Teachers' unions basically always want two things: Less work and more money.
The Coronavirus thread
- Thread starter hamster
- Start date
Teachers' unions basically always want two things: Less work and more money.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 5,840
- Reaction score
- 4,788
- Points
- 113
100% of the teachers at our school want to be in school at the normal start date....with kids.....teaching and gasp....EARNING their money. I know this because I've talked to them all regularly through text or Zoom meetings. None of them want to be at home doing nothing. Blanket statements about any group of people are usually made out of ignorance.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2014
- Messages
- 10,557
- Reaction score
- 6,262
- Points
- 113
No..........my main point is there is so much conflicting information out there that no one knows what the correct info is. No one can see into the future and know if there are any long term damages to kids or even adults especially if they were asymptomatic. We wont know that for many years unless China spills the beans. I am not against opening schools, but there is no way to claim that is 100% safe at this point.
Where’s my ******* refund? Schools closed for how long and potentially longer. Why da fuq am I still paying school taxes?!?!
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,242
- Reaction score
- 8,018
- Points
- 113
I have not run across one in our district who wants to go back full time. Not one.
Like I said, not that I blame them for that. I just think everyone is going to need to compromise some. I'm sure they will in the end. But at the moment they do not seem to want to accept any of the proposed solutions.
Lengthy but excellent article on Sweden vs. New York & lockdowns.
Why Sweden Succeeded in “Flattening the Curve” and New York Failed
by Jon Miltimore
Wednesday, July 15, 2020
Coronavirus deaths have slowed to a crawl in Sweden. With the exception of a single death on July 13, no deaths in this nation of 10 million have been reported since July 10.
But the debate over Sweden’s approach to the COVID-19 pandemic, which relied on individual responsibility instead of government coercion to maintain social distancing, is far from over.
Last week, The New York Times labeled Sweden’s approach to the pandemic a “cautionary tale” for the rest of the world, claiming it “yielded a surge of deaths without sparing its economy from damage.”
To be accurate, Sweden has outperformed many nations around the world with its “lighter touch” approach and was one of the few nations in Europe to see its economy grow in the first quarter of 2020.
Meanwhile, Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top infectious disease expert, continues to defend his nation’s approach to the pandemic.
“I’m looking forward to a more serious evaluation of our work than has been made so far,” Tegnell said in a recent podcast published by Swedish public radio before taking a scheduled vacation. “There is no way of knowing how this ends.”
Sweden’s Actual Pandemic Performance
Sweden has become a global lightning rod, but this has less to do with the results of its policies than the nature of its policies.
While Sweden’s death toll is indeed substantially higher than neighbors such as Finland, Norway, and Denmark, it’s also much lower than several other European neighbors such as Belgium, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain.
Indeed, a simple comparison between Belgium and Sweden—nations with rather similar populations—reveals that Belgium suffered far worse than Sweden from the coronavirus.
The reason Sweden is a “cautionary tale” and Belgium is not is because Belgium followed the script. Early in the pandemic, Belgian officials closed all non-essential business and enforced strict social distancing rules.
All non-emergency workers were told to stay home. Shopping was limited to a single family member. Individuals could leave for medical reasons or to walk a pet or get a brief bit of exercise—so long as social distancing was maintained.
These lockdown protocols, the BBC reported, were strictly enforced by Belgian police using “drones in parks and fines for anyone breaking social distancing rules.”
A More Suitable ‘Cautionary Tale’
Sweden clearly endured the pandemic better than Belgium, which had nearly twice as many COVID-19 deaths despite its economic lockdown.
Yet the Times chose Sweden as its “cautionary tale” because Sweden chose not to institute an economic lockdown. Sweden took such an approach for two reasons. First, as Tegnell has publicly stated, there is little to no scientific evidence that lockdowns work. Second, as evidence today shows, lockdowns come with widespread unintended consequences: mass unemployment, recession, social unrest, psychological deterioration, suicides, and drug overdoses.
Even if Sweden has seen its death toll rise more sharply than Scandinavian neighbors such as Finland and Norway, it’s strange that the Times would go thousands of miles across an ocean and continent to find a “cautionary tale.” A far better cautionary tale can be found right under the Grey Lady’s nose.
A simple comparison between New York and Sweden shows the Empire State has suffered far worse from COVID-19 than the Swedes. Yinon Weiss, an entrepreneur and founder of Rally Point, recently compared Sweden and New York using data from the COVID Tracking Project.
Here’s the good news: You can shut down businesses or keep them open. Close schools or stay in session. Wear masks or not. The virus will make its way through in either case, and if we protect the elderly then deaths will be spared.
The first thing one notices about the comparison is that Sweden was able to “flatten the curve,” so to speak. Though the phrase is largely forgotten today, flattening the curve was originally the entire purpose of the lockdowns. To the extent that there was a scientific basis for lockdowns, it was in the idea that they were a temporary measure designed to help hospitals avoid being overwhelmed by sick patients.
