

>>11995859
>Also if you will not leave your home, then you will get no adverse effects both for yourself and for others.
Again, ask Sweden about that. It didn't work. Maybe you have a bomb shelter where you can avoid all human contact for several years, but most don't.

>>11995861
Because we are talking about disease which has median age of death around 80. That means that it is almost harmless for younger population and the only way to get statistically significant harm from it is to force it in places full of old people.
Now what do we see? There is a political power which fully supports the destruction of rights with one hand. But with the other hand it does things which are strictly the ones which can yield that statistically important harm. When you knowingly do the exact opposite of what is needed, it can cause certain suspicions.

>>11995881
>But with the other hand it does things which are strictly the ones which can yield that statistically important harm.
But Sweden didn't do what you're claiming Democrats are doing, and they wrecked their elderly population. Other countries did what the USA tried to do and largely spared their elderly.

>>11995869
>Again, ask Sweden about that. It didn't work.
It did work though. They treated seasonal cold as a seasonal cold instead of going full 1984 because of it and, unsurprisingly, they did not get the promised black plague. Every other country should have followed Swedish (or Belarusian) example.
>Maybe you have a bomb shelter where you can avoid all human contact for several years, but most don't.
So lockdowns were idiotic? That's already a certain improvement.

>>11995881
Are you defining harm as only death? So dismemberment wouldn't be harmful so long as you survive?

>dude why use an umbrella lmao you'll still get some drops on your legs
No, really, I understand your concerns but you gotta be really retarded to not understand that it's way harder for a person to release the virus if there's a physical barrier in the middle, as mild as that barrier may seem.

>>11995887
Since many lockdown countries """wrecked""" their elderly population even more, that wreckage should probably be ignored. You can also go to transhumanist threads and devise a way to save 90K of Swedes dying each year (if you care about them).
But, returning to the topic: how will your grandparents catch the disease? You are probably talking about your grandparents (or some couple you know). What is the mechanism which will give them the corona?

>>11995892
>So dismemberment wouldn't be harmful so long as you survive?
Dismemberment sounds bad. Being buried alive is pretty bad too. That's why I say no to lockdowns and masks. Any more good analogies?

>>11995890
>It did work though.
Only if you don't dig up the graves.

>1984
Plenty of countries maintained a very lenient lockdown, but their citizens complied with social distancing and mask regulations.

>So lockdowns were idiotic?
Let's compare. On the one hand, you have a population spreading a disease for years who aren't sheltering. For those who are, they can never come out or they'll likely get exposed (per your words, they can never go out). On the other hand, you have entire populations sheltering, which lowers the virus to almost zero within a month. And then you have the third option, half ass the lockdown, never get things under control, and then claim it didn't work and give up.

>>11995897
>Since many lockdown countries """wrecked""" their elderly population even more
Name one worse than Sweden who locked down before shit was hitting the fan.

>But, returning to the topic: how will your grandparents catch the disease?
Do you think they'll never need to visit a doctor, have groceries delivered, etc? You believe they can completely cut off all human contact? The more the general population is infected, the greater the chance they'll catch it. That's what happened in Sweden and you're refusing to acknowledge. Their elderly weren't going out (their plan was exactly what you're claiming is best, shelter the elderly while the young run amok), but ultimately they were still contracting the virus from the brief human contacts that were required for survival.

>>11995905
>Only if you don't dig up the graves.
You should again go to transhumanists and mourn the 90K Swedes who died in 2019 or 2018.
>Plenty of countries maintained a very lenient lockdown
If that country
a)Did not introduce forced lockdown
b)Does not have forced masks
c)But still recommends masks
I'll consider wearing one in that country. Not because I am certain that it works, but because such a country deserves some politeness from me.
> On the one hand, you have a population spreading a disease for years
This will already certainly happen (unless the covid isn't that dangerous and will suddenly disappear). Or maybe if the collective immunity will happen, but then lockdowns are harmful.
>half ass the lockdown
If you know that something you do will break halfway with no effect, then don't start it.

