Weird Time for Christians

Bledred said:
"In addition to hypoxia and hypercapnia, breathing through facemask residues bacterial and germs components on the inner and outside layer of the facemask. These toxic components are repeatedly rebreathed back into the body, causing self-contamination. Breathing through facemasks also increases temperature and humidity in the space between the mouth and the mask, resulting in a release of toxic particles from the mask’s materials. A systematic literature review estimated that aerosol contamination levels of facemasks including 13 to 202,549 different viruses. Rebreathing contaminated air with high bacterial and toxic particle concentrations along with low O2 and high CO2 levels continuously challenge the body homeostasis, causing self-toxicity and immunosuppression."

https://www.aier.org/article/medical-journal-warns-about-maskss-potentially-devastating-consequences/
Click to expand...
You might try reading that article as it's been updated because the paper it was based on has been withdrawn. From your link:

[UPDATE: The paper discussed below was withdrawn from the journal following an editorial investigation. RetractionWatch explains the reasons for this decision. The authors of this article defer to the editors of the journal. We leave the text intact for reference purposes only.]
Click to expand...


Plus the author falsely claimed he was affiliated with Stanford and the research has been debunked:

Three days after we reported that Elsevier would be retracting a paper about COVID-19 and masks whose author claimed a false affiliation with Stanford, the publisher tells us that the “paper is misleading,” “misquotes and selectively cites published papers,” and that the data in one table is “unverified.”
Click to expand...
https://retractionwatch.com/2021/04/29/mask-study-was-misleading-and-misquotes-citations-says-elsevier/

And guess what? An article I linked earlier was specifically about how that paper was debunked:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/24/fact-check-study-falsely-claiming-masks-harmful-isnt-stanfords/7353629002/

 
RedDenver said:
You might try reading that article as it's been updated because the paper it was based on has been withdrawn. From your link:

Plus the author falsely claimed he was affiliated with Stanford and the research has been debunked:

https://retractionwatch.com/2021/04/29/mask-study-was-misleading-and-misquotes-citations-says-elsevier/

And guess what? An article I linked earlier was specifically about how that paper was debunked:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/24/fact-check-study-falsely-claiming-masks-harmful-isnt-stanfords/7353629002/
Click to expand...
haven't you heard?    the MSM has an agenda and his sources do not.    

 
Bledred said:
I am very aware that N95 masks are the ONLY mask that are able to block the size of the virus from entering the mask.  99.99% of the masks I see day in and day out in are NOT N95 masks.
Click to expand...




Dude I am about to blow your mind. Ready?

Wearing non-n95 masks isn't about blocking the virus from entering, it's about slowing the virus leaving if you are sick. Can't take your argument seriously if you can't even understand that masks aren't for your own protection but for preventing you from getting other people sick.

Anyways, sorry that Christians are having such a tough time in America. 

 
I know I stole this from the other thread.  But, I think we are seeing this play out in real life in this thread.

E-DNcYLUUAEZbcD


 
commando said:
i am 59 now and still wearing mask with no problems.   tell me when the long term effects will come into play.
Click to expand...
You said you wear a mask at work only while doing certain tasks at work.  I fail to see how this is the same as wearing a mask all the time, all day in public, work, and even privately around friends and family.  The time difference here is extremely different.  How many children are also wearing the N95 masks at your job?  Because we are also requiring children to wear masks long-term in public, in school, and everywhere else.  Lets review your logic:

I am a 59 year old who has worn an N95 mask at work for certain tasks and have been just fine for years.  Therefore every single man, women, and child on planet earth regardless of age, gender, pregnancy, disability, ethnicity, or having any type of disease or comorbidity or pre-existing lung disability such as asthma etc. can also wear an N95 for long periods of time and also will not have any health issues as a result there of. 

BigRedBuster said:
I know I stole this from the other thread.  But, I think we are seeing this play out in real life in this thread.

Click to expand...
This is not going to age well.

