/sci/ - Science & Math

getting? not really
spreading? a bit

>>12643861

I’m genuinely curious, because I see a lot of trumptards posting shady info, but the government is also talking about making people 2-3 masks at the same time. It’s just so weird.

>>12643861
It makes sense that they do.

E.g. by people not sneezing through the room in subways.

>>12643867
It's a matter of how SARS-CoV-2 is primarily spread, via large droplets that quickly fall to the ground, or aerosols that hang in the air. Surgical masks should be great at stopping droplets, but a respirator is needed if aerosol spread is common. The doubling up on masks is just compensation for a lack of respirators.

>>12643861
>hey anons im 16 years old can i post here?
fuck off and die, nigger.

No one knows what they do. But they're pro-VOC-ative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlwlV4hcBac

>>12643861
>Do these things actually protect you from getting/spreading Covid or not?
Everyone asks this. No one asks if COVID exists.

>>12643938

t.

>>12643861
Getting, no. Spreading, well, "protect" is a strong word. Helps prevent, yes. It's also a way to communicate to other people that you like, aren't a self-centered prick and at least care about the potential well-being of others.

No, as all the masked countries with third lockdown show.

>>12643965
I don't wear a mask in public spaces because I care about others and want to show them they are not alone in disliking the new normal. The fact that masks are useless and even harmful is less important.

>>12643974
Honestly what's so amazing is that people like you genuinely think you're some sort of freedom fighter bullshit, like it's absolutely insane how disconnected from reality you people are to think like that.
From the outside perspective you look like a complete fool, like those liberals that think they're the protagonist in a fucking dystopian rebellion movie.
Absolutely bonkers.

>>12643989
>freedom fighter
That's correct. Of course I am weak and I can't kick the greatresetterers directly, but I can improve my immediate vicinity by encouraging people and enacting civil disobedience. Fighting for freedom is a great thing. I also shop only in stores which ignore customers not wearing masks. Since they are usually not that big, people like me help them a lot.
>From the outside perspective you look like a complete fool
Don't worry, those who think so are probably under a self-imposed year-long lockdown, so they can think whatever they want.

>>12644001

>muh Great reset

>>>/pol/ you Alex Jones faggot

>>12643861
lolno

>>12644024
Are you trying to say that /pol/ invented the new normal/great reset/build back better?

>>12643965
I don't care about you

>>12644038

I’m saying you belong whenever the rest of the schizos are.

>>12644050
>whenever the rest of the schizos are.
/sci/?

>>12643861
not one iota
but you must be a good sheep
wear them anyway

Politics aside, they are pretty uncomfortable. Imagine: you have to sneeze, but instead of going out all the stuff remains on your face. Yucky.

>>12644051

The /pol/ discord you came from. Go spread your conspiracy theories somewhere else.

>>12644060
I've been wearing a mask for 8 hours a day at work, and I've never sneezed in one. I usually sneeze several times per day. They must be pretty good at filtering dust.

>>12644082
Sounds like /sci/.

no

>>12643861
The physical size of the virus passes between the fibers of 99.9% of masks including n95 masks.

>>12643861
Yes

>>12644001
Based

>>12644040
Übermensch post

the masks are the disease

I just got my second dose of the vaccine. Can I unmask now?

>>12644336
Depends if there are evil cops around. But that's not vaccine-dependent

>>12644324
>but you been wearing a mask for 8 months
I can tell a lot of thought went into this. Also, cancer cells can use oxygen to accelerate growth.

>>12644324
He means in the area around the cancer you tard. Also, masks don't even lower your oxygen intake

>>12644457
>Also, cancer cells can use oxygen to accelerate growth.
What if noose is a cure against the cancer?

>>12644336
No, not until herd immunity is reached

>>12644336
You can still carry and transmit the virus

>>12644485
So it turns out that taking vaccines is my private business since it does not impact me transmitting the virus?

>>12644239
This is fake news. The virus travels in droplets, and thus its own size is irrelevant

>>12644001
Christ, since when are people this dumb
This has to be bait

Question about transmission my frens. I live with my dad in his late 50's, he's a stroke survivor and would be quite prone. He's alright now but had to get a bypass because of calcified arteries (which caused his stroke) to prevent future problems.

I was thinking of getting vaxxed to help protect him but I've been reading the studies and they say that the vaccines do not prevent transmission, nor do they claim to do so. Partly because transmission can be made from asymptomatic people.

But intuitively, assuming the vaccine stays efficacious under normal life situations, wouldn't preventing symptoms help reduce transmission? Less people coughing from the rona means less viral load going around. (Although I doubt "90% efficacy" can be retained in normal life because the sample populations in testing were going through life in a post-Cov world with some semblance of of social distancing and mask-wearing)

But if the vaccines truly do not prevent transmission, why do doctors and governments still want everyone to get vaxxed? I feel like only vulnerable populations should be made to take it so they don't clog up the hospitals, I think I like my chances at 99.99%. If there's anything that can show me that vaxxing up will help reduce transmission, I'll probably take it. If not, perhaps only my dad should.

>inb4 let your dad die
No!

>>12645084
Nobody can assume that for you.

Yes. Be sure to wear them at all times, even in the shower.

>>12643861
>standard in hospitals and shit for god knows how long
>retards still find a way to make themselves believe tha jooz want to control them with masks
l o l

>>12643989
Seething!

>>12643861
N95 is better but in everyday life surgical masks should be good enough.

>>12643867
>but the government is also talking about making people 2-3 masks at the same time
They're fucking with you at this point

>>12644867
I notice that the store choice part hurts covidists the most. You can make a difference after all.

>>12645108
Why won't you wear the helmet and the welding shield?

nah, the medical community looked the other way on them because there was a serious mask crisis back in april of 2020 and people were hoarding every single mask that they could find and COVID first responders weren’t getting any so they lied to the public telling them these useless face coverings were enough so they would stop buying them. There’s a reason most European countries are now mandating n95 masks use to everyone instead of homemade/cloth ones.

>>12645985
So medical community and government made a huge lie less than a year ago? That gives them some reputation.

>>12645985
>There’s a reason most European countries are now mandating n95 masks
So the government can pretend like it's doing something to stop the spread?

>>12644867
Forgot to add: I will remember which stores are ignoring masks and other demands the most now. So when/if all this stuff will be lifted, I will continue to buy stuff only in them. A friend in need is a friend indeed.

