Why some people still don't want to wear mask?

[Gerry Seymour]

yout desribibg symtoms not the risk, of developing the symptoms

So, without a specific, single number, you just assume it's near 0. Great decision-making.

 

[jobo]

Yeah, it must be nice being that smugly ignorant.

have you actually a point to make or are you just throwibg insults about, again

 

[jobo]

So, without a specific, single number, you just assume it's near 0. Great decision-making.

il settle for an aproximate range of risk, have you got one ?

 

[jobo]

It was a really, really bad fiction movie made around 1970.

cheers, id have gone for the andromeda strain myself, i watch that again recently and its still quite good

 

[jobo]

i spend a good bit of my day sat oytside cofee bars and pubs, listenibg to the conversations of other patrons, and my vox pop has revealed that everybody thinks its a conspiracy of some kind , they cant agree who is conspiring to what end, but its safe to say that any faith they once had in the govenment or its science advisors has long long gone.

for the record i dont think its a conspiracy, just ineptitude

 

[Steve]

It was a really, really bad fiction movie made around 1970.

I think what you meant to say is "cult classic."

But I applaud you for having the good sense to stop digging.

 

[EdwardA]

The science of testing.
In order to detect very small molicules you have to do what is called "amplicifation cycles". You have to do enough cycles to detect the virus, but if you do too many cycles you detect positives that are not active virus and even other things only slightly related and contamination from the lab. The front-line scientists recommended 20-30 cycles. The CDC recommended and approved 40 cycles. If anyone actually reads these details, what do suppose that means?

 

[drop bear]

i spend a good bit of my day sat oytside cofee bars and pubs, listenibg to the conversations of other patrons, and my vox pop has revealed that everybody thinks its a conspiracy of some kind , they cant agree who is conspiring to what end, but its safe to say that any faith they once had in the govenment or its science advisors has long long gone.

for the record i dont think its a conspiracy, just ineptitude

And those people who think it is a conspiracy are experts in anything related to the corona virus?

Or are they Karen's who have no way of knowing if it is a conspiracy or not? But know better than say in our case the CSIRO. Who are one of our leading authorities in the corona virus and have never been tainted with accusations of corruption or ineptitude.

And by the way. You can now have your mask tasted and accredited.

CSIRO launches Australia's first accredited face mask testing facility - CSIRO

Can Karen from the pub do that?

 

[jobo]

And those people who think it is a conspiracy are experts in anything related to the corona virus?

Or are they Karen's who have no way of knowing if it is a conspiracy or not? But know better than say in our case the CSIRO. Who are one of our leading authorities in the corona virus and have never been tainted with accusations of corruption or ineptitude.

And by the way. You can now have your mask tasted and accredited.

CSIRO launches Australia's first accredited face mask testing facility - CSIRO

Can Karen from the pub do that?

they are a cross section of the public, that they are so suspicous of the govenment is a failure by the govenment, who have to goven by consent and they have very little as things stand

it doesnt matter if you are morally and factually correct, if no one belives you

 

[JowGaWolf]

CSIRO launches Australia's first accredited face mask testing facility - CSIRO

I wish the U.S. had something like that and if they do, I wish I knew the link lol.

 

[JowGaWolf]

it doesnt matter if you are morally and factually correct, if no one belives you

It always matters if you are factually correct. The goal isn't to get people to believe you. The goal is to have correct information

I'm pretty sure there was a time where the majority of people didn't believe that men could fly or that the world was round and revolved around the sun.

Being morally correct also matters. There is a long line of examples, showing how things were viewed from a morally correct lens. Especially if it was going against someone or something that was seen as morally incorrect. Like they say "Facts Matter"

 

[jobo]

It always matters if you are factually correct. The goal isn't to get people to believe you. The goal is to have correct information

I'm pretty sure there was a time where the majority of people didn't believe that men could fly or that the world was round and revolved around the sun.

Being morally correct also matters. There is a long line of examples, showing how things were viewed from a morally correct lens. Especially if it was going against someone or something that was seen as morally incorrect. Like they say "Facts Matter"

well no, not being belived coz peopke think you are lieing and beng wrong are much the same thing at least as far as govenments are concerned, it results in a break down of social order and the deconstruction of the social contract

or to put it more simply for you govenments cant goven in a democracy if a significant number of peopke belive the govenment is delibratly trying to kill them, improveresh them or indeed just doest care if either of the above happen

the truth us what most peopke belive it to be, until you can prove them wrong and youve proved them wrong when they belive you, chicken and egg

 

[Steve]

they are a cross section of the public, that they are so suspicous of the govenment is a failure by the govenment, who have to goven by consent and they have very little as things stand

it doesnt matter if you are morally and factually correct, if no one belives you

This is a good point. Why do you think folks don't trust their government agencies? I mean, like the CDC or the FDA here in America. Do you think they've done things to erode public trust? If so, what?

 

[Steve]

It always matters if you are factually correct. The goal isn't to get people to believe you. The goal is to have correct information

I'm pretty sure there was a time where the majority of people didn't believe that men could fly or that the world was round and revolved around the sun.

Being morally correct also matters. There is a long line of examples, showing how things were viewed from a morally correct lens. Especially if it was going against someone or something that was seen as morally incorrect. Like they say "Facts Matter"

I would say it's both: be factually correct and credible AND people should believe you. And in a normal world, one leads to the other. If you are factually correct and credible, then you will be believed. And generally, when federal agencies are not politicized, they are credible.