Dr Robert Katz, founding director of the Yale‐Griffin Prevention Research Center, observed that by flattening the curve “you don't prevent deaths, you just change the dates.” But a temporary lockdown could at least prevent everyone from getting sick at once, which would be catastrophic.
If flattening the curve was the primary goal of policymakers, Sweden was largely a success. New York, on the other hand, was not, despite widespread closures and strict enforcement of social distancing policies.
The reason New York failed and Sweden succeeded probably has relatively little to do with the fact that bars and restaurants were open in Sweden. Or that New York’s schools were closed while Sweden’s were open. As Weiss explains, the difference probably isn’t related to lockdowns at all. It probably has much more to do with the fact that New York failed to protect the most at-risk populations: the elderly and infirm.
“Here’s the good news: You can shut down businesses or keep them open. Close schools or stay in session. Wear masks or not,” says Weiss, a graduate of Harvard Business School. “The virus will make its way through in either case, and if we protect the elderly then deaths will be spared.”
This is precisely the prescription Dr. John Ioannidis, a Stanford University epidemiologist and one of the most cited scientists in the world, has advocated since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.
“One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health,” Ioannidis wrote in a STAT article in March. "Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric.”
Sadly, many of the adverse consequences Ioannidis predicted have since come to pass, as he has acknowledged.
Is Sweden Truly a ‘Cautionary Tale’?
Tegnell and Swedish leaders have mostly stood by their lighter touch approach, although there is a recognition that they, too, could have more effectively protected at-risk populations.
“We must admit that the part that deals with elderly care, in terms of the spread of infection, has not worked. It is obvious. We have too many elderly people who have passed away,” Sweden’s Prime Minister Stefan Löfven said in June.
Yet it’s a mistake to label Sweden’s approach a failure. As noted above, Sweden is being criticized less because of the results of their public health policies and more because of the nature of them.
By embracing a much more market-based approach to the pandemic in lieu of a centrally planned one, Sweden is undermining the narrative that millions and millions of people would have died without lockdowns, as modelers predicted.
Without Sweden and a few similar outliers, it would be far easier for central planners to say, sure, lockdowns were harsh and destructive. But we had no choice.
In the wake of the most destructive pandemic in a century, there will be considerable discussion as to whether the lockdowns, which stand to trigger a global depression in addition to other psychological and social costs, were truly necessary.
In a sense, the disagreement over the pandemic largely resembles a much larger friction in society: should individuals be left free to pursue their own interests and weigh risks themselves or should they be guided, coerced, and protected by planners who want to do all this for them.
As Ludwig Von Mises noted long ago, modern social conflict is largely a struggle over who gets to design the world, individuals or authorities. Mises saw few things more dangerous than central planners seeking to supplant the plans of individuals with plans of their own, which they see as a preeminent good.
It was partly for this reason Mises saw market economies as superior to command economies.
“Whatever people do in the market economy, is the execution of their own plans. In this sense every human action means planning,” Mises wrote in Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. “What those calling themselves planners advocate is not the substitution of planned action for letting things go. It is the substitution of the planner’s own plan for the plans of his fellow-men. The planner is a potential dictator who wants to deprive all other people of the power to plan and act according to their own plans. He aims at one thing only: the exclusive absolute pre-eminence of his own plan.”
When Mises speaks of the “pre-eminence of his own plan,” it’s hard not to think of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who in March sounded downright indignant when a reporter asked about nursing homes objecting to his plan of prohibiting them from screening for COVID-19.
“They don’t have the right to object,” Cuomo answered. “That is the rule, and that is the regulation, and they have to comply with it.”
Cuomo clearly saw his central plan as superior to that of individuals acting within the marketplace.
The policy of forcing nursing homes to take COVID carrying patients, which was adopted by numerous US states with high virus death tolls, is a stark contrast to Sweden’s market-based approach that trusted individuals to plan for themselves.
“Our measures are all based on individuals taking responsibility, and that is … an important part of the Swedish model,” Hakan Samuelsson, the CEO of Volvo Cars, observed in April.
Sweden’s approach of encouraging social distancing by giving responsibility to individuals may very well explain why the Swedes fared so much better than New York, where authorities disempowered individual actors and prevented nursing homes from taking sensible precautions.
It’s almost absurd to look at New York’s pandemic plan and declare it superior to Sweden’s, yet many in the intellectual class will continue to hammer away at Sweden while ignoring the catastrophic numbers in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and other states.
This likely would have been no surprise to Mises. As he pointed out, the central planner is primarily concerned with a single factor: the pre-eminence of his own plan.
Once this truth is understood, one can finally understand the drumbeat of criticism against Sweden.
Link https://fee.org/articles/why-sweden-succeeded-in-flattening-the-curve-and-new-york-failed/
Why Sweden Succeeded in “Flattening the Curve” and New York Failed
by Jon Miltimore
Wednesday, July 15, 2020
Coronavirus deaths have slowed to a crawl in Sweden. With the exception of a single death on July 13, no deaths in this nation of 10 million have been reported since July 10.