>>12643861
getting it? not really

spreading it? yes absolutely


imagine your sneeze/cough is a deodorant can spraying droplets into the air. If you cover the nozzle with a cloth, you will see that less droplets disperse, and cover a smaller area.
this is how the masks decrease transmission


masks only really work in tandem with social distancing

>>12646215
You can always put the mask down if you want to sneeze. No need to let this stuff on your face.

>>12644082
Anon, bunkerchan is asking you to go back

Coof-it 19

>>12643861
You can wear all the masks in the world and you could still get COVID if you constantly touch yourself and spread those germs. At work I've been seeing an uptick of customers wearing two masks because the "experts" recommend it now. They think masks are a bubble blocking everything outside.

>>12643861
Covid is a biological weapon deliberately spread to enable lockdown measures for the ultimate goal of covering up the collapse of central banks and to create a plausible culprit for the coming depression. It is all about money and power.

>>12646236
I genuinely can't tell if you are trolling

>>12643861
No those spreads it.

Beacuse you collect viruses whole time on the screen...

Then you put it somewhere infectible like pocket in elevator, then when you're at home, you put apple in your pocket or whatever.

This thing is danerous.

Only certified user of N95 can say he is protected from virus by facemask.

>>12647257
I mean, >>12646236 has two sentences and both are trivially correct, so if you like to be trolled by the truth...

>>12644024
Justin Trudeau officially responded to the great reset this is no conspiracy you caveman.

>>12645108
>You're a conspiracy theorist!
Biden has seriously discussed federal mask mandates and lock downs. Wear your napkin for the rest of your life since it's good for you and all, but try to call all-controlling bullshit when you see it from career politicians.

>>12645108
>X is totally a conspiracy
>but X is also totally true!
So conspiracies are true after all? Thanks.

>>12647288
Pulling the mask down to sneeze defeats the purpose

>>12645985
>Yeah, we lied but you can trust us, we're not lying now.
They say this shit with a straight face and think everyone will buy it. Many do but that they have to resort to threats shows that most people see it for the bullshit it is.

>>12647322
The purpose of keeping the sneeze inside? That's the point, no need to keep it inside.

>>12646236
Agreed. Also, when you need to fart in public, it's best to pull your pants down first, to make sure nothing collects in them.

>>12647363
Because sneezing in public, which is one of the better ways to transmit covid, is the right choice?

>>12647395
Yes. Why increase your viral load (and just feel yucky) when you can avoid it?

>>12647379
Anon, it may shock you, but if you fart with your pants on, it still stinks.

>>12647410
Your viral load isn't being increased that much by holding a sneeze in let alone just sneezing into a piece of fabric.

Because you don't want to infect everyone around you???

>>12647417
If my viral load isn't decreased by sneezing things out, then these things barely have viruses in it. So sneezing them out is safe!!!

So when is the study going to come out that says that we are ingesting microplastics or something from wearing masks all the time?

>>12647416
Anon, it may shock you, but gases escaping from your pants doesn't mean the bacteria wasn't stopped. This was actually tested. A guy farted on petri dishes with and without pants. Only the petri dishes that were bare-assed farted on successfully grew bacteria.

>>12643861

>>12647410
>Yes. Why increase your viral load (and just feel yucky) when you can avoid it?
Maybe you wouldn't have been infected in the first place if you wore a mask properly, and the majority of your viral load is already in your cells.

>>12647456
Hey, it's you who posted
>Also, when you need to fart in public, it's best to pull your pants down first, to make sure nothing collects in them.

>>12647466
Exactly, you might as well keep that bacteria out of your pants, you shouldn't just be concerned about viral particles in your mask.

>>12647460
>Maybe you wouldn't have been infected in the first place if you wore a mask properly
No,
>mask does not protect you, it protects others
, remember?

>>12647472
Are you constantly getting illnesses from the farts?

>>12647472
>you shouldn't just be concerned about viral particles in your mask.
If there are no viral particles in your mask, then you can't infect others.

>>12646215
never realized how disgusting sneezing humans really is

>>12647476
>Are you constantly getting illnesses from the farts?
Are you constantly getting illnesses from your own sneezes?

>>12647485
Are you constantly getting illnesses from the farts of the others?

>>12647478
>If there are no viral particles in your mask, then you can't infect others.
Sure you can, because you've made sure the viral particles go in their mouths and noses instead of your own mask.

>>12647489
>Are you constantly getting illnesses from the farts of the others?
Nope, on of account that they're wearing pants and underwear. You just made a great case for masks, good job. :-)

>>12647491
So we return to >>12647410

>>12647495
A few hundred particles can infect a person, possibly less. You have billions of particles in you once the infection is established. Your own sneeze will do little to increase your viral load, but could easily infect someone else. And if you're constantly sneezing, you shouldn't be going out in the first place.

>>12647494
They wear pants because they have penises/vaginas and asses in them. If you have a penis or vagina instead of a nose and an anus between your cheeks, then you indeed should wear masks. You just made a great case for masks (for yourself), good job. :-)

>>12647499
If such a tiny fraction of particles can infect someone else, then keeping them from infecting someone else is impossible task, so no need to do it.

>>12647502
>They wear pants because they have penises/vaginas and asses in them.
And they coincidentally filter the bacteria from your farts, as has already been established. So they're an effective filter. But I don't know why you think it's okay to sneeze all over everything, I'm assuming you don't think it's okay to shit everywhere. Of course the reason we don't shit everywhere is because it's unsanitary as hell, yet for some reason people believe it's okay to spread their mucus all over the place.

>>12647494
So... you believe that people around you have deadly diseases waiting to infect you and only pants protect you from them? That's a very interesting worldview.

>>12647507
>If such a tiny fraction of particles can infect someone else, then keeping them from infecting someone else is impossible task, so no need to do it.
It's clearly not since I deal with infected people and haven't become ill because I wear masks.

>>12647509
So I'm genuinely interested now. Is your nose penis-like? Vagina-like? That's a very grotesque face, so I see why you try to cover it.
>as has already been established
No?
>I'm assuming you don't think it's okay to shit everywhere.
Do you constantly shit in your pants? Anon, you are a very curious person.

>>12647512
Stool is literally a bunch of bacteria and by-products. There's a reason intestinal diseases are ridiculously infectious.

