Horowitz: Exposing the maskerade: The questions every American should be asking about indefinite mask mandates

I was condemning the study, it is not science; I was also condemning you because you also ignore all truth in favor of garbage that perpetuates your indefensible political agenda :rofl:

After I forced you to read it, after you tried to claim I misrepresented it.

You should have read it first thing.

Don’t get why you think lying about reading it is ok.

You “forced me to read it” :rofl:

Your study concludes nothing relevant to your claim, you are lying and misrepresenting in the hopes that your hopeless political party can kill enough people to keep the attention off of your imbecilic candidate; it won’t work :rofl:

2 Likes

Oh? Then why did you call it “garbage that perpetuates your indefensible political agenda”?

How does it “perpetuate my agenda” if it doesn’t agree with me?

Excuses, excuses.

Because the only thing they “tested” was distance of the droplets of a cough or sneeze when done through a mask or not, a useless test because nobody coughs or sneezes into a mask (they pull it down when they feel it coming) and nobody without a mask coughs or sneezes towards anyone (they cover their face with their hand or arm and turn away from people); the only exception is babies and toddlers (who won’t be wearing masks anyway).

A garbage test designed to show a benefit from masks that does not exist in practice.

The study also refused to study the actual contamination of the surroundings and the detrimental effects of mask wearing by the general public, this was left out to avoid showing that there is a significant heath risk involved in breathing through a contaminated mask all day long.

AS I said, a garbage study designed from the start to make a bad idea seem like an idea with at least a small benefit.

And you know it just like the perveyers of this “study” knew it.

4 Likes

Reducing particle count is useful in practice.

And it’s what i claimed the study said. So I described it accurately.

Saying “I lied” about the study was your lie.

Dishonest tactic RET. Don’t get why you think that’s okay.

A person whose actually right shouldn’t have to do that.

There is no reduction in “particle count” because NOBODY COUGHS OR SNEEZES INTO A MASK.

If they did they would then IMMEDIATELY grab that nasty goo covered mask and toss it, then touch everything with their gross hands until they got somewhere to wash their hands.

You are wrong, wearing a mask is a bad idea for the general public and does only harm, just as every responsible medical entity said back in MARCH; the only thing that has changed is the political motives since then.

2 Likes

Pretty sure they do, this is the same as saying a cough or sneeze never takes someone unawares.

And that’s your opinion. But I didn’t lie about what the study said.

You made that up, because you give yourself excuses to act that way.

You are correct RET.

AS has traded science for politics. Like the German Nazis, he embraces junk science that supports his politics.

Also, you said There is no reduction in “particle count” because NOBODY COUGHS OR SNEEZES INTO A MASK. I would add that since we are not even infected in the first place there are no particles of note that need to be reduced anyways.

The only thing that you are “sure of” is that this study is a worthless piece of Propaganda that serves no purpose but to lend credibility to bad ideas that nobody with an ounce of sense would embrace if the truth were not censored.

1 Like

Nope. The Singapore study on SARS also lays ground work for suggesting steroids and anti-malarial medication can treat a coronaviri disease.

And it’s from 16 years ago. There’s no political bias in it.

Uh, yep.

Tell me, what is the scientific basis for saying that Homosexuals are normal?

What silly thing to say, just because this glorified cold is not present does not mean our bodies do not expell harmful bacteria to others and flu/cold type viruses that are harmful; the human respiratory system is designed to filter incoming contaminates and expel bad stuff when it is detected.

That is why we cough and sneeze and that is why it is harmful to hinder the expulsion of our breath while giving contaminates a place to stick that insures they will be breathed back in.

1 Like

Nope. You shot from the hip. You admit that by changing the discussion.

Nor did I, I said it reduces it.

Large droplets contain more virus than aerosols. Aerosols are a harder vector to be infected by.

This simply comes down to viral load. Masks reduce it.

That was unexpected. Well then, in that case, you should have worn a mask your whole life. As you said, your body expels harmful bacteria to others and flu/cold type viruses that are harmful. Yet your whole life you have done so without a mask. You sound like a hypocrite who wants to purposely infect people with all your harmful bacteria and flu/cold type viruses. Where has your mask been all these years?

Exactly what is your position here.

It reduces nothing, there is no benefit in the contamination of the environment by the wearing of a mask by the general public; your study does not show this or anything else that is useful regarding how to act during this pandemic.

Your political motives are the only thing that is served by your claims and those come with a cost of public health for all those who believe you and never see the truth because your Party censors it.

1 Like

It reduces viral load, that’s what the study showed.

Coughing or sneezing through a mask disrupts the size of particles released. Only aerosols get away, and again, aerosols have less viral load to infect with.

Then tell me this:
Since we lose 60k people a year from the Flu, why weren’t masks and school and restaurant shutdowns demanded every year. 60k is a lot of people. In 20 years that was 1 million 200k people dead.

So, why not the masks and shutdowns?

My “position” is that wearing a mask is harmful to the wearer and provides no benefits to others, I am pretty sure that I have been consistent on that.

The human respiratory system is designed to protect us, wearing a mask in the general public diminishes the performance of our respiratory system (which harms us) and provides no tangible reduction of contaminates in the environments where we go that would help others.

Mask wearing in public is 100 percent a bad idea with 0 percent benefit to anyone.

1 Like