Comments by "Dale Crocker" (@dalecrocker3213) on "Why The Anti-Masker Movement Should Terrify You" video.

You have obviously suffered greatly in life. You have my every sympathy.
2
There is no evidence that masks reduce the effects of coronavirus. Until May of last year their use by the general public actively discouraged. They are little more than symbols of repression and conformity - which is why the left approve of them so much.
2
@Hugh Dougall That mutation already exists somewhere in the world, the incredible numbers make it inevitable.
1
@MiqelDotCom Up until May medical science was opposed to mask use. Then suddenly this changed. I'm still not quite sure why.
1
@MiqelDotCom I have to disagree. The CDC published a lengthy study in May recommending against the use of masks by the general public in dealing with the novel coronavirus, as has indeed been the case with influenza viruses. The WHO offered the same advice as did the British Medical Association and similar bodies in other countries. Suddenly everything changed. Although transmission by droplets is one source of infection, masks only reduce the problem slightly. I can't help feeling this obsession with them is more of a psychological prop than anything.
1
@markb6295 Well May of last year, obviously. Do you need time explained to you?
1
Masks are only one factor in the Asian situation. Climatic conditions and partial immunity due to previous similar covids are probably more significant.
1
@jasonarthurs3885 How much of one though? There are no dramatic improvements in the performance of US states where masks are mandated, or in European countries either.
1
@jasonarthurs3885 Which are only one of very many variable factors involved in their performance and probably not a very significant one.
1
@jaelynn7575 Can you point me to a study which proves that masks prevent the wearer from infection? There is a possibility that they might just-might reduce the chances of passing it on to others, but that's about it. This semi-religious reliance on their magical properties is really quite dangerous. (And I meant the effects on the community as a whole, not upon individuals. In fact they could make things worse if you are infected and constantly re-inhale the viruses trapped on the inside of your mask.)
1
@skydog9043 No. The CDC, the WHO, the British Medical Association and other bodies all published reports at the start of the pandemic, citing experience with flu epidemics and also several detailed studies all discouraging the wearing of masks by the general public. The sudden change is political, and has little if anything to do with public health.
1
@KF75411 Too much when the benefit is so very small and the real reason we are required to wear masks is to concentrate our attention on the one hand, and as symbols of conformity on the other.
1
@DB-bb8ho I can't. YouTube deletes them. Try The CDC's magazine Emerging Infectious Diseases Vol 2 No 5 for May 2020.
1
@DB-bb8ho Go to Swiss Policy Research
1
@jasonarthurs3885 Yes, but I just want to know what this newer information is. Nobody seems able to tell me. An outlook is just another word for opinion and I personally need newer information before I change my outlook.
1
@PhoenixHinds Masking is not mandatory in Florida yet their covid figures are no worse than anywhere else. It really is a puzzle.
1
@PhoenixHinds You must excuse my intellectual shortcomings. I just can't understand why in Florida, where masking is voluntary as are most regulations, the death and infection rates are so comparatively low whereas in Michigan , say, when there are many varied tough regulations, the current situation is close to breaking point. You are obviously more intelligent than me and I would be grateful for an explanation. If it is so clear to you perhaps you could make it clear to me?
1
@PhoenixHinds But I've just checked. The covid death rate in Michigan, where regulations on masking etc seem quite severe is 176 per 100.000 and I heard on the news I think that infections are so high new border controls may be introduced. In Florida, where regulations are few and masking is largely voluntary, the figure is 158 per 100,000 despite the large elderly population - and people are flocking there. Could it be the sunshine do you think? There must be some explanation.
1
@PhoenixHinds But where can I get them? These are the official figures provided by Statista, presumably from the CDC. How are they "fudged" exactly? Do you know? Do you think people have died with covid but it has been left off the death certificate? I expect they have some very large hospitals in Florida because of all the old people and that's why the facilities there aren't overcrowded, as they are in Michigan and elsewhere.
1
@PhoenixHinds Most figures can be fudged , I agree. I do hope there is some sort of investigation going on into this. It's very hard for doctors to decide whether covid killed someone or whether they died of something else and just happened to have it as well. The same sort of thing seems to be happening in Texas, where they've stopped making masks mandatory and yet no more people seem to have died than before. Are they doing the same sort of cheat, do you suppose?
1
@jasonarthurs3885 Such as the need to divert public attention and exercise psychological control by mandating the wearing of masks. There is no evidence that masks prevent the spread of coronavirus to any appreciable degree. On the other hand they do lead to the illusion that we as individuals are doing something to help. They also allow us to divert our rage and fear away from the authorities for failing to protect us and to focus these feeling on people not wearing masks. They are badges of compliance. Ritual garments, little more.
1
@jasonarthurs3885 Unfortunately YouTube now deletes all direct links to information regarded as heretical in this and other matters. However if you go to a site called Swiss Policy Research and scroll down their covid section to mask effectiveness and read the article there it will direct you to several sources, including the CDC study published in May 2020.
1
@jasonarthurs3885 I will try several approaches in an attempt to bypass the disgraceful censorship now widely practiced by tech companies on behalf of their masters. The CDC study I mentioned was published in its journal "Emerging Infectious Diseases" vol 26 no.5 May 2020. It is the lead article.
1
@jasonarthurs3885 A study published in Denmark in November divided 6,000 people into groups of masked and unmasked. Of the masked group 2.1% contracted the virus as opposed to 1.87% who did not. (I may have got these figures slightly wrong. I suggest you Google it as it attracted considerable controversy and there are several articles attempting to analyse the results. Personally I feel they show no meaningful statistical difference between the two groups.
1
@jasonarthurs3885 Doesn't what tell me something? The only message I get is that this pandemic has been hi-jacked as an exercise in social control where all contrary views, however scientifically based, have to be supressed. The British Medical Journal also published a study recommending against the use of masks by the general public, and condemning cloth masks as totally ineffective. It was in the edition of 7 April 2020. You might be able to track it down. Its reference is 369.m.422. Here is an extract : They concluded, “The evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks as a protective measure against covid-19. However, there is enough evidence to support the use of facemasks for short periods of time by particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations.”
1
@jasonarthurs3885 You talkin' to me? I ses, are you talkin' to me? For the very reason that controversy indicates a degree of accuracy. This is not the sort of result masking fanatics want and the very fact that they have made rather pathetic attempts to undermine it show a total lack of objectivity. Plus of course, when the flak starts you know you're over target.
1
@jasonarthurs3885 This may be repeat, in which case I apologise. It's hard to know what's getting through and what isn't. From a study in the British Medical Journal April 7, 2020. (Ref.369.m.422) They concluded, “The evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks as a protective measure against covid-19. However, there is enough evidence to support the use of facemasks for short periods of time by particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations.”
1