>>12647513
Another proof that covid is a non-issue.

>>12647517
>No?
So we've established you haven't been reading what's written to you, or you have a very selective memory.

>Do you constantly shit in your pants?
Farts contain the same bacteria that is in shit, anon.

>>12647518
So when you ride the bus, you shit in your pants and people around you shit in their pants too? Anon, that's spooky.

>>12647520
Enjoy your long term illnesses, hopefully you're not someone I have to treat.

>>12647513
> I deal with infected people and haven't become ill because I wear masks.
Please continue to wear it, looks like it's enough for you then.

>>12647521
Let me cite you:
> I'm assuming you don't think it's okay to shit everywhere.
So it's you who is talking about shitting your pants.

>>12647522
I think it's funny that you seem to be concerned about your dirty sneezes, but you seem to believe air coming from your ass is sterile.

>>12647524
I mostly ignore masks and I am healthy, so looks like it's masks which kill the covid-havers.

>>12647529
>so looks like
I think you may have brain damage.

>>12647528
If sneezes are clean, then there is no need for the mask at all.

>>12647531
Hey, you can wear a mask + a cloth bag on your head. Pants for the face, you know.

>>12647532
They're not clean, fortunately masks can filter them, just like pants prevent bacteria from escaping when you fart.

>>12647410
I'm confused. Do you or don't you believe masks work?

>>12647536
>They're not clean
So not keeping them inside is a good choice.
>just like pants prevent bacteria from escaping when you fart.
People wear pants because they consider the sight of what's inside unpleasant. They also try to avoid farting in public because pants don't stop that. But if your face has penis and anus + you constantly shit in your pants, then such a lovecraftian sight deserves six masks and a permanent lockdown.

>>12647537
If masks hold viral load inside, then they are harmful for me.
If masks don't do anything with viruses, they are a bit less harmful for me, but useless for others.

>>12647545
>If masks hold viral load inside, then they are harmful for me.
But that means it will also protect you from others, you silly billy, and vice versa. It's much better to never get infected.

>>12647547
Well, since I don't want to turn a common cold into pneumonia, I'd better get it out.
>It's much better to never get infected.
Just don't go out then.

>>12647551
>Well, since I don't want to turn a common cold into pneumonia
How would that happen? You don't think they're filtering anything. Or, if you they do, then you won't catch a common cold if you wear one.

>>12647552
>How would that happen? You don't think they're filtering anything.
If they are not filtering anything, then there is no need for them.

>>12647395
So sneeze into your elbow like civilized people do. Sneezing in a mask will make you hate your life

>>12647555
>If they are not filtering anything, then there is no need for them.
If they're not filtering anything, then you should have no need to fear sneezing into one. It seems like you're conflicted here. You simultaneously think they're not effective, yet are so effective that they're going to give you pneumonia by not letting out bacteria and viruses.

>>12647556
>Sneezing in a mask will make you hate your life
I posted earlier in the thread, but I've been wearing a mask at work for 8 hours a day, and have never had to sneeze while wearing one. They're great at blocking dust and particles that trigger sneezes.

>>12643958

>>12647559
>If they're not filtering anything, then you should have no need to fear sneezing into one.
If they do nothing, then there is no need to wear them.
>You simultaneously think they're not effective, yet are so effective that they're going to give you pneumonia by not letting out bacteria and viruses.
No, we have two possibilities here, and both lead to the conclusion that masks are useless/harmful. So no matter which one is true, masks should be avoided. Looks like it''s you who are conflicted because both are against you.

>>12647569
>No, we have two possibilities here, and both lead to the conclusion that masks are useless/harmful.
Kek. You've already admitted masks work at filtering viruses by whining about sneezing increasing your viral load.

>>12647574
>You've already admitted masks work at filtering viruses by whining about sneezing increasing your viral load.
Then you should avoid it precisely for that reason. But if by some reason it's false, then you should avoid it for another reason. You can't win in any case.

>>12647580
>Then you should avoid it precisely for that reason
You should wear it precisely for that reason. If it's effective at stopping stuff from getting out, then it's effective at stopping stuff from getting in.

>>12647584
>If it's effective at stopping stuff from getting out, then it's effective at stopping stuff from getting in.
No, that's not given and since I've heard enough claims that "mask is not for you but for others", I'll believe that.

>>12647580
>Then you should avoid it precisely for that reason.
For what reason is that? It seems like you'll happily infect others because of a small risk to you.

>>12647590
Please explain the mechanism by which they can only filter in one direction. I'd love to hear it.

>>12647592
Constantly breathing back a huge viral load? Doesn't look safe if a viral load matters.

>>12647598
If they filter so well when you wear it, then just wear it yourself, and it will be enough to protect you.

>>12647609
So, in your opinion, breathing in a few million more viral particles when there's already billions in your cells, is a danger, but exposing others to those particles is fine?

>>12647509
>People sneeze so it's okay to force masks on them.
When does it become not okay to force someone to do something "for their own good?"
Sneezing and coughing have been issues solved by polite mouth covering all up until now, because of a flu, anon.

>>12647620
If it's such a minuscule amount, then breathing it out with or without mask provides no difference no matter if you wear mask or not.

>>12647615
Multiple people wearing masks compounds their effectiveness.

>>12647630
Then wear three masks?

>>12647628
That makes no sense, anon.

>>12647628
Yeah, like when Fauci said it didn't even matter if you wore a mask or not.

>>12647633
Correct
>you breathe out such a huge amount of coronavirus! wear a mask!
>but it's actually minuscule! holding it in isn't harmful!

>>12647621
>Sneezing and coughing have been issues solved by polite mouth covering
That's interesting. How do you think upper respiratory viruses spread if the issue is "solved"?

>>12647634

>>12647636
So basically you don't know the difference between an infectious dose and viral load? Or how viruses work? That's what I'm getting from your statement.

>>12647633
It's like your chances of getting killed by the flu, so small it doesn't matter.
Oh, Corona is over twice as deadly as the flu? Still doesn't matter.
We shouldn't worry about these things 24/7.

>>12647637
It looks like coronovirus is spreading wonderfully in the countries with masks, so masks don't solve anything too.

>>12647647
So it doesn't matter how much virus someone is getting from me: it does not increase his viral load? Is it correct?

