Doctor demonstrating how ineffective masks are in stopping vape smoke!

[AProudLefty]

It was referred to you.

You said this: "and I never claimed that you claimed such things."

[gfm7175]

You said this: "and I never claimed that you claimed such things."

Correct.

[gfm7175]

...deleted 'PolitiFact' holy link...

You cannot use PolitiFact (or any "fact checker") as a reference with me. PolitiFact, like Wikipedia, is too often incomplete, misleading, or just plain wrong...

In this case, they are just plain wrong. They are taking a photo which clearly shows a mask box's warning label (for masks that people are commonly wearing around) which explicitly states that those masks will NOT provide any protection against viruses, yet they are still trying to claim that masks somehow provide protection against viruses.

[Mott the Hoople]

They don't use masks in Holland, Sweden or Denmark except maybe on crowded public transport.

https://fee.org/articles/europes-top...ting-covid-19/

Attachment 17217

There a tool and like any other they have specific uses and performance criteria. I designed, trained and implemented many a respiratory protection program and the level of protection and the type of contaminant you are providing protection for determines your selection.

I’ve implemented respiratory protection from particle mask to self contained and supplied breathing apparatus.

The whole intent of selecting a particle masks is to protect for particles of a specific size or larger. The main purpose of surgical mask is to protect from air born fluid aerosol particle.

They are effective and work well within those limitations. They are not designed as a barrier medium for viruses. Most particles mask and respirators are not.

What they can do efficiently is create a barrier to airborn aerosol particulates that do carry viruses.

It’s not an absolute form of protection but is quite effective for its intended purpose and the peer reviewed literature in public health and industrial hygiene support this.

Which is why there’s so much uninformed nonsense in these threads in regards to the use of face masks. They are certainly not an absolute fix but used appropriately can and do lower transmission rates. Which is a very good thing.

[AProudLefty]

You cannot use PolitiFact (or any "fact checker") as a reference with me. PolitiFact, like Wikipedia, is too often incomplete, misleading, or just plain wrong...

In this case, they are just plain wrong. They are taking a photo which clearly shows a mask box's warning label (for masks that people are commonly wearing around) which explicitly states that those masks will NOT provide any protection against viruses, yet they are still trying to claim that masks somehow provide protection against viruses.

Um are you aware that they said that the label is legitimate? That is if you even read the article.

[AProudLefty]

Correct.

So either you referred to me or you didn't. Which one? Make up your mind.

[gfm7175]

Um are you aware that they said that the label is legitimate? That is if you even read the article.

Yes, and unlike you, I actually read through the article... They are simply denying the meaning of words because they don't like what is being said. Laughable, which is why I do not accept PolitiFact as a source.

[AProudLefty]

Yes, and unlike you, I actually read through the article... They are simply denying the meaning of words because they don't like what is being said. They are trying to claim that someone who said that "the Earth is warming" ACTUALLY said that the Earth is cooling, but that you just "misinterpreted" the words that were said... Laughable, which is why I do not accept PolitiFact as a source.

[gfm7175]

So either you referred to me or you didn't. Which one? Make up your mind.

I already told you that I did.

[gfm7175]

The messaging on the packaging was VERY clear...

[AProudLefty]

The messaging on the packaging was VERY clear...

Okay. Let's move on.

[AProudLefty]

I already told you that I did.

You cannot have it both. Anyway, I am getting tired of playing your silly game. We'll move on, shall we?

[gfm7175]

Okay. Let's move on.

Are you now changing your position and agreeing with me that the PolitiFact article that you linked to is completely full of shit?

[gfm7175]

You cannot have it both.

I'm not arguing both sides of anything. You are simply failing to closely discern what I said to you...

Anyway, I am getting tired of playing your silly game.

Reading comprehension is not a game.

We'll move on, shall we?

Fine by me.

[AProudLefty]

Are you now changing your position and agreeing with me that the PolitiFact article that you linked to is completely full of shit?

Nope. I am saying to move on because obviously you don't like the source so it's pointless.