Fuck masks
Comments
-
Felt cute, might delete later IDKdannarc said:Imagine thinking masks don't cut down on disease transmissions....lol
-
Masks working or not working is not decided by your perceived freedom.RaceBannon said:We should do what we're told
Libertarian socialism -
The study admits inconclusive results. No blinding and self reported results are two of the biggest things to look for to tell if a study is bullshit. It did both.Sledog said:
Because none of that happens in real life right? Everyone wears them always and perfectly. FYI the airborne virus goes right through them. But you do you dingbat.TheKobeStopper said:Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others.
Seems like a really well done study.
Post a larger and better study. I'll look. I think this may be the largest I've seen so far.
It’s worthless, unless, you’re all up in your feelings over masks. -
Makes sense to a libertarian socialist.TheKobeStopper said:
Masks working or not working is not decided by your perceived freedom.RaceBannon said:We should do what we're told
Libertarian socialism
-
@dflea do Steelies give a fuck about masks? Because I can assure you, Dungees give zero fucks
-
CoolTheKobeStopper said:
Masks working or not working is not decided by your perceived freedom.RaceBannon said:We should do what we're told
Libertarian socialism
Nobody said it was
Just do what you're told boy -
The study does not admit inconclusive results. Did you read the actual “Conclusion” in the abstract, you fucking retard? Do you know how all field studies on humans are done, dipshit? Unless you keep your subjects locked up and observed 24/7, which you probably believe is what happens, there are always limitations and variables.TheKobeStopper said:
The study admits inconclusive results. No blinding and self reported results are two of the biggest things to look for to tell if a study is bullshit. It did bothered.Sledog said:
Because none of that happens in real life right? Everyone wears them always and perfectly. FYI the airborne virus goes right through them. But you do you dingbat.TheKobeStopper said:Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others.
Seems like a really well done study.
Post a larger and better study. I'll look. I think this may be the largest I've seen so far.
It’s worthless, unless, you’re all up in your feelings over masks.
Let me guess. You also believe the model-based “studies” on global warming while embarrassing yourself criticizing a valid and controlled research study in this thread.
Why do you post here? Do you enjoy getting humiliated? -
They work in crowds or if people cough all over other people like slobs. Besides that, they're nearly useless. They make sense in dense countries. This isn't a dense country.TheKobeStopper said:
The study admits inconclusive results. No blinding and self reported results are two of the biggest things to look for to tell if a study is bullshit. It did both.Sledog said:
Because none of that happens in real life right? Everyone wears them always and perfectly. FYI the airborne virus goes right through them. But you do you dingbat.TheKobeStopper said:Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others.
Seems like a really well done study.
Post a larger and better study. I'll look. I think this may be the largest I've seen so far.
It’s worthless, unless, you’re all up in your feelings over masks. -
dannarc said:
Imagine thinking masks don't cut down on disease transmissions....lol
It’s not a disease, it’s a virus. Some of you need to learn the difference.