>>12647656
That's correct if they're already infected. That's not correct if they're not already infected, in which case you've just screwed them over, and possibly other people who come in contact with them, and the people who come in contact with those people, and so on...

>>12647637
By the fact that so few people die from it, modern medicine treats all of this. Diseases will always exist, the larger concern is the growing establishment interest in government overreach. Socially distancing and mandatory masks radically change daily life, you should be much more afraid of your political overlords than of the minuscule chance you will get some disease and the even rarer chance it will impact you permanently in any way. Seriously what did you do before masks? Do you look back on those days and think "gee, it's a miracle I survived!"

>>12647665
>That's not correct if they're not already infected
Oh, so once again: it does not matter how much I cough on someone: if there are some particles, then the load does not matter. I've hear the opposite claims, but now you enlightened me.
>in which case you've just screwed them over, and possibly other people who come in contact with them, and the people who come in contact with those people, and so on...
In this case the blame is purely on that Chinese who ate a raw bat (it's the current idea of what happened, right?)

>>12647630
They're spit-catchers at best, breathing inhibitors at worst. If you are such an advocate of wearing masks, you should also be defending people's right not to wear them as well.

>>12647677
>it does not matter how much I cough on someone: if there are some particles, then the load does not matter.
Again, only if the person isn't infected. The viral load in a cough or sneeze is minuscule compared to the load already in your cells.

>>12647680
>They're spit-catchers at best
Which is how viral particles travel.

>breathing inhibitors at worst.
What does that mean?

>>12647684
Then it doesn't matter how large his initial dose will be. And since the number of viruses you breathe is still huge, mask will still let out a huge amount and will not prevent anything.

>>12647698
>Then it doesn't matter how large his initial dose will be.
Yes it does, because it could take thousands of particles to set off an infection. We have antiviral properties in our mucus, and cilia to move the particles to our stomachs. Those mechanisms are effective against an initial assault, but they fail once an infection takes hold.

>>12647691
>Sorry, anon, I don't understand how forcing something over somebody's mouth and nose could impair their breathing.
Do you ever think about the well being of the diseases? Think about how they feel.

>>12647715
I honestly don't get it, nor have I experienced it. I find masks comfortable to wear.

>>12647711
Well, since you breathe out millions, then you need to wear a hazmat suit to prevent the infection then, not mask.

>>12647719
Good, so you can wear them and we will not.

>>12647721
100k particles inhaled would be a certain infection. 5k inhaled may very well mean no infection. 95% filtration is easily possible if both people are wearing masks, or one person is wearing a respirator.

>>12647723
But explain how it inhibits your breathing? How? You think they won't filter particles, but they'll impact gas exchange?

>>12647724
If you don't want covid, then wearing three masks sounds enough then.

>>12647727
Why weren't you wearing the mask your whole life (including at home and when sleeping)?

>>12647728
>If you don't want covid
I'm not fearful for myself, but that gives me a great viewpoint into your motivation and opinions.

>>12647719
Wear three or four, your betters demand it. People should be free to do what they want, a year go that was not a radical idea.

>>12647733
-10 points
Shifting goal posts

>>12647736
>I'm not fearful for myself
Then you have literally no reason to complain about others wearing or not wearing masks.
>but that gives me a great viewpoint into your motivation and opinions.
Yes, they are pretty clear.

>>12647737
>>12647736
Then go advocate against indecency laws which are much more restrictive and carry much heavier penalties for literally no reason except cultural disgust

>>12647737
>People should be free to do what they want, a year go that was not a radical idea.
Really? Was robbing a bank legal a year ago. Killing someone? Walking around naked? Driving 50 miles over the speed limit?

>>12647738
-20 points
If the mask does not inhibit you in any way and is comfortable, then wearing it forever sounds like the best idea. Goalposts are still here.

>>12647740
You missed the point I think.

>>12647746
>If the mask does not inhibit you in any way and is comfortable, then wearing it forever sounds like the best idea.
Not that anon, but I'd be fine with this, and it should be required of everyone.

>>12647745
Hey, getting out of your bed should be prohibited too. If you can't rob a bank, you should be forced to wear a muzzle and never stand up.

>>12647746
Literally shifting from "how does it stop gas exchange?" to "why not wear it to an unnesicary degree?"

Shifty af. Stay mad.

>>12647741
Hearing about indecency laws from someone who wants to put a burqa on everyone is a bizarre sight.

>>12647727
Wearing a respirator or gas mask for long period of time can make people light headed and those are more specially designed to allow for airflow over the non-covid blocking surgical and diy masks people wear to show how complicit they are. By virtue of the cloth catching anything that would 'protect' you, the mask will also hinder air particles as well.
Unrelated: segregation is good.

>>12647752
Okay, I'll recommend this to Congress. You'll obey, right?

>>12647738
Don't you care about people, anon?

>>12647747
What point? If you care for yourself, wear three masks (they work, right?). Same should happen for everyone who is afraid of covid. Then the remainder will be free to get sick if they want. And if you are not fearful, then just join them.

>>12647757
>and those are more specially designed to allow for airflow over the non-covid blocking surgical and diy masks people wear
As someone who wears an N95 on the regular, it's far more difficult to breathe in than a surgical mask.

>>12647753
I mean if someone does not know that a piece of cloth around his mouth makes it harder to breathe, then he is being retarded on purpose.
>"why not wear it to an unnesicary degree?"
I wear it only when necessary. So... never?

>>12647756
They are much more intrusive and have no actual motivation beyond cultural imposition on personal freedom. The very definition of what you are against, with even less reason than "try to stop a pandemic".

But you won't protest for that now will you? In fact is be surprised if it ever actually crossed your mind without someone bringing it up on this way.

>>12647758
Hey, after 2020 craziness they can do it.
>You'll obey, right?
Sure, just like I obey the lockdown and mask laws.

>>12647763
I can't believe you still missed the point. Is it that impossible for you to believe that someone else may not be personally afraid of getting infected, but still goes out of their way to prevent getting infected because they have loved ones they're trying to protect?

>>12647763
Masks stop others from getting ill. Your dumbass parading through a public space infecting everyone else isn't going to be stopped. It's a measure everyone needs to take or it becomes pretty worthless.

>>12647771
>Sure, just like I obey the lockdown and mask laws.
Are you also a bank robber and murderer? You must be, you're such a rebel. I can't see you listening to any rules, you're your own man.

