“If masks don’t work, then why do surgeons wear them?”

[Golden Duck]

2 hours ago, and then said:

That's nice.  You are correct, most of what I relay in here is my OPINION.  I worked in patient care, including in many, many surgical suites for nearly 2 decades, so my opinion about masks is at least better informed than those who have never been required to wear them on the job, fair enough?  Beginning from the premise that a mask will indeed stop SOME of the water vapor and contaminants contained within that vapor, the idea is being pushed that when you have millions of untrained people wearing the wrong masks, mostly improperly, it is achieving a goal worth risking their health in other ways.  I simply disagree.  I wear them when It is demanded of me and I have no other option.  Those who feel better about their safety and "doing their bit" by wearing them, are free to do so and I'll never complain against them.  IT ISN'T MY BUSINESS what they choose to do.

All of that said, did you read the information about working in BSL4 labs?  Do you deny that the Wuhan lab was a BSL4 and that they were working with respiratory viruses?

Who is saying that masks will absolutely stop pathogens, or at least be as effective as BSL4 standard?

Are masks better than nothing?

Edited January 19, 2022 by Golden Duck

[Myles]

1 hour ago, Autochthon1990 said:

 right wing in this country just cannot stand anybody smarter then they are saying they need to do something different.

 

 

Are your including all the African American right wing people

They are Democrats at over 70% with another 10% being being left leaning independent and another 13% being independent. 

[Doug1066]

2 hours ago, zep73 said:

Studies have shown that it's the amount of time we spend with infected people, and how close we are to them, that matters.

See it like this: You spend 10 minutes close to an infected, that gives you 100 droplets. 20 minutes gives you 200. A.s.o...

A certain amount of droplets will escape any mask.  The exact number may depend on length of exposure, but a certain number still escape.  The dose is cumulative; eventually you will get enough to cause an infection, no matter how good the mask is and no matter how well you handle it.  Avoiding other people is a better defense.

Doug

[Doug1066]

10 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Are masks better than nothing?

Yes.

Doug

[Doug1066]

1 hour ago, and then said:

I'm sure you'll say that's because the unvaccinated are keeping this virus alive.  

Viruses are not respecters of international boundary lines.  There are sizable disease reservoirs inh nearby nations.  Have you noticed how small those places are?

Doug

[zep73]

52 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

A certain amount of droplets will escape any mask.  The exact number may depend on length of exposure, but a certain number still escape.  The dose is cumulative; eventually you will get enough to cause an infection, no matter how good the mask is and no matter how well you handle it.  Avoiding other people is a better defense.

Yes, that's what I was trying to say. Your explanation is better than mine. (Probably because English is your first language.)

[itsnotoutthere]

3 hours ago, Autochthon1990 said:

We get it, you just want the pandemic to be over, but you don't want to actually do your part so you're willing to spread misinformation to feel better about not getting vaccinated or wearing masks when you know it's the right thing to do, but that would mean being told what to do and at the end of the day, the right wing in this country just cannot stand anybody smarter then they are saying they need to do something different.

And don't hit me with that 'but I'm not right wing', I saw your quote. 

 

Long time since I've seen so much 'wrong' in a single post, but could have placed a bet that it would be you. For one, I have been vaccinated and two I do wear a mask when asked to do so, if not for myself, then for the benefit of bedwetters such as yourself.

"the right wing in this country just cannot stand anybody smarter then they are saying they need to do something different."  Well, that might be true but when it's Biden saying it you can sort of understand why people have their doubts.

I realise that 'critical thinking' isn't a strong suit of the liberal left, but since when did they start slavishly giving in to authority. I seem to remember that when Trump had the temerity to close airports to stop the spread of covid you guys went wild & resorted to your 'go-to' victim card & cried racism, & yet :- https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-impose-travel-curbs-eight-southern-african-countries-over-new-covid-19-2021-11-26/  .......but not a peep from you guys. The lack of self awareness and double standards we have come to expect from the left.

Edited January 19, 2022 by itsnotoutthere

[Grim Reaper 6]

3 hours ago, and then said:

See?  It always comes back a perfect circle to which sources are deemed trustworthy and by who.  I'm not sure why this concept is so difficult except maybe it's down to those pushing the government line, WANTING to be part of that chain of control against those they see as the "other".

What do you base your comments on?

[aztek]

they are called  surgery masks for a reason, they are meant to prevent surgeons  from having their body fluids to fall on a person they are operating on. they are not made to prevent infection, viral or bacterial,   those who come up with this argument, "if masks do not work, why do doctors use them" is a clueless moron, who is actually  doing  harm, and spreads medical disinformation

[Grim Reaper 6]

3 hours ago, Hugh Mungus said:

Yeah basically any study into the effectiveness of masks used by the public shows next to zero effect. Within the margin of error.

It should be quite easy to show masks effectiveness through a study.

Why don't you post one?

What do you base you comment on?

Here you go, now back up you comments with a Medical Journal not your opinion!

“””The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts. Public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high. Given the current shortages of medical masks, we recommend the adoption of public cloth mask wearing, as an effective form of source control, in conjunction with existing hygiene, distancing, and contact tracing strategies. Because many respiratory particles become smaller due to evaporation, we recommend increasing focus on a previously overlooked aspect of mask usage: mask wearing by infectious people (“source control”) with benefits at the population level, rather than only mask wearing by susceptible people, such as health care workers, with focus on individual outcomes. We recommend that public officials and governments strongly encourage the use of widespread face masks in public, including the use of appropriate regulation.””

Here is Peer Reviewed Medical Journal—An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19 : https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

[zep73]

9 minutes ago, aztek said:

they are called  surgery masks for a reason, they are meant to prevent surgeons  from having their body fluids to fall on a person they are operating on.