>>11995881
The numbers you see now are only with a lock down.

Without the deaths go up and the avg. age goes down. Schools for example become breeding grounds due to kids being excellent carriers and shit for protection. Not to mention even more of the population with defective immune systems is pushed out due to how contagious this is.

Really though the bigger worry for kids and adults is how many get fucked over with permanent damage. The death rate on this thing isn't too bad but the type of damage it can do is enough to wreck lives.

As for what methods of fighting this shit does and doesn't work. You got the world stage to look at for that. And so far its clamp down as hard as possible.

>>11995919
>You should again go to transhumanists and mourn the 90K Swedes who died in 2019 or 2018.
If they died unnecessarily, then that's sad. Are you telling me they were allowed to die because of inconvenience?

>Or maybe if the collective immunity will happen
It won't, as that doesn't happen with coronaviruses.

>If you know that something you do will break halfway
That's like claiming your car broke, ignoring the fact that you intentionally drove it into a wall, meanwhile there's plenty of cars still working perfectly because their drivers aren't morons.

>>11989972
>i just dont understand why govts keep fucking this up.
Business lobby. A government that doesn't suck business dick is a government that doesn't have much time left.

>>11995911
>who locked down before shit was hitting the fan.
That's some incredibly vague notion. No one locked down before "shit was hitting the fan". Maybe North Korea?
>You believe they can completely cut off all human contact?
Simple math tells me that if a very small fraction of population is infected and you additionally voluntarily reduce your contacts to a bare minimum, your chance to contract something is also reduced to bare minimum. It is also in your best interests to have collective immunity achieved as soon as possible (so the lockdown provides additional harm for you). But if you are so weak that a single contact will kill you, then use hazmat suit and disinfect the goods. It will prevent other diseases too.

>>11989173
Fucking this

>>11995930
>Are you telling me they were allowed to die because of inconvenience?
They are not allowed to force me under house arrest or to force me to wear the muzzle when I don't even know them. Actually if they like these two things, then they can stay under the house arrest forever. This way everyone will be happy.
>It won't, as that doesn't happen with coronaviruses.
Then present or past lockdowns were purely and absolutely useless.
>meanwhile there's plenty of cars still working perfectly because their drivers aren't morons.
More like these drivers stopped driving completely and STILL drove the car into the wall by some magic.

>>11995933
>No one locked down before "shit was hitting the fan".
They did, anon. Many countries started limiting their citizens' movement before there was a significant surge in cases, and they're the countries that remain in the best shape. Locking down once the horse is out of the barn is pointless.

>Simple math
Forget math, use the real world, Sweden, and you'll see the results.

>It is also in your best interests to have collective immunity achieved as soon as possible
Again, won't happen, Sweden's still under 10% antibodies, and their drop in cases corresponded with their five week summer vacationing.

>>11995881

Many people say a 22 is shit when compared to a 9mm. But they wouldn't stand and get shot with a 22. 1% death rate isn't "almost harmless", it's 70 million people dead if everyone gets infected. Honestly we seem to be going towards 0.1% and that's still 7 million dead.
As for the gubmint, they are full ass backwards retarded and that goes for almost every country right now. There isn't even a conspiracy, government just plainly doesn't know what to do.
I think the only ones that actually got their shit together and solved (yes solved) this shit was south korea. They flooded with tests, 200 thousand in two months, so they quickly detected the origin cases without having too many infected, directed a very restrictive lockdown. And now they have very little cases.
The countries that handled this competently didn't just lockdown, they did some other stuff.
The countries that either did no lockdown or full lockdown now have almost the same problems as before, the ones that did a lockdown are marginally better because they have less dead and we are closer to a vaccine than in March.

t. Argentine that has seen his government just do a lockdown for 5 months that is still ongoing, makes me stay at home while thousands of niggers walk around like it's Christmas

>>11995942
>Then present or past lockdowns were purely and absolutely useless.
I'm going out on a limb that you're also anti-vacc.