>>12647769
Laws introduced in 2020 vastly top everything done before. They put every supposedly free country somewhere below China (but maybe still a bit above North Korea). So no, I will protest about the elephant first and look at the mouse later. Anyway, you should probably stay home forever. Little chance to go indecent.

>>12647773
>because they have loved ones they're trying to protect?
Why won't they wear three masks too?

Why are you visiting them in the first place? If you don't visit them, then the chance to infect them is zero. You don't want to be a murderer, correct?

>>12647778
>They put every supposedly free country somewhere below China
Had the roads out of your city dug up and blocked, have you? You've been boarded up in your home by the government? That's rough, anon.

>>12647778

>>12647767
I disagree, though I am usually sitting when I wear mine. If I had to walk everywhere wearing anything strapped to my face all day, everyday, then I would be uncomfortable, especially so as it would be against my will.
Ask yourself how was it we survived before masks? By some miracle? Or is it literally normal not to wear them?
A year ago the same politicians now forcing mask mandates would have called you crazy and a conspiracy theorist for implying "2 weeks to slow the spread" may take longer than 2 weeks. These masks are seriously blocking people's ability to sniff out bullshit.

>>12647780
I'll ask my children and parents to move out. Thanks anon, you've solved all of my problems.

>>12647777
Since your existence is probably against what Stalin thought, you should probably voluntarily go to the camp (or apply the capital punishment to yourself). You are an a obedient man, right?

>>12647787
>Since your existence is probably against what Stalin thought
Stalin's dead, I'll follow the current laws.

>>12647775
The less people buying your faggotry the better anon.

>>12647781
Yes, closing most businesses for months, introducing curfews and in some places house exit bans is totally China-tier. China social rating system and smartphone system isn't fully implemented yet, but looks like it will become ubiquitous in year or so. Actually China may become a bit freer than others: after all it is now claiming that it defeated covid.

>>12647785
So why do you think that literally murdering them is good? Move out yourself then, or ask the state to give you an isolation chamber.

>>12647802
>Actually China may become a bit freer than others: after all it is now claiming that it defeated covid.
K.

>https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/13/world/asia/china-covid-lockdown.html
>Facing New Outbreaks, China Places Over 22 Million on Lockdown
Those are real lockdowns, and they work. Close up completely for a few weeks, and then reopen.

>>12647805
Don't you mean China's murdering them? You just can't seem to figure out who to blame, but clearly everyone but yourself.

>>12647797
You'll do anything your betters tell you to do lol

>>12647775
>Masks stop others from getting ill.
So they don't work you wear three masks yourself? Thanks for the confirmation.
>It's a measure everyone needs to take or it becomes pretty worthless.
You can wear three masks and go out maybe once a month. Then the chance to get covid will be absolutely minuscule for you. Do that for 1-2 years and you will survive until herd immunity.

>>12647812
I don't think that seasonal cold merits any special measures. But if you think that going out is literally murder, then blame yourself (or China if you wish).

>>12647797
Correct, that's why I follow 2019 laws, but apply civil disobedience to the Stalin-tier laws.

>>12647820
I'll blame China and the people in my country who selfishly infected others. I won't blame the people who took precautions.

>>12647826
It's 2021 anon. Why not follow 1800 laws?

>>12647828
>I won't blame the people who took precautions.
Well, if they follow the three-masks-out-once-a-month rule, their chances to get or spread covid are incredibly small. And if they like their freedumbs, then it's on them.

>>12647807
You (maybe) won, maybe China will be as bad as the West too.

>>12647832
Why not 1600? Won't you like to be burned as a witch?

>>12647807
>The shill reveals itself. Paid or not, it just shilled the Chinese Communist's Party's historic efforts. Yes, those are very real and genuine numbers, anon, after all, China is the safest and strongest country. China will grow larger.
Everyone did exactly as they were told, right? Especially the millions living in squalor, they practiced social distancing at all times, didn't they? Not like the CCP has been known to lie about this before, right? Not like they would have any agenda of their own, right? Not like they funnel billions into other countries and the WHO to act in their interest, right? China will grow larger, and with your help!

>>12647845
Unironically this. Shill is getting paid by the post

>>12647858
Tests and cases don't matter (if except for quarantining measures). What matters is hospitalizations and deaths.

>>12647877
If not doing lockdowns/masks makes year better than several years from the past decade, then you can make covid into a benign cold or into a plague (depending on how you count deaths with it).

>>12647889
Just compare deaths in a particular area from the same time period last year adjusting for population growth.

of course masks won't work as effectively unless everyone wears them. but it's not like any of you give a fuck about positive externalities anyway.

>>12647894
Current year can be just above the average (and the last year can be a local minimum with deaths delayed to the next year). If it is still better than a number of years from the recent history, then it is as lockdown-worthy as them.

>>12647845
Do you think they lose money every time someone identifies them in a thread? Or is it more like a demerit system where enough gets them sent to the wow gold mines?

>>12647908
I'm not arguing in favor of or against lockdowns. I'm just saying change in deaths and hospitalizations are a better metric of a pandemic's societal effect as opposed to number of tests and number of cases.

>>12643861
helps a little, but utterly pointless when you're not sick. Not that media or authoritarians care.

But hey, let's just produce untold paper waste. So much for environmentalism.

>>12647936
asymptomatic transmission isn't a meme though

Yes to a limited degree. That is the true answer. It's better than wearing nothing.
n95 > surgical > cloth > nothing.

>>12645084
The truth is that the vaccines likely prevent transmission. The reason media says they do not is twofold: 1. Fear mongering for ratings
2. Moderna and Pfizer did NOT TEST their vaccines to determine if they inhibit spread of the virus. The only thing they focused on is disease SEVERITY. this is the true reason. The Oxford/astrazeneca vaccine does prevent contagion, this is known because they TESTED for it during the trials.

>>12647845
>Specifically points out that China didn't defeat the virus, considering there's currently 20 million people under a hard lockdown
>"Durrr, you're a shill!!!"
Are you mentally ill?

>>12648170
People are getting so blinded by rage that their reading comprehension is completely failing them.

>>12648073
This.

>>12644250
Always do the opposite of what the WHO says. Wear that mask, lemming.