And then propaganda and political influence become involved. Look. Anyone can be misled. The key is to stay as informed as possible, and check the sources. We are all being bombarded now with information and misinformation. So, try and stay informed and curious. And if you are shown to be wrong, just admit it.

 

[jobo]

This is a good point. Why do you think folks don't trust their government agencies? I mean, like the CDC or the FDA here in America. Do you think they've done things to erode public trust? If so, what?

im not really up to speed on american agencies, from the little i know, there a reasonable suspicion that they are there to serve the big companies rather than the well being of the population.

in 5he uk the govenment has flip floped on everything, some times changing the guidance three or 4 times in 24 hours, its hard to come to any conclusion other than if its unpopular( pn twitter) they change it, the country appears to be beibg ran by a few thousand loonies on twitter. even consevative mps are calling bull on it. masks......yes , no not all the time,, yes sometimes, no not at all, yes all the time apart from pubs, tends to erode public confidence very quickly

on the larger issue its hard to hold people in a state of fear, they adjust mentally to it, then they cease to actually care at all.

pkus passibg laws to protect people from themsrlves is always dangerous and seldom works, drugs being a clasoc example

 

[JowGaWolf]

im not really up to speed on american agencies, from the little i know, there a reasonable suspicion that they are there to serve the big companies rather than the well being of the population.

In the U.S. the government has a history of not having morally correct actions. It also has a history of Lie.

They usually get busted with the Lies after the Facts come out. That's why I say being morally correct and facts matter. Usually distrust is due to the fact that someone discovered that things were as they said they were. That's when facts come out. If you are morally correct and truthful then it's difficult to show facts that prove otherwise no matter what people say.

Obama's birther conspiracy is a good example of that.

 

[dvcochran]

No, it's just about 850,000 out of 25.8 million. Not everyone's had it yet.

This is where that herd immunity argument starts to get scary. Let's say all 7.5 billion people on Earth gets it, and the actual death toll after everyone gets it is a very generous .25%. For the sake of argument, let's just assume that if you get it, you won't get it again. We're talking an additional 18 million people will die, not including the 800,000 or so people who have died so far. That's if we're talking a lower than current death rate.

Now, the USA accounts for about 25% of the cases worldwide. We also have, just in raw numbers, about 22% of the deaths. So, if we don't spread them out equally based strictly on population, but instead put those deaths where they are actually occurring using the raw data... it looks really bad in the USA and the UK (though worse in other countries). That's like an additional 3.6 million people just in the USA.

Quick math here... the UK accounts for about 5% of the worldwide deaths... if that rate stays consistent, you'd see an additional 900,000 deaths.

Hopefully I add the right number of zeroes... I am a product of Seattle public schools, so if my math isn't right

im not really up to speed on american agencies, from the little i know, there a reasonable suspicion that they are there to serve the big companies rather than the well being of the population.

in 5he uk the govenment has flip floped on everything, some times changing the guidance three or 4 times in 24 hours, its hard to come to any conclusion other than if its unpopular( pn twitter) they change it, the country appears to be beibg ran by a few thousand loonies on twitter. even consevative mps are calling bull on it. masks......yes , no not all the time,, yes sometimes, no not at all, yes all the time apart from pubs, tends to erode public confidence very quickly

on the larger issue its hard to hold people in a state of fear, they adjust mentally to it, then they cease to actually care at all.

pkus passibg laws to protect people from themsrlves is always dangerous and seldom works, drugs being a clasoc example

Here in the US, this is the most bizarre Presidential election year I have ever encountered in my lifetime, and I predict it will go down as the most bizarre ever. Along with the virus, heavy social disruption, and excessive media influence, it is hard to believe much of anything right now.
Literally everything of pertinence is in flux right now.

 

[jobo]

In the U.S. the government has a history of not having morally correct actions. It also has a history of Lie.

They usually get busted with the Lies after the Facts come out. That's why I say being morally correct and facts matter. Usually distrust is due to the fact that someone discovered that things were as they said they were. That's when facts come out. If you are morally correct and truthful then it's difficult to show facts that prove otherwise no matter what people say.

Obama's birther conspiracy is a good example of that.

prisons are full of people who were morally correct and truthful, it doesnt seem to help if no one believed them

there are very few facts in the world that are not subject to interpritation, clealy as facts keep beibg updated, its difficult to know which facts are axtually factual as we speak. and thats hard science in political science there is only interpretation and its polical science that runs the world

 

[dvcochran]

In the U.S. the government has a history of not having morally correct actions. It also has a history of Lie.

They usually get busted with the Lies after the Facts come out. That's why I say being morally correct and facts matter. Usually distrust is due to the fact that someone discovered that things were as they said they were. That's when facts come out. If you are morally correct and truthful then it's difficult to show facts that prove otherwise no matter what people say.

Obama's birther conspiracy is a good example of that.

But you have to admit literally all actions or decisions are made based on the information available at that time. Radiation was thought to be good for you at one point. Cocaine cured every illness. At the time, an entire country thought Hitler was a god.
Based on the information at hand they thought they being morally correct. There is very little historically that was not refined after the discovery.

BSAT is a frequently used acronym in law and technical troubleshooting. Often it is just a cop out legally speaking and the explanation of failure in application. But if it is all you have to make an informed decision, I do not think that bankrupts you morally.

 

[granfire]

Here in the US, this is the most bizarre Presidential election year I have ever encountered in my lifetime, and I predict it will go down as the most bizarre ever. Along with the virus, heavy social disruption, and excessive media influence, it is hard to believe much of anything right now.
Literally everything of pertinence is in flux right now.

well, it's the most bizarre presidency....this year is just the crowning pinnacle