>More like these drivers stopped driving completely and STILL drove the car into the wall by some magic.
Hey did they stop driving when they kept their foot on the gas pedal? Anon, many people did not lock down, don't even try to be obtuse about it.

OP is the biggest fucking brainlet retard. N95s and P100s, P95 etc block virus. It doesn't matter if aerosol virus particle size is smaller than what the filter is rated for; a cough or a sneeze transmits the virus in much larger particles that can be filtered (and reduced spread by cloth masks)

>>11995944
> Locking down once the horse is out of the barn is pointless.
Then it looks like all the measures you propose are useless in a long run.
>Forget math, use the real world, Sweden, and you'll see the results.
I use Sweden (and Belarus) and see that they treated the seasonal cold as it should be treated and became the light of reason compared to the rest of the world.
>Sweden's still under 10% antibodies
How much under? Because supposedly their number of cases is less than 1% of population. If the antibodies tell the truth, then actual fatality rate falls down by an order of magnitude, and turns from somewhat concerning to benign.

>>11995953
>I'm going out on a limb that you're also anti-vacc.
Hmm, it depends. Before that rumble I wasn't against any vaccines. Except flu because of an extremely unpleasant personal experience reinforced by opinions of people around. Now I'm certainly not doing any flu vaccines - and I'm certainly not doing any corona vaccines if they will appear. Don't have enough info to spread that to other stuff.
>Hey did they stop driving when they kept their foot on the gas pedal? Anon, many people did not lock down, don't even try to be obtuse about it.
If you have some magic solution, but it requires all people enthusiastically cooperating and does not work otherwise - don't even attempt it. Especially if it has tons of side effects.

>>11995972
>I use Sweden (and Belarus) and see that they treated the seasonal cold as it should be treated
>"I don't care about the lives of the elderly if it means a slight inconvenience for me"

>then actual fatality rate falls down by an order of magnitude
All viruses have a high asymptomatic rate, unfortunately SARS-CoV-2 can get you the second time around. But hey, it might be six months from now, and in the meantime, you can enjoy your damaged heart and lungs.

>>11995985
>If you have some magic solution, but it requires all people enthusiastically cooperating and does not work otherwise - don't even attempt it.
So for the 30 countries it did work for, because their citizens aren't mentally challenged, they shouldn't have attempted it? You sound like a 300 lb fatty who claims dieting doesn't work because you heard it didn't work for someone else and you don't want to stop eating cake.

>Especially if it has tons of side effects.
Heh. Go ahead and describe these side effects.

>>11995994
>"I don't care about the lives of the elderly if it means a slight inconvenience for me"
These elderly are free people and they can make their own choices - stay under full self-imposed lockdown and full safety - or to go out and have some little risk. I can't choose for them. Also, let me cite, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
>But hey, it might be six months from now, and in the meantime, you can enjoy your damaged heart and lungs.
No,
>this virus is ultramegadeadly!
>what, it's not that deadly? but it has scary hidden damage
will not work now.

>>11995946
>t. Argentine that has seen his government just do a lockdown for 5 months that is still ongoing, makes me stay at home while thousands of niggers walk around like it's Christmas
That sounds like getting all the negatives and almost no positives.

>>11996009
>So for the 30 countries it did work for
It worked wonderfully for North Korea which supposedly has no cases. But I don't want such a solution.
>Heh. Go ahead and describe these side effects.
For example, house arrests.
Or, you know, completely destroyed economies.

>>11996017
>These elderly are free people and they can make their own choices - stay under full self-imposed lockdown and full safety
We've been through this. Many elderly in Sweden did so, and still became infected simply from having food delivered or needing to get medical care.

>No
Yup.

>will not work now
You don't have to believe it, but it doesn't change the truth, that many asymptomatics were found to have heart and lung damage. When you're having a stroke at 40 maybe you'll wish you did things differently, that is if you don't die from the acute infection.