 
Bledred said:
You said you wear a mask at work only while doing certain tasks at work.  I fail to see how this is the same as wearing a mask all the time, all day in public, work, and even privately around friends and family.  The time difference here is extremely different.  How many children are also wearing the N95 masks at your job?  Because we are also requiring children to wear masks long-term in public, in school, and everywhere else.  Lets review your logic:

I am a 59 year old who has worn an N95 mask at work for certain tasks and have been just fine for years.  Therefore every single man, women, and child on planet earth regardless of age, gender, pregnancy, disability, ethnicity, or having any type of disease or comorbidity or pre-existing lung disability such as asthma etc. can also wear an N95 for long periods of time and also will not have any health issues as a result there of. 
Click to expand...


So you still have no legit examples of harm done by masks from any study not funded by the Koch organization. This is all your speculation based on biased sources.

 
Bledred said:
You said you wear a mask at work only while doing certain tasks at work.  I fail to see how this is the same as wearing a mask all the time, all day in public, work, and even privately around friends and family.  The time difference here is extremely different.  How many children are also wearing the N95 masks at your job?  Because we are also requiring children to wear masks long-term in public, in school, and everywhere else.  Lets review your logic:

I am a 59 year old who has worn an N95 mask at work for certain tasks and have been just fine for years.  Therefore every single man, women, and child on planet earth regardless of age, gender, pregnancy, disability, ethnicity, or having any type of disease or comorbidity or pre-existing lung disability such as asthma etc. can also wear an N95 for long periods of time and also will not have any health issues as a result there of. 
Click to expand...
i said i've worn these masks a lot for a lot of years with no problem    you said it was unhealthy for anyone to wear a mask that much.    :dunno

 
Lorewarn said:
Dude I am about to blow your mind. Ready?

Wearing non-n95 masks isn't about blocking the virus from entering, it's about slowing the virus leaving if you are sick. Can't take your argument seriously if you can't even understand that masks aren't for your own protection but for preventing you from getting other people sick.

Anyways, sorry that Christians are having such a tough time in America. 
Click to expand...
How is it that you believe a virus can easily enter a mask but not easily exit a mask?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver said:
You might try reading that article as it's been updated because the paper it was based on has been withdrawn. From your link:

Plus the author falsely claimed he was affiliated with Stanford and the research has been debunked:

https://retractionwatch.com/2021/04/29/mask-study-was-misleading-and-misquotes-citations-says-elsevier/

And guess what? An article I linked earlier was specifically about how that paper was debunked:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/24/fact-check-study-falsely-claiming-masks-harmful-isnt-stanfords/7353629002/
Click to expand...
You keep quoting USA TODAY as a source to debunk a medical journal.  If you presented this to any higher educational system you would be laughed out of the room.  Sorry, but journalists are not medical experts.  Also 'Reaction Watch' is a blog....A BLOG.  And I am the one pushing 'misleading info' and 'false information'?

 
commando said:
i said i've worn these masks a lot for a lot of years with no problem    you said it was unhealthy for anyone to wear a mask that much.    :dunno
Click to expand...
The issue at hand is about masking the entire world, not certain people in certain jobs and only for certain times in those jobs.  How do you know that you are not an exception to the rule? 

 
Bledred said:
You keep quoting USA TODAY as a source to debunk a medical journal.  If you presented this to any higher educational system you would be laughed out of the room.  Sorry, but journalists are not medical experts.  Also 'Reaction Watch' is a blog....A BLOG.  And I am the one pushing 'misleading info' and 'false information'?
Click to expand...




UMMMMMM..... Did you read the VERY FIRST paragraph of the AEIR article you linked? 

"The paper discussed below was withdrawn from the journal following an editorial investigation. RetractionWatch explains the reasons for this decision. The authors of this article defer to the editors of the journal. We leave the text intact for reference purposes only."

Your own source debunks your source.  

 
Back
Top