>>12643861
Lol
Wear two now!
Ahahahahaha

>>12643965
I don't care about your well being.

>>12643861
No*

*answer based on the fact that studies show that almost no one spreads the virus *before* actually showing symptoms - at which point we should be aware not to sneeze or cough in anyones direction (especially when there is a pandemic going on and everybody is trained to be very careful). This also explains why lockdowns do not really work - because the germ is not transmitted when you go shopping or walk into a restaurant.

>>12644038
The Great Reset is a good thing, you fucking muppet. The fools who think its some massive conspiracy are gonna be the death of us. Your type is the same type to cry about the world being a piece of shit, when it starts to change you cry like a baby. My god.

What about these things? Are they better or worse? Are they glorified coffee fillers or does the certification mean something impactful?

>>12649037
r. person who would amputate their arm to stop the pain of a papercut

>>12648073
>It's better than wearing nothing.
How much better? If you cannot accurately quantify it, then it could be 99% better or 0.00001% better.
Before you reply "but it doesn't hurt anything" ask yourself why we don't give everyone the vaccine for Yellow Fever even though on an individual basis it is considered to be quite safe and Yellow Fever outbreaks do still happen in unexpected places from time to time.

I did some home tests on different masks and how they perform. Would anyone be interested?

>>12647910
They very well could be in China so they may just get dragged off to some back room never to be seen again. Feels bad honestly.

>>12649051
Assuming they are certified you should have trouble breathing trough them.
But if its just a paperstamp, its a glorified coffee filter.

>>12649175
If you aren't Project Farm?
Fuck off.
Jesus
We don't need more shitty videos of unempirical testing.

>>12648195
>>12648170
You're not just a shill you're a liar. The article claims everything was fine until a wedding party spread the virus. One wedding party. Bullshit. China has lied about everything so far and has been lying about their numbers all up until now, they've just been forced to lie a little bit less since it's hard to cover up your death tolls when you've subjected millions to squalor through communism. Not that Western media will report on this, they and China itself will be the new Axis powers in the coming world conflict.

So do lockdowns work? No? They're still having millions of cases after a 'real' lockdown. I said it didn't do shit and the artcile appears to corraborate my ascertion while conveniently leaving out the whole 'China lied, people died' bit. Maybe we could get everything right if we just followed their great efforts. I'm sure they've been nothing but truthful about their death tolls and didn't keep this a secret at first allowing panic to spread that way.

>>12649051
Theoretically better but studies of infection control don't agree with the theory.

Problem is that N95 means that you still inhale 5% of the infectious material that's dispersed in the air, and next to someone who really is contagious it means you're hammered with thousands of viral particles even after filtering.

>>12649175
>home tests on different masks and how they perform. Would anyone be interested?
Sure, but only so that I can tell you how your tests are flawed. Fucking universities with tens of thousands of dollars budgets fuck up their analysis too to design flaws.

>>12649037
>Muh great reset.
Don't even talk to these fags, there's a reason the great reset sounds absolutely bonkers crazy schizo syraight from the mouth of a real life Bond movie villian.
You're the type to look at the hundreds of millions dead from Mao, Stalin, and Hitler and say alright guys that wasn't for real we're gonna give this whole socialism thing another go.

>>12649581
>So do lockdowns work? No?

Very extreme forms of lockdowns might work. The problem with that is that it's a temporary solution that cannot be sustained for a permanent problem that still remains afterwards. The virus needs contact between humans to spread as a fundamental requirement so if all contact is abolished then it cannot spread. But that also means the most extreme of draconian measures and a requirement that people want to follow them. For a nothingburger virus like covid it makes no sense to even consider an attempt of this.

The half assed lockdowns the west implement is just a sad joke, no effect and ruins the economy. The Netherlands pretended their spring lockdowns worked because cases dropped during summer, the official line was that children don't spread covid so schools was okay physically. Numbers started rising 1 week after schools opened. From december they closed schools and cases have been dropping, so they instantiated a lockdown for everyone except one of the main transmission pathways, completely negating the usefulness of everything and just pissing away the mental health of everyone and the livelyhood of small business owners, ending up with lots of cases, lots of financial damage and no results whatsoever. If anyone with any kind of responsibility did a farce like this in the professional life they would be fired, barred and prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law. But for a politicians? They hand themself a fucking medal.

>>12649614
If true lockdowns kill you from starvation and plunge countries into 3rd world condition I'm going to put them into the do not work category.
I agree with you though, Covid is indeed a nothingburger, and this is all about control, not our health.

>>12649581
Kek. Here's my original post: >>12647781. I assume you agree with this, yes? Then anon posted this >>12647802, claiming China is freer than others. I called bullshit, showing that 20 million people are under a severe lockdown >>12647807. And then you chime in like a mentally challenged moron because I said harsh lockdowns work (they do), while my original point was that China's measures, which work at the local level, are too harsh and don't work at the national level. For some reason you're attacking me, and ignoring the anon that claimed China is freer than other countries. I'm actually disgusted that I agree with you on anything, because you clearly have your head up your ass.

>>12649590
>Problem is that N95 means that you still inhale 5% of the infectious material that's dispersed in the air, and next to someone who really is contagious it means you're hammered with thousands of viral particles even after filtering.
N95's tend to filter more in the range of 97-98% of particles. Taking the low end, if you have two people, and both are wearing N95's, that 97% bumps up to 99.91%. But that's of course dependent on the people fit testing their N95's, and being able to tolerate them.

>>12649786
They obviously didn't work, 20 million Covid cases now prove that. My point is China lied about this all along and probably had little to no success stopping Covid. They are overpopulated. These deaths are good for the CCP. My point is they lied and the lockdowns don't work. You've been seething over this and assuming myltuple positions just to prove nothing.
When China comes out and said they have literally had no deaths for an entire month, throughout the whole country, do you think they might be lying?

>>12649815
Again, harsh lockdowns work at the local level. They literally test cities multiple times over the course of several weeks and only lift the lockdowns after everything is clear. It doesn't work at the national level, because of course the cities don't remain isolated indefinitely. I don't understand why you're throwing a fit over this and ignoring everything else I pointed out in my posts (roads are dug up, people are boarded in, lockdowns are still happening, China still has a major issue with the virus), yet you're ignoring the person who flat out claimed the USA is harsher than China. I think this all stems from you not bothering to look at what led to my response, so now you're unwilling to admit you fucked up.