>>11996024
And South Korea, and Taiwan, and Germany, and Japan, and New Zealand, and yadda yadda yadda...they all have more freedom than American citizens at this point, it's amazing what a little bit of selflessness can accomplish.

>For example, house arrests.
For the countries I listed, no house arrests unless you're infected or have been recently exposed to someone who was infected. Why do you jump to an extreme at every chance when there's almost always a middle ground?

>Or, you know, completely destroyed economies.
The countries I listed have been less impacted than the USA's.

>>11996028
>Many elderly in Sweden did so, and still became infected simply from having food delivered or needing to get medical care.
That requires some source. Did "many" elderly in Sweden get that from what you describe? Or were the circumstances completely different?
Anyway, now deaths in Sweden went to almost a halt. Did they run out of elderly, or is corona no longer bad?
>You don't have to believe it, but it doesn't change the truth, that many asymptomatics were found to have heart and lung damage.
Then, since you agreed that no immunity will be achieved, the corona will linger around and you will get in the next years lockdown or not and mask or not. Guess everyone will die 20 years later then. I will be in a good company - but meanwhile I'll take a cozy walk without a mask.

>>11996039
>Did they run out of elderly, or is corona no longer bad?
They're on their 6 week vacations where they're no longer spreading the virus. We've been through this. Wait until people go back to work and kids return to school.

>Then, since you agreed that no immunity will be achieved
Oh, it will, just not with your method. ;-)

>meanwhile I'll take a cozy walk without a mask.
Me too, I go for walks every day without a mask, and I breathe easily with my undamaged lungs.

>>11996037
So Japan had no forced lockdowns as in "you can be arrested/fined for being outside without permit"? Supposedly it did not even have centralized restaurant bans.
While we are at it, does Japan have forced masks? Not "you are strongly advised to wear one", but "you can be arrested/fined if you are in the train without one"? I'm not sure, should probably google myself.

>>11996048
They're not forced to do anything. They were already wearing masks during flu season. Morons, right?

>>11996047
>They're on their 6 week vacations where they're no longer spreading the virus. We've been through this. Wait until people go back to work and kids return to school.
Their death rate peaked in early April and was on a continuous decline since then. In July they had like 200 deaths compared to 2000 in April.
>Oh, it will, just not with your method. ;-)
So what it is? Because it doesn't look like everyone is respecting the lockdown or wearing the mask.
>Me too, I go for walks every day without a mask, and I breathe easily with my undamaged lungs.
Wonderful! Now you see that freedom is great.

>>11996048

I'm pretty sure Japan doesn't need laws to force mask wearing because it was already common practice decades before the outbreak

>>11996054
Wow, Japan is truly the land of anime! Guess if I'll visit Japan one day, I'll wear a mask. I'll do the same if I'll visit Sweden or Belarus (assuming that they will recommend it). But in the mandatory mask (or past lockdown) countries I will sabotage it as long as I can.

>>11995933
>It is also in your best interests to have collective immunity achieved as soon as possible (so the lock down provides additional harm for you). But if you are so weak that a single contact will kill you, then use hazmat suit and disinfect the goods. It will prevent other diseases too.

Last I heard, scientific projections stated heard immunity wouldn't begin to develop for around 10-12 years. Source was C-Span interview. Brits also were going to go for it originally but ditched it after they ran the numbers and found the number of casualties it would cause was more than they could stomach.

>>11995946
which is also why a second major factor being added is first world country...

what if everyone has a full beard that renders any face mask ineffective

So many retards on /sci/. Just take it to /pol/, only people who don't wanna go to /pol/ go to Reddit

>>11989033
>The most effective mask was the fitted N95. Three-layer surgical masks and cotton masks, which many people have been making at home, also performed well.
I would not phrase it as "don't work"

>>11990145
Based af

>>11989033
>CNN told me so it must be true!
I'm not even a Trumptard but even I know CNN is absolute garbage and prone to tons of false information. Grow up, retard, go back to plebbit.