But the debate over Sweden’s approach to the COVID-19 pandemic, which relied on individual responsibility instead of government coercion to maintain social distancing, is far from over.
Last week, The New York Times labeled Sweden’s approach to the pandemic a “cautionary tale” for the rest of the world, claiming it “yielded a surge of deaths without sparing its economy from damage.”
To be accurate, Sweden has outperformed many nations around the world with its “lighter touch” approach and was one of the few nations in Europe to see its economy grow in the first quarter of 2020.
Meanwhile, Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top infectious disease expert, continues to defend his nation’s approach to the pandemic.
“I’m looking forward to a more serious evaluation of our work than has been made so far,” Tegnell said in a recent podcast published by Swedish public radio before taking a scheduled vacation. “There is no way of knowing how this ends.”
Sweden’s Actual Pandemic Performance
Sweden has become a global lightning rod, but this has less to do with the results of its policies than the nature of its policies.
While Sweden’s death toll is indeed substantially higher than neighbors such as Finland, Norway, and Denmark, it’s also much lower than several other European neighbors such as Belgium, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain.
Indeed, a simple comparison between Belgium and Sweden—nations with rather similar populations—reveals that Belgium suffered far worse than Sweden from the coronavirus.
The reason Sweden is a “cautionary tale” and Belgium is not is because Belgium followed the script. Early in the pandemic, Belgian officials closed all non-essential business and enforced strict social distancing rules.
All non-emergency workers were told to stay home. Shopping was limited to a single family member. Individuals could leave for medical reasons or to walk a pet or get a brief bit of exercise—so long as social distancing was maintained.
These lockdown protocols, the BBC reported, were strictly enforced by Belgian police using “drones in parks and fines for anyone breaking social distancing rules.”
A More Suitable ‘Cautionary Tale’
Sweden clearly endured the pandemic better than Belgium, which had nearly twice as many COVID-19 deaths despite its economic lockdown.
Yet the Times chose Sweden as its “cautionary tale” because Sweden chose not to institute an economic lockdown. Sweden took such an approach for two reasons. First, as Tegnell has publicly stated, there is little to no scientific evidence that lockdowns work. Second, as evidence today shows, lockdowns come with widespread unintended consequences: mass unemployment, recession, social unrest, psychological deterioration, suicides, and drug overdoses.
Even if Sweden has seen its death toll rise more sharply than Scandinavian neighbors such as Finland and Norway, it’s strange that the Times would go thousands of miles across an ocean and continent to find a “cautionary tale.” A far better cautionary tale can be found right under the Grey Lady’s nose.
A simple comparison between New York and Sweden shows the Empire State has suffered far worse from COVID-19 than the Swedes. Yinon Weiss, an entrepreneur and founder of Rally Point, recently compared Sweden and New York using data from the COVID Tracking Project.
Here’s the good news: You can shut down businesses or keep them open. Close schools or stay in session. Wear masks or not. The virus will make its way through in either case, and if we protect the elderly then deaths will be spared.
The first thing one notices about the comparison is that Sweden was able to “flatten the curve,” so to speak. Though the phrase is largely forgotten today, flattening the curve was originally the entire purpose of the lockdowns. To the extent that there was a scientific basis for lockdowns, it was in the idea that they were a temporary measure designed to help hospitals avoid being overwhelmed by sick patients.
Dr Robert Katz, founding director of the Yale‐Griffin Prevention Research Center, observed that by flattening the curve “you don't prevent deaths, you just change the dates.” But a temporary lockdown could at least prevent everyone from getting sick at once, which would be catastrophic.
If flattening the curve was the primary goal of policymakers, Sweden was largely a success. New York, on the other hand, was not, despite widespread closures and strict enforcement of social distancing policies.
The reason New York failed and Sweden succeeded probably has relatively little to do with the fact that bars and restaurants were open in Sweden. Or that New York’s schools were closed while Sweden’s were open. As Weiss explains, the difference probably isn’t related to lockdowns at all. It probably has much more to do with the fact that New York failed to protect the most at-risk populations: the elderly and infirm.
“Here’s the good news: You can shut down businesses or keep them open. Close schools or stay in session. Wear masks or not,” says Weiss, a graduate of Harvard Business School. “The virus will make its way through in either case, and if we protect the elderly then deaths will be spared.”
This is precisely the prescription Dr. John Ioannidis, a Stanford University epidemiologist and one of the most cited scientists in the world, has advocated since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.
“One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health,” Ioannidis wrote in a STAT article in March. "Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric.”
Sadly, many of the adverse consequences Ioannidis predicted have since come to pass, as he has acknowledged.
Is Sweden Truly a ‘Cautionary Tale’?
Tegnell and Swedish leaders have mostly stood by their lighter touch approach, although there is a recognition that they, too, could have more effectively protected at-risk populations.
