Can we all agree that wearing a mask for 10 seconds to walk to your table in a restaurant is peak safety farce

Having food in your mouth will protect against covid.

Stonesy wrote:

If everyone wears the mask for 10 the second walk to the table, the hostess is protected by 100% of the guests she seats.

If no one wears a mask, the number drops to 0%.

Sure, the waiters get exposed, but only to 10-20% of the total guests depending on how many servers there are.

It’s a numbers game for risk exposure.

It’s not about your protection but protection from you, the guest.

Why even insist on eating out during a deadly pandemic? Ever heard of take out? It’s not about your protection but protection from you.

SeattleSilver wrote:

so super safe wrote:

Dinner theater all night, every night.

Depends on where your table is and how crowded the place is. But you'd have to be a total snowflake to complain. If it is a problem for you stay home and try to cook.

More of the same: pointing out that a COVID rule is completely pointless makes you not a critical thinker engaged in actual analysis of the pros/cons of policy, but a snowflake.

Liberals are just name calling bullies who want to control everybody.

Best one I’ve heard is this; in my neighboring county, kids on the high school football team aren’t allowed to shake hands with the opponents after the game due to covid concerns.

antivaxxers killing democracy wrote:

[quote]life enhancing wrote:

It's supreme virtue signalling. Think of the respect you gain from virtue signalling libtards.

Refusing to wear a piece of cloth for 10 seconds and thereby put restaurant staff at risk of contracting a disease to own the libs.

You can't possibly believe that.

The problem is that none of you are qualified to make public health decisions, and when you go against public health decisions that qualified people have made, you signal that you don’t care if you are putting others at risk. Maybe the waitress isn’t at risk, but she lives with her 80 year old grandma who is very much at risk. It’s incredibly selfish to just decide that you know better and the rules don’t apply to you. I don’t follow the science because I’m some drone that only follows my masters commands. I follow the science because I want to do my part in protecting people around me. And again, you are not qualified to decide what is protection and what isn’t.

It's time to just get back to normal, forget about masks, distancing etc.

If you chose to not vaccinated it's on you..

99% of society is going to have very little negative effects from the virus.

This has become a hysterical over-reach from government and people are on the verge of open rebellion.

[quote]super tough guy wrote:

The problem is that none of you are qualified to make public health decisions, and when you go against public health decisions that qualified people have made

There's your mistake.

super tough guy wrote:

The problem is that none of you are qualified to make public health decisions, and when you go against public health decisions that qualified people have made, you signal that you don’t care if you are putting others at risk. Maybe the waitress isn’t at risk, but she lives with her 80 year old grandma who is very much at risk. It’s incredibly selfish to just decide that you know better and the rules don’t apply to you. I don’t follow the science because I’m some drone that only follows my masters commands. I follow the science because I want to do my part in protecting people around me. And again, you are not qualified to decide what is protection and what isn’t.

Several poor points here.

1. I’ll pick on your specific example of the waitress with an old relative. The 80 year old has had ample time to get the vaccine you love so much and should have nothing to worry about.

2. You follow the medical “experts” who contradict themselves every other week. That’s the definition of being a drone.

Maybe you can answer the question that others won’t answer. When is the pandemic going to end according to you?

It’s obvious now they’ll never end it. I wish I listened to Bad W. at the start. It’s all fear mongering to push perpetual boosters and passports. Where’s the metrics to declare this thing over? Thing could fizzle out to common cold and they’ll still push it. PCR cycles increased when needed.Thank you bro-jos for allowing discussion and not censoring people who speak up about this mess.

Stonesy wrote:

If everyone wears the mask for 10 the second walk to the table, the hostess is protected by 100% of the guests she seats.

If no one wears a mask, the number drops to 0%.

Sure, the waiters get exposed, but only to 10-20% of the total guests depending on how many servers there are.

It’s a numbers game for risk exposure.

It’s not about your protection but protection from you, the guest.

Except that the masks provide no protection.

" Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.

" We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility. "

New Study Shows Mask Mandates Had Zero Effect in Florida or Nationwide, But the Lie Continues

As Dr. Andrew Bostom points out in an interview with noted liberal feminist Naomi Wolf, multiple randomized controlled tests—the “gold standard” of scientific evidence—performed prior to the pandemic found that masks have no impact on the transmission of respiratory viruses. The only RCT conducted since the pandemic began, the so-called “Danmask study,” reached the same conclusion.

A WHO report issued this past December, while (oddly) advising people to continue wearing masks in public, contained this little nugget near the end: “A large randomized community-based trial in which 4862 healthy participants were divided into a group wearing medical/surgical masks and a control group found no difference in infection with SARS-CoV-2. A recent systematic review found nine trials (of which eight were cluster-randomized controlled trials in which clusters of people, versus individuals, were randomized) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness. Two trials were with healthcare workers and seven in the community. The review concluded that wearing a mask may make little or no difference to the prevention of influenza-like illness.”

“While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures.”

Below are 7 studies that found masks are ineffective at stopping COVID-19 like viruses.

