October 31, 2020

The Folly of Facemasks

Timothy Birdnow

On Facebook E. Calvin Beismer posted about facemasking, and a reader took umbrage, leading to an argument that I think left the reader bleeding and shell-shocked as both myself and Cal took aim. I reproduce the discussion below:


Can we start a new movement here? Make your profile picture that expressive part of your countenance that the bosses are making you cover up in protest against this encroachment of our liberty. Tsk tsk, such a symbol, these masks, for repressing free speech!

Udo (the reader):

Maybe a fun thing to do...for some. But masks do not surpress your free speech! Limit only your virus wandering off towards me and others.


Speech isn't the point. Facial expression and all that communicates are the point. Facial expression and personal relation are deeply intertwined, and there are serious psychological consequences to the constant hiding of face. All this is of course distinct from questions about how effective any masks other than a properly fitted n95 are in slowing the spread of the virus.


And, masks are useless at stopping viruses Udo W. Middleman.https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/view/cloth-masks-are-useless-against-covid-19 The openings in the weave are larger than the virus particles. Otherwise they wouldn't have to use spacesuits when treating Ebola patients. Also, most viruses enter through the eyes via the hands. If you have rubber gloves on it doesn't matter; the virus sits on the glove. And as Cal says, this isn't an issue about speech. I would like to point out the left pushes the idea of a "penumbra" in the Constitution which they used to justify abortion by saying there is an inherent right to privacy. If that is so, how much more of a right is it to walk around with nothing over your face? Why isn't THAT in the "penumbra"? The real issue here is how much power are we going to grant the government. Few tyrants began by saying "I'm going to take away your freedom because I want power". Rather, they whittle it down with good intentions and altruistic speech. YOU are perfectly free to wear a face covering, and stay inside if you wish. But you have no right to demand that of others. The authorities are demanding it because, like a bit in the horse's mouth, they know getting us to accept this will make us more amenable to accepting other restrictions on our liberty. Even Fauci scoffed at masks early on, calling them "talismans". He was right; it is a kind of sacrament, like air raid drills in Omaha during WWII, they serve no purpose but to make everyone feel a part of the movement and accept the will of the ruling class. Udo:

Timothy Birdnow Thanks.I know all those limitations of mask and arguments against their wear. I also know that not wearing them has ways resulted in more cases. Only people who blindly believe that security must be 100% are disappointed, because that be never exists anywhere, only Americans still believe it is possible.


Udo W. Middleman I understand your point but I see no evidence whatsoever wearing masks reduces either infection rates or mortality. I do not believe anyone has every done any sort of controlled study. We have anecdotal evidence perhaps and maybe some rather hastily-done research funded by the people pushing masks but no solid evidence one way or the other.

E Calvin Beisner Of course, but we can't have everything all the time! Better well than being seen sick or dead! Better considered to others than worried your words don't carry unless you can express them also with your face. The kind of things people worry about when their expectations cannot be met.....

Timothy Birdnow More cases at crowd events without masks, from dancing in the street to watching Trump's shows: always a rise in cases, also in Europe.


But Udo W. Middleman there is more in cases of people dancing together than breathing on them;; they are actually physically touching each-other, which means the virus passes from hand to hand to eye. Also do we really KNOW of actual "superspreader"

events? Again, I know of no careful studies, just a lot of anecdotal evidence.


E Calvin Beisner I am unaware of your sensitivity level, sorry to have assumed it to be normal. When the virus, which has killed a quarter of the whole world's victims, and infected 9 million citizens in America, and people still lack the compassion to wear masks, it is time for salt. I am surprised that Christians learn so little from Jesus who wept over death; and yet individualists see wearing of masks as political insult, loss of rights? Where are their tears, their efforts to engage in the social, economic, relational problems resulting from the virus?

Timothy Birdnow Ridiculous to avoid admitting that the tested mask do not filter and redirect airflow from your mouth and nose, and that where masks are worn you find fewer infections. I will never stand near you or your ilk, and earn others to avoid you.


Udo W Middelmann why must you resort to insulting language? Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt.


228'000 died and 9 million infected in the US, and people still will not wear masks!? Or stay away from others to protect them!? Humanly stupid insistence on rights, as if they were 'absolute'. Even JHWH has no 'absolute rights', (implying He is free to do anything at all). The tetragram refers to God being true to himself, keeping covenants, unable to contradict himself. The unwillingness or inability to think ideas through to their consequences lies behind such insensitive, unscientific, suspicious views, which also helped Christians (of a kind) to fall for the show without substance of the past election.