“We must admit that the part that deals with elderly care, in terms of the spread of infection, has not worked. It is obvious. We have too many elderly people who have passed away,” Sweden’s Prime Minister Stefan Löfven said in June.
Yet it’s a mistake to label Sweden’s approach a failure. As noted above, Sweden is being criticized less because of the results of their public health policies and more because of the nature of them.
By embracing a much more market-based approach to the pandemic in lieu of a centrally planned one, Sweden is undermining the narrative that millions and millions of people would have died without lockdowns, as modelers predicted.
Without Sweden and a few similar outliers, it would be far easier for central planners to say, sure, lockdowns were harsh and destructive. But we had no choice.
In the wake of the most destructive pandemic in a century, there will be considerable discussion as to whether the lockdowns, which stand to trigger a global depression in addition to other psychological and social costs, were truly necessary.
In a sense, the disagreement over the pandemic largely resembles a much larger friction in society: should individuals be left free to pursue their own interests and weigh risks themselves or should they be guided, coerced, and protected by planners who want to do all this for them.
As Ludwig Von Mises noted long ago, modern social conflict is largely a struggle over who gets to design the world, individuals or authorities. Mises saw few things more dangerous than central planners seeking to supplant the plans of individuals with plans of their own, which they see as a preeminent good.
It was partly for this reason Mises saw market economies as superior to command economies.
“Whatever people do in the market economy, is the execution of their own plans. In this sense every human action means planning,” Mises wrote in Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. “What those calling themselves planners advocate is not the substitution of planned action for letting things go. It is the substitution of the planner’s own plan for the plans of his fellow-men. The planner is a potential dictator who wants to deprive all other people of the power to plan and act according to their own plans. He aims at one thing only: the exclusive absolute pre-eminence of his own plan.”
When Mises speaks of the “pre-eminence of his own plan,” it’s hard not to think of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who in March sounded downright indignant when a reporter asked about nursing homes objecting to his plan of prohibiting them from screening for COVID-19.
“They don’t have the right to object,” Cuomo answered. “That is the rule, and that is the regulation, and they have to comply with it.”
Cuomo clearly saw his central plan as superior to that of individuals acting within the marketplace.
The policy of forcing nursing homes to take COVID carrying patients, which was adopted by numerous US states with high virus death tolls, is a stark contrast to Sweden’s market-based approach that trusted individuals to plan for themselves.
“Our measures are all based on individuals taking responsibility, and that is … an important part of the Swedish model,” Hakan Samuelsson, the CEO of Volvo Cars, observed in April.
Sweden’s approach of encouraging social distancing by giving responsibility to individuals may very well explain why the Swedes fared so much better than New York, where authorities disempowered individual actors and prevented nursing homes from taking sensible precautions.
It’s almost absurd to look at New York’s pandemic plan and declare it superior to Sweden’s, yet many in the intellectual class will continue to hammer away at Sweden while ignoring the catastrophic numbers in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and other states.
This likely would have been no surprise to Mises. As he pointed out, the central planner is primarily concerned with a single factor: the pre-eminence of his own plan.
Once this truth is understood, one can finally understand the drumbeat of criticism against Sweden.
Link https://fee.org/articles/why-sweden-succeeded-in-flattening-the-curve-and-new-york-failed/
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The State of Texas today had to remove 3,484 cases from its Covid-19 positive case count, because the San Antonio Health Department was reporting “probable” cases for people never actually tested, as “confirmed” positive cases.- TDHS<br>What other departments make this same mistake? <a href="https://t.co/wYhGWhHl5w">pic.twitter.com/wYhGWhHl5w</a></p>— Steve Eagar (@steveeagar) <a href="https://twitter.com/steveeagar/status/1283575782175014916?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 16, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Hmm. Seeing a pattern here yet jitter77?
Hmm. Seeing a pattern here yet jitter77?
- Joined
- May 10, 2019
- Messages
- 2,067
- Reaction score
- 3,201
- Points
- 113
From a youtube commenter re: masks:
It's all about the masks...
For all you mask wearers (especially those of you who think wearing it outside is NOT stupid ). I know I’m about to burst your “google doctor degree” bubble, but here goes nothing.
So Masks?
I am OSHA 10&30 certified. I know some of you are too. I don’t really know WHY OSHA hasn’t come forward and stopped the nonsense BUT I want to cover 3 things
• N95 masks and masks with exhale ports
• surgical masks
• filter or cloth masks
Okay, so upon further inspection, OSHA says some masks are okay and not okay in certain situations.
If you’re working with fumes and aerosol chemicals and you give your employees the wrong masks and they get sick, you can be sued.
• N95 masks: are designed for CONTAMINATED environments. That means when you exhale through N95 the design is that you are exhaling into contamination. The exhale from N95 masks are vented to breath straight out without filtration. They don’t filter the air on the way out. They don’t need to.
Conclusion: if you’re in Target and the guy with Covid has a N95 mask, his covid breath is unfiltered being exhaled into Target (because it was designed for already contaminated environments, it’s not filtering your air on the way out).