American Greatness:

Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,” American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417–419.

N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.

Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) “N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824–833.

“Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. … Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

Long, Y. et al. (2020) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1–9.

“A total of six RCTs involving 9,171 participants were included. There were no statistically significant differences in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza, laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, and influenza-like illness using N95 respirators and surgical masks. Meta-analysis indicated a protective effect of N95 respirators against laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78). The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

Cowling, B. et al. (2010) “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,” Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456.

None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.

Bin-Reza et al. (2012) “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257–267.

“There were 17 eligible studies. … None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”

Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” CMAJ Mar 2016

“We identified six clinical studies … . In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.”

Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) “Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, pages 1934–1942,

“Self-reported assessment of clinical outcomes was prone to bias. Evidence of a protective effect of masks or respirators against verified respiratory infection (VRI) was not statistically significant.”

Bad Wigins wrote:

The Ostrogoth wrote:

I think most of us can agree it's barely worth complaining about.

The equivalent of saying "Yes, master" is acceptable to you?

Aww, is that really how you feel every time? That must really suck, man.

runnerboy70 wrote:

It's time to just get back to normal, forget about masks, distancing etc.

If you chose to not vaccinated it's on you..

99% of society is going to have very little negative effects from the virus.

This has become a hysterical over-reach from government and people are on the verge of open rebellion.

This is where the virus spreads because of ignorant people like you, you are the reason why this pandemic will continue on forever. Wait until you get covid and you will change your mind. It will be too late because the day is not far where people will be mourning your death from the next covid variant because of your stupid actions.

smartmaskman wrote:

runnerboy70 wrote:

It's time to just get back to normal, forget about masks, distancing etc.

If you chose to not vaccinated it's on you..

99% of society is going to have very little negative effects from the virus.

This has become a hysterical over-reach from government and people are on the verge of open rebellion.

This is where the virus spreads because of ignorant people like you, you are the reason why this pandemic will continue on forever. Wait until you get covid and you will change your mind. It will be too late because the day is not far where people will be mourning your death from the next covid variant because of your stupid actions.

So what if it spreads? It’s a 99% survival rate.

“Wait till you get Covid”. What? He’ll maybe get the sniffles or feel a little less than 100% for a short period of time. We are humans. We get sick sometimes. So what?

What part of 99% do you not understand?

alpha lobster wrote:

So what if it spreads? It’s a 99% survival rate.

. . .

What part of 99% do you not understand?

Translation for the innumerate: "So what if it kills three million-plus Americans? I'M all right, Jack."

so super safe wrote:

Dinner theater all night, every night.

Agree with this, but I'm also honestly (no sarcasm) in favor of masks in hospitals/nursing homes (where there'd be a legit fear of spread and hurting vulnerable populations), and I think everyone should get the vax to drive down case counts.

As a moderate who leans R, I think a lot of the masking in other places is "theater."

so super safe wrote:

interesting take wrote:

It isn't a social convention, it's public health recommendations. But go ahead and try to twist it.

Public health isn’t a monolith. Plenty of epidemiologists have spoken out against perma-masking, safety theater, etc.

Plus, there’s far more to life than maximizing public health outcomes. You can listen to public health experts, understand them, accept their scientific validity, and still ignore them for reasons that are also entirely valid, such as: I’d rather live in a slightly riskier world than in one where I have to do silly performative safety exercises and wear a mask constantly. That’s simply not a world I want to live in, no matter how safe it is.

This. It's theater.

If Covid measures were taken seriously they should have done more to prevent the riots and looting in 2020. Enforce the distancing and masking like they should have. At that point I think most moderates were like F it, they aren't consistent. BLM idiots can riot over a dead guy (whom they wouldn't care about otherwise) and be socially packed in, etc. but when Trump's motorcycle rally is deemed a superspreader event (and I don't even like Trump) by the media, I think most people were realizing it's political.

People are compliant by nature--also, most are afraid of losing their jobs so they may complain on FB but nobody will actually fight back.

runnerboy70 wrote:

It's time to just get back to normal, forget about masks, distancing etc.

If you chose to not vaccinated it's on you..

99% of society is going to have very little negative effects from the virus.

This has become a hysterical over-reach from government and people are on the verge of open rebellion.

Interestingly, Ohio State has 105,000 fans in the Shoe each week...masks required to get in but people take them off once they get in there...no huge case and death counts in the '21 season...

I don't think people of our generation will have the ability to rebel or cause an uprising. A lot of planning and logistics are needed for something on that scale. Most Millennials are glued to their phones.

fear mongers R wrote:

It’s obvious now they’ll never end it. I wish I listened to Bad W. at the start. It’s all fear mongering to push perpetual boosters and passports. Where’s the metrics to declare this thing over? Thing could fizzle out to common cold and they’ll still push it. PCR cycles increased when needed.Thank you bro-jos for allowing discussion and not censoring people who speak up about this mess.

I do love LRC even with all of the opinions--it's one of the last bastions of freedom online.

I live in Columbus. Unfortunately, it's blue. And so is the running group I run with--they are very blue. I just don't say anything.