>>11996133
There's masks made with a pocket for your beard.

>>11996665
>I'm not even a Trumptard but even I know CNN is absolute garbage
That's cool, what's it have to do with the study (which CNN had no part in)?

>>11996063
>But in the mandatory mask (or past lockdown) countries I will sabotage it as long as I can.
It's impressive to claim masks and lockdowns don't work when you're admitting you're sabotaging it from working. When there's millions of saboteurs, of course it's going to fail. Why do Americans have such a difficult time with every single recommendation and mandate that gets made? You guys can't agree on anything, no wonder you're failing.

By the way, Swedish government recommends explicitly against masks, and many people are wearing them anyway. They're sabotaging the herd immunity plan. If you go you'll want to wear a mask just to stick it to the government, since that seems to be your M.O.

>>11992631
That's a statement about American people, not the effectiveness of masks.

>>11997402
>By the way, Swedish government recommends explicitly against masks, and many people are wearing them anyway.
Does Swedish government arrest or fine people for wearing a mask?

>>11997402
>It's impressive to claim masks and lockdowns don't work when you're admitting you're sabotaging it from working.
Of course sabotaging fully insane demands of government is a must. Especially if their negatives vastly overweight the positives. Especially if, as you claim yourself, it fails anyway, so you get only negatives.
>When there's millions of saboteurs, of course it's going to fail.
If you know that something will surely fail, then don't even start it.

>>11997546
No, and that's not happening in the USA either.

>>11997402
It's because they're children basically. Opposing authority is one thing, but they are mentally unable to rationalize anything other than what they want to do.

>>11997546
They wouldn't have to fine anyone if people like you didnt exist. They had to do something because retards dont understand that it can reduce and slow the spread.

>>11989070
Governments unironically say to use these. Only surgical-grade masks work, and they only make a difference in areas of minimal airflow and ventilation (i.e. indoors). Coof can be defeated by a dispersing summer breeze.

>>11997402
>By the way, Swedish government recommends explicitly against masks
As we can see, Swedish death numbers are already down to almost nothing. Looks like their lockdown and mask approach actually worked.

>>11997587
Hopefully next time they will notice that their approach did not work (of course that will happen only if all the rumble was a consequence of honest governmental retardation which isn't the case).

>>11997602
>As we can see, Swedish death numbers are already down to almost nothing.
Same for many other countries which didn't take Sweden's approach (and those other countries didn't have significant losses). What's your point?

>>11997624
>What's your point?
That all the ridiculous measures against corona were useless and malignant, and that continuing them now (for example, wearing masks) is beyond any uselessness.

>>11997610
>Hopefully next time they will notice that their approach did not work
Agreed, hopefully the citizens will realize the approach of refusing to wear masks didn't work, and next time they'll wear masks.

>>11997640
>That all the ridiculous measures against corona were useless
They were only useless if you claim the reduced loss of lives compared to Sweden are useless. That's extremely callous.

>>11997642
Hmm... we'd rather not wear them. Not only it is a protest against malignant actions, not only it is about avoiding the useless thing, but it is also way comfier that way!

>>11997655
>Hmm... we'd rather not wear them.
And that's why your country is leading the world in total deaths and is near the top in deaths per capita. Do you think that approach is working?

>>11997647
Yes, introducing house arrests due to seasonal cold is insanely callous and should be ignored as much as possible. But if (you) liked it, then (you) indeed should stay home forever. Not only you will protect yourself, but you also will prevent a chance to kill someone else (and wanting to do that is Callous).

>>11997665
Judging by the fact that Swedish deaths fell to almost nothing and
>By the way, Swedish government recommends explicitly against masks
that approach is working great. Especially if, as you say, countries with masks are doing worse.

>>11997669
You're still minimizing deaths and you don't even realize it. Are you just being a troll, or are you actually psychotic?

>>11997673
>Especially if, as you say, countries with masks are doing worse.
That doesn't include the USA. You get that, right?