>>12643965
>It's also a way to communicate to other people

>>12647781
Theatrics.

>>12643965
oh, so I shouldn't be wearing one?

>>12649869
Correct, because you're a self-centered prick, so wearing one would be sending the wrong message.

>>12643965
for me it's just a way to communicate to other people that I don't want to be jailed/fined for not wearing one lol...

>>12649882
Thanks for the validation

>>12649844
>A fit.
Anon, calm down. If you have to add caveats to make lockdowns work and then admit in the end they aren't feasible anyway then it's okay to admit when you're wrong about this and probably some other deepseeded things.
Ignoring that the US is harsher than China? On what? On having the lockdowns we aren't even sure China had and still have to determine worked or not?
I called the shill for what it is, shilling for China, using an article that didn't help it's point, because the article implies the lockdown worked but now because of a single wedding that is all out the window. You can't even keep your own mental gymnastics on the mat. You can't decide what China did or what we didn't do and what would even work. You could at least admit China are the new National Socialist Party of Germany but your programming has never been challenged enough. 'Kek.'

>>12649922
Yes, a fit. See >>12648170 and >>12649581 you nut job.

>Ignoring that the US is harsher than China? On what? On having the lockdowns we aren't even sure China had
Are you...special? We have satellite images of cities that were under lock down. That's not something China can fake. If you want to question their efficacy, then fine, but you can't question that they did happen and are still happening.

>I called the shill for what it is, shilling for China, using an article that didn't help it's point, because the article implies the lockdown worked
The entire point of my posting the article was to show that China's efforts haven't worked, because China has just placed 20 million people under lock down.

>You can't decide what China did or what we didn't do and what would even work.
I've already stated that China's efforts haven't worked. Seriously, what is wrong with you?

>>12647778
>>12647802
>>12649922
Fucking Chinese shills.

>>12649935
>Satellite images of cities under lockdown.
Not every city. Yes, this is North Korean propaganda tier. Call it when you see, never buy into China's claims. They have the same system of government as Kim Jong Un's and many hundred times the resources.
>The article crtiticized China
The article blamed a single wedding for the new outbreak, no establishment news outlet aside from the controlled opposition of Fox would ever blame China for anything significant
>The lockdowns that totally everyone in China abided by, especially the 3rd world parts which is most of China, did not work.
We agree lockdowns don't work.

>>12649946
How is the person critizing China a Chinese shill?

>>12649985
>claims China is freer than other countries
>claims the actions of the West are harsher than China
>claims China didn't even have lockdowns
Fuck off you CCP shill.

>>12650013
>Claims China is freer
Anon, no, China is the result of decades of Maoist establishment work. China=Evil, you're backwards on this. You're an actual idiot throwing the term shill around only to discredit it's effectiveness.
>West harsher than China.
A bunch of chinks coofed and the entirety of Europe and the West hit the fucking deck. Learn to criticize yourself if you really are western.
>China didn't have lockdowns
Fucking China lied you imbecile. Why would they shut down their economy when they are overpouplated and what people to die anyway. They control their own optics, made people go inside to validate their claims for a photo op, and 'opened' up months before we did. Point is they lied about their Covid numbers and their dirt poor worse than 3rd world communities which is over half of China did not shut down.

>>12650065
>They put every supposedly free country somewhere below China
>Closing most businesses for months, introducing curfews and in some places house exit bans is totally China-tier.
>Actually China may become a bit freer than others
>Ignoring that the US is harsher than China? On what? On having the lockdowns we aren't even sure China had and still have to determine worked or not?
Fuck off shill.

>>12650083
People claiming the West is harsher than China really deserve to be sent to China to see what it's really like.

>>12650083
>Criticizing tyrannical lockdowns means you're supporting China.
My government and others are hamstringing themselves for the interest of the Chinese. These are competing nations. China funnels money to all of these countries in broad fucking daylight. Do you have a vocabulary that extends beyond shill? Your brain is glitching to come to this conclusion. Your quotes aren't even making sense. You're more robot than anything. These curfews and shut downs are literally something China would do. Now the west is opening up quarantine camps, how do you not see this shit? We will become as bad as China if we do not check our horrendous establishment overreach. Anyone cand endorse communism, and the US government is going hard on that now, Europe is already halfway there.
Why the hell would a shill endorse any of this, you grabbed a bunch of statements and twisted their meaning in a way that doesn't even mesh.

>>12643861
shut up retard

>>12650096
We are quickly following in Chinese footsteps by sending them money and employing their highly establishment control faggot. Our governments are enabling China right now. Only an idiot has zero criticisms for their own government. You think someone saying the US and European governments are shit makes them worse than the Maoist hellhole of China?

>>12650120
Kek, look how defensive the shill is getting now that he's been spotted.

>These curfews and shut downs are literally something China would do.
China's not even doing that, remember? You made that claim. You also attacked the one person in this thread who said something negative about China. You fucked up, shill. There's no backing out, now.

>>12650143
>You think someone saying the US and European governments are shit
You literally said the USA is below China.

>>12650146
>>12650154
Lol just accuse your enemy of what you are guilty of, is it pay by the post or just pennies on the hour? You can't point to anything specifically said because you're relying on willfully misconstruing everything.
I have maintained all my positions while pointing out issues on every side, which is what actual humans are supposed to do. Did you know that the west is acting in the interest of China and that needs to fucking stop? Of course China would lock down if it were in their interest, yhey would do anything they wanted to including genocide because to hell with everything that isn't them. They didn't lock down, becuase it wasn't good for the CCP, why fight the west when they will voluntarilly collapse their own economies because of the coof? China would lock down, if it were to their benefit, but it's never good to do so, they don't care if people die or not, they only care about becomming the next world power and globalist interests are seeing to it that they do.
Seethe, starve, syntax. Trannies, Chinks, and Bots can pick what's best for them.

>>12650146
You gooks are working overtime.

>>12650218
>You can't point to anything specifically said because you're relying on willfully misconstruing everything.
Fucktard, how can you possibly defend saying "they put every supposedly free country somewhere below China"? What a huge coincident that you say that, while simultaneously attacking someone who said that China's actions were too harsh and the West hasn't experienced anything similar. Fucking shill. You're caught, now you're just doing damage control.