• Surgical Mask: these masks were designed and approved for STERILE environments. The amount of particles and contaminants in the outside and indoor environments where people are CLOGGING these masks very, VERY quickly. The moisture from your breath combined with the clogged mask will render it “useless” IF you come in contact with Covid and your mask traps it, YOU become a walking virus dispenser. Everytime you put your mask on you are breathing the germs from EVERYWHERE you went. They should be changed or thrown out every “20-30 minutes in a non sterile environment.”
• Cloth masks: I can’t even believe I’m having to explain this, but here it goes. Today, three people pointed to their masks as they walked by me entering Lowe’s. They said “ya gotta wear your mask BRO” I said very clearly “those masks don’t work bro, in fact they MAKE you sicker” they “pshh’d” me. By now hopefully you all know CLOTH masks do not filter anything. You mean the American flag one my aunt made? Yes. The one with sunflowers that looks so cute? Yes. The bandanna, the cut up t-shirt, the scarf ALL of them offer NO FILTERING whatsoever. As you exhale, you are ridding your lungs of contaminants and carbon dioxide. Cloth masks trap this carbon dioxide the best. It actually risks your health, rather than protect it. The moisture caught in these masks can become mildew ridden over night. Dry coughing, enhanced allergies, sore throat are all symptoms of a micro-mold in your mask.
-Ultimate Answer:
*N95 blows the virus into the air from a contaminated person.
*The surgical mask is not designed for the outside world and will not filter the virus upon inhaling through it. It’s filtration works on the exhale, (Like a vacuum bag, it only works one way) but likely stops after 20 minutes, rendering it useless outside of a STERILE ENVIRONMENT (correct Becky, they don’t work in a bar, not even a little bit).
*Cloth masks are WORSE than none. It’s equivalent to using a chain link fence to stop mosquitos.
The CDC wants us to keep wearing masks. The masks don’t work. They’re being used to provide false comfort and push forward a specific agenda. For the love of God, research each mask’s designed use and purpose, I bet you will find NONE are used in the way of “viral defense.”
Just like EVERY Flu season kids, wash your hands. Sanitize your hands. Don’t touch stuff. Sanitize your phone. Don’t touch people. And keep your distance. Why? Because your breath stinks, your deodorant is failing, your shoes are old and stink, that shirts not clean, & I like my space. Trust me I can hear you from here. Lots of reasons to keep your distance and work on body hygiene. But trust me, the masks do not work.
*Occupational Safety & Hazard Association sited.
The top American organization for safety.
They regulate and educate asbestos workers, surgical rooms, you name it.
I know, facts suck. They throw a wrench into the perfectly (seeming) packaged pill you are willingly swallowing. Facts make you have to form your OWN OPINION, instead of regurgitating someone else’s, and I know how uncomfortable that makes a lot of you. If your mask gives you security, by all means wear it. Just know it is a false sense of security and you shouldn’t shame anyone into partaking in such “conspiracies.”
If select politicians stopped enforcing it, no one would continue this nonsense. Don’t drink the kool-aid.
It's all about the masks...
For all you mask wearers (especially those of you who think wearing it outside is NOT stupid ). I know I’m about to burst your “google doctor degree” bubble, but here goes nothing.
So Masks?
I am OSHA 10&30 certified. I know some of you are too. I don’t really know WHY OSHA hasn’t come forward and stopped the nonsense BUT I want to cover 3 things
• N95 masks and masks with exhale ports
• surgical masks
• filter or cloth masks
Okay, so upon further inspection, OSHA says some masks are okay and not okay in certain situations.
If you’re working with fumes and aerosol chemicals and you give your employees the wrong masks and they get sick, you can be sued.
• N95 masks: are designed for CONTAMINATED environments. That means when you exhale through N95 the design is that you are exhaling into contamination. The exhale from N95 masks are vented to breath straight out without filtration. They don’t filter the air on the way out. They don’t need to.
Conclusion: if you’re in Target and the guy with Covid has a N95 mask, his covid breath is unfiltered being exhaled into Target (because it was designed for already contaminated environments, it’s not filtering your air on the way out).
• Surgical Mask: these masks were designed and approved for STERILE environments. The amount of particles and contaminants in the outside and indoor environments where people are CLOGGING these masks very, VERY quickly. The moisture from your breath combined with the clogged mask will render it “useless” IF you come in contact with Covid and your mask traps it, YOU become a walking virus dispenser. Everytime you put your mask on you are breathing the germs from EVERYWHERE you went. They should be changed or thrown out every “20-30 minutes in a non sterile environment.”