>>11997675
Anon, if you don't ever leave your house, (you) reduce the chance to harm someone else to almost zero. Are you that Callous to risk the chance of killing someone on the road? Are you Callous enough to risk infecting them with some disease? Does your Callousness allow you to risk bumping into someone and accidentally hitting his head? Where does your Callousness end?

>>11997676
Wait, USA
>recommends explicitly against masks
and has no mask mandates?

>>11997688
The USA isn't a country "with masks" since many aren't wearing masks. You're sticking it in a category it doesn't even belong. It also never fully locked down, only some states did, and even then they were extremely lenient. If the USA had taken Sweden's approach, they'd probably have 5x the current deaths, but maybe they wouldn't have experienced a second wave. Had the USA take Germany's or S. Korea's approach, it would have fewer deaths and wouldn't be experiencing a second wave.

>>11997683
Why are you capitalizing callous? That's not a proper noun.

>>11997706
Because it seems to be an important concept which means a lot to you, so I'm respecting your sensitivities. The only problem is that you don't want to practice what you preach. So, to repeat the question:
>Are you that Callous to risk the chance of killing someone on the road? Are you Callous enough to risk infecting them with some disease? Does your Callousness allow you to risk bumping into someone and accidentally hitting his head? Where does your Callousness end?

>>11997716
I'm not that anon, I just don't understand why you're butchering the language, and that's coming from an ESL speaker.

>>11997700
>The USA isn't a country "with masks" since many aren't wearing masks.
Wow, that's an incredible example of no true scotsman fallacy! If forced masks mandate doesn't even lead to mask-wearing let alone something good, then it is proven that it is useless or malignant.
> If the USA had taken Sweden's approach, they'd probably have 5x the current deaths
No, as we can see, in this case USA would have like half of Swedish deaths (and they would have been at almost zero now).
>Had the USA take Germany's or S. Korea's approach, it would have fewer deaths and wouldn't be experiencing a second wave.
If USA will take N. Korea's approach, it will have no covid deaths at all! Looks like juche was a superior ideology all along.

>>11997683
>Anon, if you don't ever leave your house, (you) reduce the chance to harm someone else to almost zero.
And if you leave the house with a mask, you reduce the chance of harm to almost zero. You're doing neither. Do you think drunk driving is okay? It's clearly riskier than sober driving. You seem to think it's not your responsibility to take anyone else's safety into account, they just shouldn't drive a vehicle if they don't want to get killed by you while you're drunk.

>>11989201
The only right post itt and has 0 (you)s

>>11997726
Anon, if you are serious, then search for the "reverential capitalization" term and, while we are at it, search for the "sarcasm" term.

I don't wear a mask because I think it will work, I wear one because I have to get my groceries

>>11997733
>If forced masks mandate
There is no mandate for many parts of the USA. Do you even follow the news in your own country?

>No, as we can see, in this case USA would have like half of Swedish deaths
S. Korea - 503 people per square km, 6 deaths per million
Sweden - 25 people per square km, 571 deaths per million

South Korea never really closed down, it just strictly enforced mask use, tested like crazy early on, and used contact tracing.

>>11997739
>And if you leave the house with a mask, you reduce the chance of harm to almost zero.
As we can see, Sweden recommends against using masks and is doing better than USA now. So even at the factual level that's wrong. But the issue here isn't even higher or lower risk from the masks, but the massive governmental overstep of the boundaries (and the protest against it).
> Do you think drunk driving is okay? It's clearly riskier than sober driving.
If drunk driving is no worse than going out as usual, then it is okay, but I don't think so. But if you think that it is indeed that benign, you can try to prove it, I'll listen to you.
> You seem to think it's not your responsibility to take anyone else's safety into account, they just shouldn't drive a vehicle
Vehicle driving is inherently dangerous, it's the main source of death for the younger population. Should we completely ban driving?