Udo Middleman You cite deaths and then blame not wearing masks which is not even provably correlated. Perhaps you should wear a pair of underpants on the outside of your pants, or walk around barefoot? I mean, maybe that keeps you from catching Covid! Your argument is entirely based on a dubious premise. There is absolutely NO evidence masks stop the spread of infection. None. Masks are fine to prevent the spread of bacteria (which are much larger than viruses) but do you know of anyone wearing masks during cold or flu season? If not, why not? The fact is you are promoting cargo cult science, superstition packaged as fact based. The only way masks would work is if they were completely form fitted to your face and Hepa grade. You must have at minimum an N95 mask, and even then there are problems with that. As few have such most use cloth face coverings whose primary purpose is psychological, to make people compliant with the authorities and thus feel like part of a movement. That you have to accuse those who understand the folly of masking of wanting to kill people is a sure sign that this whole thing is not what it seems. I could accuse you of the same, as there is considerable negative medical issues with masking and many people are being sickened by holding in what God intended be expelled. This letter to the editor explains just a few of the problems of facemasks. https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1435/rr-40 They may actually spread the disease.

I almost fainted from wearing a mask when they first imposed a mask mandate, I might add.

And in the end what are the masks doing? We are NOT "fighting the disease" with them; rather, we are staving it off for a later day, kicking the can down the road. The original idea was to "flatten the curve" to buy time for the medical community. Everyone knew at the beginning of this that in the end herd immunity would have to be reached before the epidemic would end. As panic and groupthink took over that subtly morphed into "fighting the disease" and now people such as yourself actually believe these masks are somehow doing that. They aren't and in fact we don't want them to. We want healthy people to catch this asymptomatically or with minor illness, get better, and eventually the chain of contagion will break. The elderly and the ill should self-quarantine until then (I fall into the latter category I might add and Covid may well kill me if I catch it.) We don't lock everybody up and bundle their faces in filthy, germy masks. If that is how you want to live far be it from me to stop you, but do not demand the rest of society comply with your fear. .

Oh, and by the way, Legionella Longbeachae - a bacterium - is not stopped by gloves or masks, so why would a much smaller viral particle be? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5512494/

Oh, and see here https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/29/these-12-graphs-show-mask-mandates-do-nothing-to-stop-covid/?fbclid=IwAR2_aDYyRXgYJODStTZTD_7S79lTTs3FQnhF98RqTt64NVKbgNalYPNnKhM Udo W. Middleman. These graphs illustrate the futility of masking.


Udo W Middelmannaccording to CDC in mid August only 6% of Covid deaths we're of people who had ONLY Covid. 96% we're of people with comorbidities, and the average was 2.6 comorbidities. So take the 230,000, multiply by .06, and you get 13,800 deaths truly attributable to Covid alone. Meanwhile, other research found that a large percentage of those who died "of" the Spanish flu (1918ff) actually died of bacterial pneumonia contracted from masks worn to protect from flu. Then of course we must compare the "Covid death toll," real or inflated, with the death toll mounting from the lockdowns' effect on food production and distribution (one estimate I saw from UNFAO was that it would push about 150 million more into starvation than otherwise would be expected) and on availability of other medical services and people's willingness to avail themselves of them. Like these factors or not, it's naive and simplistic to ignore them. Having done a good bit of study over the years of the mortality effect of lost GDP, I expect that deaths caused by the official responses to Covid will wind up far exceeding deaths caused by Covid--even without applying the 6% statistic.

I said nothing of absolute rights and don't believe in them, but I suppose it's easier to knock down a straw man. You're a better thinker than that, Udo.


Udo Middleman we had pandemics in 1957 and 1968 which, when adjusted for population growth, were very comparable to this pandemic. We did not overreact as we have done here. The media (and so you ) keep harping on cases because that's a big, scary number. Then you say 229,000 deaths to project your own fears. The fact is there were 116,000 deaths in the '57 pandemic (with a base population of 177,751,476. And in '68 675,000 died in the pandemic, out of a population of 199312000. We did not demand facemasking, or shut the economy down then. You lack perspective. This is not smallpox. This is not ebola. This is not typhoid. It is a rather nasty illness, granted, but one that mostly effects the sick and elderly, who can self-quarantine. As Cal points out, the deaths from the economic shutdown will outweigh the deaths from the disease. See here https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-children-un/u-n-warns-economic-downturn-could-kill-hundreds-of-thousands-of-children-in-2020-idUSKBN21Y2X7 and here https://unglobalcompact.org/take-action/20th-anniversary-campaign/covid-related%20hunger-could-kill-more-people-than-the-virus If you choose to avoid my company, rest assured I won't lose any sleep over the matter. I've largely self-quarantined anyway (since I AM high risk.) As fpr who is being unscientific, we have supplied considerable scientific evidence here. WE are the ones following science. The chicken littles promoting the "sky is falling" fallacy (a common thing these days which includes so many things, what Michael Crichton correctly identified as a social control in State of Fear) are the ones utilizing Cargo Cult Science. https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-feynman-20131028-story.html and gaslighting. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/here-there-and-everywhere/201701/11-warning-signs-gaslighting

That's it for now. I'll post more if Muddlemind returns.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:19 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 1967 words, total size 13 kb.

1 This is an interesting article, which is very relevant now. The effectiveness of using masks has not been confirmed yet. We study the effects of the virus every day in medical lessons. Yesterday, we were asked to write an essay about viruses. Here you can found some useful hints https://essaydragon.com/blog/rhetorical-essay-writing-tips. I think the students will find them useful.