• Cloth masks: I can’t even believe I’m having to explain this, but here it goes. Today, three people pointed to their masks as they walked by me entering Lowe’s. They said “ya gotta wear your mask BRO” I said very clearly “those masks don’t work bro, in fact they MAKE you sicker” they “pshh’d” me. By now hopefully you all know CLOTH masks do not filter anything. You mean the American flag one my aunt made? Yes. The one with sunflowers that looks so cute? Yes. The bandanna, the cut up t-shirt, the scarf ALL of them offer NO FILTERING whatsoever. As you exhale, you are ridding your lungs of contaminants and carbon dioxide. Cloth masks trap this carbon dioxide the best. It actually risks your health, rather than protect it. The moisture caught in these masks can become mildew ridden over night. Dry coughing, enhanced allergies, sore throat are all symptoms of a micro-mold in your mask.
-Ultimate Answer:
*N95 blows the virus into the air from a contaminated person.
*The surgical mask is not designed for the outside world and will not filter the virus upon inhaling through it. It’s filtration works on the exhale, (Like a vacuum bag, it only works one way) but likely stops after 20 minutes, rendering it useless outside of a STERILE ENVIRONMENT (correct Becky, they don’t work in a bar, not even a little bit).
*Cloth masks are WORSE than none. It’s equivalent to using a chain link fence to stop mosquitos.
The CDC wants us to keep wearing masks. The masks don’t work. They’re being used to provide false comfort and push forward a specific agenda. For the love of God, research each mask’s designed use and purpose, I bet you will find NONE are used in the way of “viral defense.”
Just like EVERY Flu season kids, wash your hands. Sanitize your hands. Don’t touch stuff. Sanitize your phone. Don’t touch people. And keep your distance. Why? Because your breath stinks, your deodorant is failing, your shoes are old and stink, that shirts not clean, & I like my space. Trust me I can hear you from here. Lots of reasons to keep your distance and work on body hygiene. But trust me, the masks do not work.
*Occupational Safety & Hazard Association sited.
The top American organization for safety.
They regulate and educate asbestos workers, surgical rooms, you name it.
I know, facts suck. They throw a wrench into the perfectly (seeming) packaged pill you are willingly swallowing. Facts make you have to form your OWN OPINION, instead of regurgitating someone else’s, and I know how uncomfortable that makes a lot of you. If your mask gives you security, by all means wear it. Just know it is a false sense of security and you shouldn’t shame anyone into partaking in such “conspiracies.”
If select politicians stopped enforcing it, no one would continue this nonsense. Don’t drink the kool-aid.
It’s the opposite here. Every teacher I’ve talked to and worked with this summer for summer school is ready to go back. Maybe it’s a cultural thing and a thing where the teachers unions haven’t infiltrated. But when we found out yesterday we would be out past Labor Day, not one teacher/staff was happy. We are ready to go back, dammit!
It’s the opposite here. Every teacher I’ve talked to and worked with this summer for summer school is ready to go back. Maybe it’s a cultural thing and a thing where the teachers unions haven’t infiltrated. But when we found out yesterday we would be out past Labor Day, not one teacher/staff was happy. We are ready to go back, dammit!
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2014
- Messages
- 10,557
- Reaction score
- 6,262
- Points
- 113
Those probable cases tested positive with the antigen test, but have to be classified as only probable do to CDC guidelines.
https://twitter.com/steveeagar/status/1283870404512292864?s=09
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2014
- Messages
- 10,557
- Reaction score
- 6,262
- Points
- 113
That mask post yikes... Bunch of half truths. The N95 is correct, as they are mainly used to protect the wearer. Not all of them have breathers though. Cough with a duckbill / cough without a duckbill which one do you think the particles will travel further? And for masks being "clogged" If a filter is clogged what happens? You get no airflow. If a mask becomes clogged its not going to magically start letting things through. Again cough with a surgical mask and without. The chain link comparison is bogus. First the corona particles are largish in size. Second the main goal of surgical masks are to mostly keep things contained in the mask. Cloth masks are kinda nasty, but they still slow down the particles coming in/out of your mouth. If someone sneezed in my face i would certainly rather have a cloth mask on than nothing. I highly doubt anyone would rather have their bare face sneezed on
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,242
- Reaction score
- 8,018
- Points
- 113
I'm going to say this one more time.
No one is suggesting that cloth or surgical masks 100% protect the wearer, or that they filter out virus particles. The point of them is to inhibit the spread of our respiratory droplets. The spew that comes out of my mouth travels less far and wide. It's that simple. My mask doesn't protect me, it helps protect you. Your mask doesn't protect you, it helps protect me.
As far as mildew or buildup of germs I wear disposable masks or wash my cloth masks after every use. I don't wear any mask 24/7. the longest I've ever worn one was probably 45 minutes while doing a massive grocery shopping trip. I'm a 53 year old woman in decent but not perfect shape, and I've never experienced one ill effect from wearing a mask. No trouble breathing. No effects from all of terrible carbon dioxide I'm breathing in. Millions of people in a variety of professions from medical to industrial to construction have worn masks all day most days of their lives for years with no concern about germ buildup, mildew or carbon dioxide inhalation causing harm to their health. Yet suddenly this is a big concern to people for some reason.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2014
- Messages
- 10,557
- Reaction score
- 6,262
- Points
- 113
For more reading this debunks the supposed osha expert in the original post.
