zlacker

>>themgt+(OP)
The sources this article cites regarding masking is a single pre-print that hasn't been peer reviewed yet, and it cites no sources at all for the claim that

| "Then they ignored natural immunity. Wrong again. The vast majority of children have already had Covid, but this has made no difference in the blanket mandates for childhood vaccines. And now, by mandating vaccines and boosters for young healthy people, with no strong supporting data, these agencies are only further eroding public trust."

>>wiskin+m61
Do you have any sources that cloth masking (the types of masks worn by the vast majority of school children) works to reduce the spread?

>>LewisV+d71
They don’t because there isn’t. It’s just idiotic medical security theater. Unless the right masks are worn correctly 100% of the time, which lets be honest is not happening. I guess this is how superstitions start in a sense…

>>rajup+Zl1
> Unless the right masks are worn correctly 100% of the time, which lets be honest is not happening.

That argument doesn't make any sense. Why would masks have to be worn correctly 100% of the time, otherwise it's theater?

If a type of mask works well at 100% use, it probably also works pretty well at 85% use.

>>Dylan1+lw1
agreed, the arbitrary requirement of 100% effectivensss seems like the nirvana fallacy to me