Posted by: CharlieMueller at November 27, 2020 08:45 AM (ioAV6)

2 This article is really amazing. Thanks for the sharing.

Posted by: MyAARPMedicare at November 29, 2020 10:29 PM (tlOdE)

3 MoonRocks And SunRocks: What Are They And How To Smoke Them

MoonRocks and SunRocks are a special type of cannabis flower. Combining regular buds with oil and kief, these babies pack a big, potent punch.




 How to smoke moon/sun rocks

 What are the effects of moon/sun rocks?



Cannabis connoisseurs are always looking for newer, better ways to enjoy their favourite flower. Two of the latest experiments to help consumers get more out of their weed are MoonRocks and SunRocks - concentrate-covered bud designed to take you out of this atmosphere.


MoonRocks are something special. They are made by taking a regular cannabis flower, covering it with some kind of oil (usually BHO like wax) and coating it in a thick dusting of kief. Pack one of these in your pipe and you’ve got yourself a return ticket to the moon, literally.




SunRocks take things to another level. A SunRock is basically like MoonRock’s older, chain- smoking brother.

While their composition is nearly identical (a bud coated in concentrate and sprinkled with kief), SunRocks are typically made using higher-grade products. They are currently being produced by two main manufacturers in California, Big Tray Deee and Apollo Sun Rocks.

Both manufacturers take top-shelf buds (usually some kind of OG), dip them in a sticky layer of wax or similar concentrate, and then finish them off with a sprinkle of kief. Big Tray Deee’s Rocks usually feature a very thin layer of concentrate and kief, clocking in at about 80% THC. Apollo’s Rocks, however, typically boast a thicker layer of kief and roughly 60% THC.


Smoking Moon or SunRocks is a little different from smoking regular flowers. If you’re lucky enough to get your hands on these goodies, here are some tips to enjoy them properly.

Don’t grind them: A regular herb grinder will butcher these buds and likely struggle with their sticky texture. Instead, use your fingers or scissors to gently break them apart.

Use a pipe, bong, or bubbler: At 60-80% THC, you don’t need a lot of these Rocks to get you flying. Hence, it's best to use a pipe/bong with a small cone to avoid letting this stuff go to waste.

Mix it with some regular weed: take it and sprinkle into some regular weed.


Moon and SunRocks produce very unique effects. Some users compare them to dabs due to their potency, but the highs are really quite different.

Dabs and concentrates typically produce a short burst of uplifting, clear-headed euphoria. Moon Rocks and SunRocks, on the other hand, produce a strong, long-lasting stone. They burn long and slow, with enduring effects after just a few hits/tokes. Expect subtle hints of clarity with uplifting euphoria.




Posted by: sunrocks vs moon rocks at December 16, 2020 07:03 PM (mLGcH)

4 It is quite beneficial, although think about the facts when it reaches this target. รีวิวufa800

Posted by: Guillermo Hernandez at June 11, 2021 02:26 PM (pMCUr)

5 Excellent read, Positive site, where did u come up with the information on this posting?I have read a few of the articles on your website now, and I really like your style. Thanks a million and please keep up the effective work. รีวิวufa800

Posted by: Guillermo Hernandez at June 11, 2021 02:31 PM (pMCUr)

6 I have a similar interest this is my page read everything carefully and let me know what you think. PetSmart store video

Posted by: Guillermo Hernandez at June 12, 2021 01:35 AM (HxRj5)

7 This is a fantastically written and insightful article. This is, without a doubt, among the finest articles ever published. Your excellent performance inspires me to raise my own standards. Please know how much I appreciate it if you do. quordle today

Posted by: kathy23 at November 09, 2023 03:23 AM (16+uv)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

What colour is a green orange?

47kb generated in CPU 5.9131, elapsed 5.7928 seconds.
37 queries taking 4.4172 seconds, 166 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Always on Watch
The American Thinker
Bird`s Articles
Old Birdblog
Birdblog`s Literary Corner
Behind the Black Borngino Report
Canada Free Press
Common Sense and Wonder < br/ > Christian Daily Reporter
Citizens Free Press
Daren Jonescu
Dana and Martha Music On my Mind Conservative Victory
Gelbspan Files Infidel Bloggers Alliance
Let the Truth be Told
>Numbers Watch
Real Climate Science
The Reform Club
FTP Student Action
Veritas PAC
The Galileo Movement
Intellectual Conservative
br /> Liberty Unboound
One Jerusalem
Publius Forum
Ready Rants
The Gateway Pundit
The Jeffersonian Ideal
Thinking Democrat
Ultima Thule
Young Craig Music
Contact Tim at bgocciaatoutlook.com

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 99073
  • Files: 15765
  • Bytes: 4.9G
  • CPU Time: 457:59
  • Queries: 3561853


  • Posts: 28657
  • Comments: 126737


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0