https://slate.com/news-and-politics...n-zebra-veritas.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab ... but, but, but - masks DO reduce your oxygen intake. That's not a conspiracy theory. We'll just have to wait and see. Personally, I think a lot of normals are going to die... hope I'm wrong.
Disinformation is so easy to do, especially when there are so many who know so little but are so eager to prove they are so smart. And I agree with you...the loss of humanity is chilling. All this hip way of being based upon "feelings" is nothing but depersonalizing narcissism.
Good grief, is that old bolshevik still running off at the mouth. The idiot still hasn't learned that linguistics and philosophy aren't the bedrocks of critical thinking and problem solving. There seems to be no limit to the things about which he has no clue.
His cohorts are looking for another few million people to murder. Wasn't it the Bolshevics who murdered all those Russians,I forget.
In her Democracy Now interviews I could see that Amy Goodman had to restrain herself from jumping on Noam's lap, more so after his wife passed on. Chomsky's responses to opponents have often been thinly veiled ad-hominem attacks - exaggerate/distort the opponent's position and then ridicule them for their extreme views. I never was impressed by the guy. He is fundamentally dishonest.
... from Journal Of The Royal Society Of Medicine /https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/ Abstract The use of surgical facemasks is ubiquitous in surgical practice. Facemasks have long been thought to confer protection to the patient from wound infection and contamination from the operating surgeon and other members of the surgical staff. More recently, protection of the theatre staff from patient-derived blood/bodily fluid splashes has also been offered as a reason for their continued use. In light of current NHS budget constraints and cost-cutting strategies, we examined the evidence base behind the use of surgical facemasks. Examination of the literature revealed much of the published work on the matter to be quite dated and often studies had poorly elucidated methodologies. As a result, we recommend caution in extrapolating their findings to contemporary surgical practice. However, overall there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination. More rigorous contemporary research is needed to make a definitive comment on the effectiveness of surgical facemasks.
I think we are living in a time of information overload making it difficult to know what to believe. In this case, less is more.
I believe there is still a reason to wear a surgical mask for some procedures, i.e., for any procedure in which "normal flora" is not a possibility. In any case, the historical mask is to protect the patient from bacteria. There is no claim to protect the surgeon, although pathologists occasionally wear them to protect themselves during autopsies on corpse that may have died of dangerous bacterial diseases. There is plenty of evidence that masks serve no purpose in protection either way concerning viruses however.
i think you're narrowing things down to the practical. I wouldn't want my surgeon sneezing over my incision. Otherwise, if everyone's sinuses are clear, masks are overkill.