>>11997752
>There is no mandate for many parts of the USA.
And in many parts there are, so USA is a country WITH mask mandates. Does Sweden have mask mandates (or no-mask mandates) in any part?
>S. Korea - 503 people per square km, 6 deaths per million
>Sweden - 25 people per square km, 571 deaths per million
Sounds like two cases of somewhat bad seasonal cold and certainly not something you can go full 1984 about.
>it just strictly enforced mask use, tested like crazy early on, and used contact tracing.
Ok, you convinced me: South Korea is is some aspects worse than USA.

>>11997776
>Should we completely ban driving?
No, we should legalize drunk driving. It's up to people whether or not they want to risk driving when there's drunk drivers on the road. That's what your argument amounts to.

>>11996037
>Germany
https://www.ksat.com/news/world/2020/08/01/thousands-protest-in-berlin-against-coronavirus-restrictions/
Looks like a noticeable swath of population does not simply ignore masks, but also gathers huge demonstrations against them.

>>11997797
>Does Sweden have mask mandates (or no-mask mandates) in any part?
Does S. Korea not have mandates in any part?

>Sounds like two cases of somewhat bad seasonal cold
Sounds like the country with 20 times the population density had deaths at 1% of the rate. Masks work. The end.

>>11997799
Meanwhile your argument amounts to wearing a hazmat burqa and burying ourselves alive. Because that will certainly prevent some corona deaths, and not wanting to prevent them is Callous.

>>11997812
>Does S. Korea not have mandates in any part?
Then S. Korea noticeably abuses rights of its citizens. No corona is worth that.
>Sounds like the country with 20 times the population density had deaths at 1% of the rate. Masks work. The end.
North Korea has 25 millions and large population density, yet they have no deaths from corona at all. Juche works. The end.

>>11997813
Nope. It's about minimal effort that can save lives. Not driving drunk is minimal. Wearing a mask is minimal. Your argument is that people should go out at their own risk, so why shouldn't drunk driving be legalized? People just shouldn't drive cars if they don't want to risk getting killed by a drunk driver.

>>11997824
>Nope. It's about minimal effort that can save lives.
Nope, masks are not minimal, and all the shitshow of last months is incredibly far from the mininal.
>Your argument is that people should go out at their own risk, so why shouldn't drunk driving be legalized?
Your argument is that you can kill someone, so why not bury yourself alive?
>People just shouldn't drive cars if they don't want to risk getting killed by a drunk driver.
You shouldn't exit your home if you don't want to risk killing someone. Actually that's not even a hyperbole, that's exactly what you wanted to be introduced. So you can enjoy it yourself.

keep your germy spittle to yourself and cover your filthy pie hole

>>11997847
Pay the fart tax!

>>11997821
This is over. You've repeatedly argued that Sweden's approach would have saved lives in the USA, but when you get an example of a country truly using masks across the population (unlike the USA), *and* that country didn't even use lock downs, you shift the goal posts. If you want to argue about rights abuses, then whatever, that's a matter of opinion, but you were flat out wrong about masks not working.

>>11997835
>Your argument is that you can kill someone, so why not bury yourself alive?
Nope, my argument is that when I can do something that doesn't impact my life but may save someone else's life, it's worthwhile. I need to go out to make a living, but wearing a mask doesn't impact me in any way. I need to drive a car, but not doing so drunk doesn't impact me in any way.

>>11997850
Oh, no, it was your initial claim that "Swedish approach would have increased USA casualties several times". Then you were shown that in reality it's the opposite. The you tried to prove that Sweden is totally different from USA and completely failed. So it's you who is constantly shifting the goal posts when you don't like the results.
>If you want to argue about rights abuses, then whatever
Oh no, it's absolutely and totally the main point of the current happening. The fact that government is grotesquely abusing its power is worse than any corona and any discomfort from the mask. The fact that corona is a seasonal cold and masks are useless at best is just a small addition.
>but you were flat out wrong about masks not working.
No, that wasn't the main point, but even here I was right.