>>12650218
>You can't point to anything specifically said

Everything in this post >>12650083 was a direct quote. Anyone who places China above the West in terms of freedom is either a fucking shill or trying to sow discord.

>>12650248
Not even me, and they are jumping the gun. But these forced lockdowns are tyrannical, they're wrong, and people in Europe are essentially under house arrest. How does calling this out make anyone a shill? You only started calling people shills when somebody blundered, said lockdowns work, and then provided an article stating that China apparently locked down and it didn't work.
If Chinese shills were here, they would be telling you to follow the lock downs and do as you are told, I am telling you that you are the boss of your own government, or at least that's how it should be. The sort of tone deafness you are exhibiting is really only possible if you are mentally ill or if you yourself are a shill.

>>12650263
Not me tranny. And you should be allowed to say lockdowns are wrong anyway. We're not worse then China, at least not yet. That's what really scares me.

>>12650248
How is it when someone shits on China they are now a shill? Only a shill or someone shilling for shills can act as shilly as you.

>>12650263
The shills are right behind you, anon. They're coming after you. You're latching onto one thing some fuck said and blaming everyone. We're all shills now down here.

>>12650295
>We're not worse then China, at least not yet.
Fine, that's fair, but why throw a fit at me, when I already stated (multiple times) that China still has an issue despite their harsh actions, while you ignore multiple posts claiming the West already has fewer freedoms than China? That's fucked up man, and seriously sketchy.

>>12650288
>You only started calling people shills when somebody blundered, said lockdowns work
Nope, I said harsh lockdowns work, but not at the national level, and provided an article showing that China still has a COVID-19 problem in direct response to someone claiming they didn't. If they had no problem, why would lockdowns be needed? Then you started throwing around the shill label, which is really weird, because I'd just attacked China in my previous post, meanwhile I've pointed out to you multiple times that there's another anon (which I thought was you) saying that China has more freedom than the West. I gave you the direct quotes. You, somehow, continue to ignore that, and never stated it wasn't you until now. I'm not buying it.

>>12650330
>How is it when someone shits on China they are now a shill?
Good question. Perhaps you can explain why you called this anon >>12647781 a shill?

>>12650354
>You're latching onto one thing some fuck said and blaming everyone.
You seriously can't believe the West is below China in terms of freedom, right? Because that's the statement you're defending.

>>12650365
Don't have to because I didn't say it fag. Hiding in this thread is only going to cause more glitches to show in your programming.

>>12650370
I'm saying the west is on it's way to that and that it's terrifying. Another anon or shill or what have you can say something retarded and it not be 100% reflective of my position. How is it you need this explained? How is it that how have you made it through life until now like this?

>>12650397
>Another anon or shill or what have you can say something retarded and it not be 100% reflective of my position.
I gave you the exact quote multiple times, you not once said it wasn't you. How the fuck am I supposed to know it's not you when you never said so? Why didn't you say so? Also, why they fuck didn't you call that person out? I think you're full of shit.

>>12643861
>>12643866
this is literally the most informative post in the thread

>>12650406
Because there's multiple people in the thread you fucking donkey, do you really need 4chan explained to you? I don't have to go around calling everyone out regardless of who I disagree with, I just like wiping my ass with your time. Your comments belong in a museum. Perhaps future generations will unearth the server this thread is stored on during an archaelogical dig and find this exact conversation. Maybe they transcibe this and put it on display so they can marvel at your stupid takes.

>>12650412
Thread is kill. Nuke it.

>>12650441
seems to be done

>>12643867
They are loving their realization of control that they have over you

>>12650437
>Because there's multiple people in the thread you fucking donkey
No shit Sherlock, so when someone attributes a post to you on three different occasions, and not once do you speak up and say that it's not your post, it's safe to assume that person will assume it is your post. Shill.

>>12650013
/Sci/ has been flooded with them for months.

>>12643921
This. And there's still no agreement whether or not the virus spreads mostly through aerosols.

>>12650659
>Boohoo I fucked up why didn't you correct me.
Sorry, Ling, just keep practicing your english.

>>12650437
>Maybe they transcibe this
Your Chinese is showing, Chang.

>>12650659
Don't you know that when you're on an anonymous message board, and your getting responses that use the same exact syntax and insults, that you're supposed to know it's different posters (even though it's really not)?

>>12651102
You're meant to evaluate each post on its merit, not on some junior high social score keeping.

>>12650013
>>claims China is freer than other countries
Before 2020 that's certainly false.
After 2020 West and China are the same shit. If you don't like it, go and protest the lockdowns.

>>12651416
>If you don't like it, go and protest the lockdowns.
Why don't you try going to China to protest, see if it's really as free as you believe.

>>12650263
>or trying to sow discord.
Trying to sow discord in these trying times is absolutely unacceptable! We must unite under the Chinese... sorry, European Communist Party wise guidance!

>>12651432
Hmm, there were some protests in Hong Kong, like million people strong. I wonder if they are still ongoing?
Wait, they are no more! Corona was very convenient, wasn't it?

>>12651439
>I wonder if they are still ongoing?
Nope, thanks to new policies allowing China to arrest anyone who says anything that could be considered negative toward the CCP. Enjoy your protests, they're a proven fact that this isn't China, because you wouldn't be sending messages on 4chan if you were involved in the Hong Kong protests.

>>12651447
>Nope
As a covid lover you should love that too. Hong Kongers are truly law-abiding and epidemics-fighting people, aren't they?

>>12651458
>As a covid lover
Kek. I don't know who you think you're talking to, I don't wear masks or abide by lock downs, but your comparison of China to the West was moronic. You have no clue what you're talking about.

China didn't defeat covid. It just pretended to fight corona a bit and then mostly ignored it. Since corona is hardly noticeable if you don't push it in media, you can live as usual and your mortality will be nothing groundbreaking. Other Asian countries did the same.

>>12651476
>I don't wear masks or abide by lock downs
That's unironically great and praiseworthy. I always try to do the same too.
>but your comparison of China to the West was moronic.
Before 2020 China was certainly a prison compared to the West. Now China is a somewhat worse prison, but West with all the lockdowns/quarantines/businesses destruction/masks/travel bans/future covid passports/etc rapidly got Chinified. If I will time-travel to 2019 and try to warn people around me, even the smallest 2020-21 details will be unbelievable.