Here are a few snippets
The image of the car with writing on it accompanied a long post that made several claims about face masks and were purported to come from a person who was “OSHA 10&30 certified.” That means a person took OSHA’s 10-hour and 30-hour training on general health and safety hazards. This training does not cover COVID-19 topics, according to OSHA. The agency doesn’t certify people who take such training.
Fact check: No, N95 filters are not too large to stop COVID-19 particles
The post claims that N95 masks are not safe to wear in public because they filter only the air coming in, not the air going out. This is true but only for the kind of N95 masks commonly used in construction. These have valves, but medical N95 masks do not. In May, the San Francisco Department of Public Health shared side-by-side images of medical and construction N95 masks and urged residents not to use the kind with valves.
The post's writer says surgical masks were “designed and approved for sterile environments,” and they clog quickly out in the real world, essentially rendering them “useless” after 20-30 minutes.
"The surgical mask is not designed for the outside world and will not filter the virus upon inhaling through it. Its filtration works on the exhale (just like a vacuum bag, it only works one way)," the post says.
OSHA says surgical masks don’t protect “against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal,” but they can “contain the wearer's respiratory droplets.” Basically, the masks are meant to protect others.
More:The 10 most popular face masks people can't stop buying
The FDA says surgical masks do stop the wearer from inhaling large particles: "If worn properly, a surgical mask is meant to help block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter that may contain germs (viruses and bacteria), keeping it from reaching your mouth and nose."
OSHA recommends surgical masks for dentists and other medical professionals who don’t work in sterile environments, but it doesn’t say how long the masks last. OSHA recommends surgical masks “be properly disposed of after use.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention asks the general public to wear cloth masks, not "use a face mask meant for a health care worker.”
"The cloth face coverings recommended are not surgical masks or N95 respirators. Those are critical supplies that must continue to be reserved for health care workers and other medical first responders, as recommended by current CDC guidance," the CDC's website says.
The post claims that cloth masks trap carbon dioxide and “the moisture caught in these masks can become mildew-ridden overnight.”
"Cloth masks are WORSE than none," it says. That is false.
Much like surgical masks, cloth face coverings are loose-fitting and meant to protect others more than the wearer from infection.
"Cloth face coverings may slow the spread of the virus and help people who may have the virus and do not know it from transmitting it to others," the CDC says on its website.
A CDC representative told Reuters, “CO2 will slowly build up in the mask over time,” but the levels are “mostly tolerable to people exposed to it.”
Symptoms could include a headache, but Reuters reported “it is unlikely that wearing a mask will cause hypercapnia,” or excessive carbon dioxide buildup in the bloodstream.
Fact check: Wearing a face mask will not cause hypoxia, hypoxemia or hypercapnia
The CDC says, “Cloth face coverings should not be placed on young children under age 2, anyone who has trouble breathing, or is unconscious, incapacitated or otherwise unable to remove the mask without assistance.”
The CDC and OSHA recommend laundering cloth masks after each use.
Our rating: Partly false
Both the picture and the post are PARTLY FALSE, based on our research. It is true that OSHA requires employers to keep their environment's air at 19.5% oxygen or higher. And it is true that surgical masks keep the wearer's droplets from getting into the air but do not protect the wearer from inhaling particles.
It is false that mask-wearing will cause serious health effects; cloth and surgical masks are unlikely to cause a dangerous drop in oxygen intake because they are not tight-fitting. The sweeping claim about the safety of N95 masks is not true. And it is false to say "cloth masks do not filter anything." Cloth masks can help prevent the wearer from spreading the virus to others.
Here are a few snippets
The image of the car with writing on it accompanied a long post that made several claims about face masks and were purported to come from a person who was “OSHA 10&30 certified.” That means a person took OSHA’s 10-hour and 30-hour training on general health and safety hazards. This training does not cover COVID-19 topics, according to OSHA. The agency doesn’t certify people who take such training.
Fact check: No, N95 filters are not too large to stop COVID-19 particles
The post claims that N95 masks are not safe to wear in public because they filter only the air coming in, not the air going out. This is true but only for the kind of N95 masks commonly used in construction. These have valves, but medical N95 masks do not. In May, the San Francisco Department of Public Health shared side-by-side images of medical and construction N95 masks and urged residents not to use the kind with valves.
The post's writer says surgical masks were “designed and approved for sterile environments,” and they clog quickly out in the real world, essentially rendering them “useless” after 20-30 minutes.
"The surgical mask is not designed for the outside world and will not filter the virus upon inhaling through it. Its filtration works on the exhale (just like a vacuum bag, it only works one way)," the post says.
OSHA says surgical masks don’t protect “against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal,” but they can “contain the wearer's respiratory droplets.” Basically, the masks are meant to protect others.