>>11997862
>Nope, my argument is that when I can do something that doesn't impact my life but may save someone else's life, it's worthwhile.
Well, the stuff of the last months did impact my life a lot. So now I will protest it, either by actual protests, or at leas by sabotage. That's both noble and comfy.
>I need to go out to make a living
So you agree that lockdowns were an insane abuse?

>>11989033
they "work" in the sense that I won't get kicked out of shops that require masks so whatever.

>>11997871
>but even here I was right.
See >>11997752
S. Korea - 503 people per square km, 6 deaths per million
Sweden - 25 people per square km, 571 deaths per million

>>11997871
>Oh, no, it was your initial claim that "Swedish approach would have increased USA casualties several times".
See >>11997752.

>The you tried to prove that Sweden is totally different from USA and completely failed.
I have no clue what you're talking about.

>>11997097
wow
incredible

>>11997937
North Korea: zero deaths. Looks like juche works. Truly a /sci/ approach here, right?

>>11997991
Yeah, their surge in pneumonia deaths during the summer is a total coincidence.

>>11997944
And that's exactly where you are "switching the goalposts". But I can switch the goalposts too and move to Belarus.
Anyway, coronaists are all about switching the goalposts, from the next spanish plague to flatten the curve to spooky hidden consequences to accepting even one death is callous.
>I have no clue what you're talking about.
In >>11995414 you claimed that
>And Sweden is very different from the USA in many ways
But you can see >>11995626 Looks like that difference does not support you.

>>11998010
Belarus - 47 people per square km, 63 deaths per million
S. Korea - 503 people per square km, 6 deaths per million

So still dying at 10x the rate of S. Korea, and when accounting for population density, 100x the rate.

You're accusing me of being someone else. My first post in this thread was >>11997402.

>>11998026
So a statistical error compared to the statistical error? Anon, you are making two mistakes. First one is that South Korea example contradicts something said before (if you think that is does, then cite it).
Second one is that it is desirable in any case. If South Korea had no corona deaths at all, that would still not be an a argument in favour of any of its abuses (although technically it will do infinitely better than everyone else).

>>11998053
>First one is that South Korea example contradicts something said before (if you think that is does, then cite it).
It contradicts the idea that Sweden's approach is the best approach for saving lives, even though you've claimed it would have saved lives in the USA. Every country that's worn masks from the beginning is doing better than both Sweden and Belarus, many by a large margin.

>If South Korea had no corona deaths at all, that would still not be an a argument in favour of any of its abuses
There's no point in continuing the argument of abuses since we'll never agree on that. If you don't believe it's an abuse that you can't drive while intoxicated, then I don't know why you think it's an abuse to wear a mask over your nose and mouth.

>>11998077
>It contradicts the idea that Sweden's approach is the best approach for saving lives, even though you've claimed it would have saved lives in the USA.
USA has/had mask mandates and lockdowns. Sweden had no such stuff. Sweden did better relatively and vastly better absolutely. Looks like Swedish approach worked better than USA one and many other countries. If you'll find some infinitely better outliers, they will show nothing. Your "some action has a certain good consequence, therefore this action is desirable" is also a bad logic.
> If you don't believe it's an abuse that you can't drive while intoxicated, then I don't know why you think it's an abuse to wear a mask over your nose and mouth.
Because it's a complete and total non-sequitur, and if you want to cancel the drunk driving fines, then you're welcome to present your arguments.
But the argument that you should stay home without getting out is not a non-sequitur, and not even a hyperbole. Because that's what people you support highly recommended and actually mandated under the threat of fines/prison. So I don't even need to invent some strawman - your side went beyond any strawman.

>>11998077
By the way, another mistake is "absolute numbers do not matter, so we should necessarily divide country deaths by country population". If only a small fraction of country population got covid, then its total population does not affect the dynamics yet. And if half of the country got covid - then covid fatality rates get down from "somewhat bad seasonal cold" to the "normal seasonal cold" and the lockdownist argumentation is destroyed even further.