More:The 10 most popular face masks people can't stop buying
The FDA says surgical masks do stop the wearer from inhaling large particles: "If worn properly, a surgical mask is meant to help block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter that may contain germs (viruses and bacteria), keeping it from reaching your mouth and nose."
OSHA recommends surgical masks for dentists and other medical professionals who don’t work in sterile environments, but it doesn’t say how long the masks last. OSHA recommends surgical masks “be properly disposed of after use.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention asks the general public to wear cloth masks, not "use a face mask meant for a health care worker.”
"The cloth face coverings recommended are not surgical masks or N95 respirators. Those are critical supplies that must continue to be reserved for health care workers and other medical first responders, as recommended by current CDC guidance," the CDC's website says.
The post claims that cloth masks trap carbon dioxide and “the moisture caught in these masks can become mildew-ridden overnight.”
"Cloth masks are WORSE than none," it says. That is false.
Much like surgical masks, cloth face coverings are loose-fitting and meant to protect others more than the wearer from infection.
"Cloth face coverings may slow the spread of the virus and help people who may have the virus and do not know it from transmitting it to others," the CDC says on its website.
A CDC representative told Reuters, “CO2 will slowly build up in the mask over time,” but the levels are “mostly tolerable to people exposed to it.”
Symptoms could include a headache, but Reuters reported “it is unlikely that wearing a mask will cause hypercapnia,” or excessive carbon dioxide buildup in the bloodstream.
Fact check: Wearing a face mask will not cause hypoxia, hypoxemia or hypercapnia
The CDC says, “Cloth face coverings should not be placed on young children under age 2, anyone who has trouble breathing, or is unconscious, incapacitated or otherwise unable to remove the mask without assistance.”
The CDC and OSHA recommend laundering cloth masks after each use.
Our rating: Partly false
Both the picture and the post are PARTLY FALSE, based on our research. It is true that OSHA requires employers to keep their environment's air at 19.5% oxygen or higher. And it is true that surgical masks keep the wearer's droplets from getting into the air but do not protect the wearer from inhaling particles.
It is false that mask-wearing will cause serious health effects; cloth and surgical masks are unlikely to cause a dangerous drop in oxygen intake because they are not tight-fitting. The sweeping claim about the safety of N95 masks is not true. And it is false to say "cloth masks do not filter anything." Cloth masks can help prevent the wearer from spreading the virus to others.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 5,840
- Reaction score
- 4,788
- Points
- 113
Well everyone at ours does, and so do every one of the neighboring districts we work with in a 30 mile radius all over the county. Just about 100%.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 5,840
- Reaction score
- 4,788
- Points
- 113
Damn.
One June 17, Trump said, “The numbers are very minuscule compared to what it was. It's dying out.”
New Coronavirus infections:
July 16: 77,255
June 16: 23,705
I bet you threw a party when you read that. I mean, it's well worth it if it makes the Orange man look bad, am I right?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 13,587
- Reaction score
- 6,270
- Points
- 113
Nope, not at all. Don't blame me Trump is a lying, deceitful fool. Nobody is forcing him to be dishonest with the American people. Who would take joy in the President being such a buffoon? It ******* sucks, actually.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 10,621
- Reaction score
- 14,469
- Points
- 113
So now you probably can imagine what another 4 years would be like, and you can understand how the majority of Americans felt for the 8 long, limp years of Bathhouse Barry.....
Sent from my SM-N950W using Tapatalk
Damn.
One June 17, Trump said, “The numbers are very minuscule compared to what it was. It's dying out.”
New Coronavirus infections:
July 16: 77,255
June 16: 23,705
We are that much closer to herd immunity. Thank you Sweden for setting the example.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 13,587
- Reaction score
- 6,270
- Points
- 113
No wonder Trump got elected. Geez.
Sweden sees high COVID-19 fatality rate after forgoing lockdown
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/sweden-sees-high-covid-19-fatality-rate-after-forgoing-lockdown/#x
A buddy of mine's father and uncle just died not long ago in Stockholm. Folks there have realized what a dumbass move the 'herd immunity' strategy was. Guess that's not the case with the Trump base stateside.
45 minutes is nothing compared to hours of wearing a mask. We had to do it this last week of summer school and it was AWFUL. We wore it for 5 hours. I can’t handle them in my face for more than 5 minutes at a time, so my anxiety was super high. As much as I want to get back to school and to normal work, if I have to wear a mask all day, I’ll stay home and do the online BS school. I thought I could handle the mask in small doses but I was wrong. And honestly- if masks work, why isn’t everything open to full capacity?
- Joined
- May 10, 2019
- Messages
- 2,067
- Reaction score
- 3,201
- Points
- 113
If there really are a few lemmings in here who haven't caught on to the way the media lie and distort, here's a nice primer for them:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...ying_by_deceptively_editing_her_comments.html
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...in-lying-about-kayleigh-mcenany-science-quote
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...ying_by_deceptively_editing_her_comments.html
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...in-lying-about-kayleigh-mcenany-science-quote