Also called infecting.

 

10 minutes ago, aztek said:

they are not made to prevent infection, viral or bacterial

You're comical!

[Grim Reaper 6]

5 hours ago, itsnotoutthere said:

"A response to people who use the classic fallacious argument, “Well, if masks don’t work, then why do surgeons wear them?”

I’m a surgeon that has performed over 10,000 surgical procedures wearing a surgical mask. However, that fact alone doesn’t really qualify me as an expert on the matter. More importantly, I am a former editor of a medical journal. I know how to read the medical literature, distinguish good science from bad, and fact from fiction. Believe me, the medical literature is filled with bad fiction masquerading as medical science. It is very easy to be deceived by bad science.

First, let’s be clear. The premise that surgeons wearing masks serves as evidence that “masks must work to prevent viral transmission” is a logical fallacy that I would classify as an argument of false equivalence, or comparing “apples to oranges.”

Although surgeons do wear masks to prevent their respiratory droplets from contaminating the surgical field and the exposed internal tissues of our surgical patients, that is about as far as the analogy extends. Obviously, surgeons cannot “socially distance” from their surgical patients

The CoVID-19 pandemic is about viral transmission. Surgical and cloth masks do nothing to prevent viral transmission. We should all realize by now that face masks have never been shown to prevent or protect against viral transmission. Which is exactly why they have never been recommended for use during the seasonal flu outbreak, epidemics, or previous pandemics."

https://www.algora.com/Algora_blog/2020/09/23/if-masks-dont-work-then-why-do-surgeons-wear-them

It’s actually pretty hilarious that a Surgeon would post his so called medical findings in right-wing blog and not present them in Medical Journal. But now I understand, I did just a very small amount of research on the gentleman you based this upon and here is what I discovered!

 Plus Dr. Meehan is not a Surgeon he is a discredited physician honestly I if you what use these kind of sources of information how can you expect others to take you seriously? Meehan is a licensed medical doctor who operates in Tulsa. His Oklahoma Medical Board profile lists his specialties as general preventive medicine, nutrition and addiction medicine and he is a QAnon supporter. 

 

Dr. Jim Meehan is another anti-vaccine physician who lacks credibility

This article about Dr. Jim Meehan was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

An anti-vaccine doctor from Oklahoma, Dr. Jim Meehan, wrote an online post about why he would no longer vaccinate his children. It’s pretty clear that his post is not so much a discussion of his own children (most of whom are adults) as an attempt to deter other parents from protecting their children from preventable diseases. His post is basically a set of claims trying to convince parents that vaccinating is very dangerous.

Since then, Dr. Jim Meehan has become one of the go-to anti-vaccine doctors who is trotted out to dismiss the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Furthermore, he has become a COVID-19 denier, testifying against the use of face masks and claiming that the disease isn’t dangerous. Furthermore, Meehan was forced to settle a libel suit filed by Dr. Eve Switzer.

https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/dr-jim-meehan-is-another-anti-vaccine-physician-who-lacks-credibility/

The head of an Oklahoma public health committee invited anti-vax doctors to talk with lawmakers about the coronavirus

In his Twitter bio, Meehan lists hashtags for “Medical Freedom,” a popular tag for the anti-vaccine movement, and for QAnon, a far-right fringe conspiracy that believes a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles runs a child sex-trafficking ring across the world that also schemes against President Donald Trump. Some members of QAnon believe Trump is secretly sending them coded messages on various websites to update them.

https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/thehead-of-an-oklahoma-public-health-committee-invited-anti-vax-doctors-to-talk-with-lawmakers-about-the-coronavirus/

@zep73 @Golden Duck @Doug1066

 

 

Edited January 19, 2022 by Manwon Lender

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

It's asserted they do nothing and were never ever mandated in any flu pandemic.

I stand corrected.  The flow of the discussion seemed to lead otherwise but, I overlooked the point you make - my bad.  I think the point being asserted was that they do almost nothing and certainly not enough to justify the risks they cause to health when used improperly and long term.  Interestingly enough, IIRC, the first widespread use of these kinds of masks  - cloth over mouth and nose - came with the original H1N1 in 1917-1920.  Was it effective then?  The numbers skew widely from 50 to 100 million dead and I don't recall any dedicated study of them but with that kind of death all around, I don't think there was a high level of noncompliance.  

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Who is saying that masks will absolutely stop pathogens, or at least be as effective as BSL4 standard?

Are masks better than nothing?

As I've said, the real issue seems to be more about how we are defining efficacy and I don't think there IS a standard measure we've all agreed to.  When I was training to dispense ionizing radiation for medical imaging in X-Ray and CT suites, I was taught the biological effects on various tissues of the body and which were more susceptible to long term cell damage from that kind radiation.  EVERY X-Ray exam held some risk of damaging DNA in cells.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.  People are generally casual about annual chest X-Rays or radiographs of broken fingers, toes, arms, etc.  The main indicator for risk was the number of exposures, the dose, and the period of time between those doses.  The doctrine was all about acceptable risk in exchange for gaining necessary information for the person's health.  It was a trade-off.  

Masks are better than nothing so long as they aren't constantly and improperly used for excessive periods of time.  It's about balancing risk.  

[+Liquid Gardens]

26 minutes ago, aztek said:

they are called  surgery masks for a reason, they are meant to prevent surgeons  from having their body fluids to fall on a person they are operating on. they are not made to prevent infection, viral or bacterial

Wow, only took two clicks to refute this one, Dr Resident Troll, congrats on the new record.

Quote

Abstract

We identified seasonal human coronaviruses, influenza viruses and rhinoviruses in exhaled breath and coughs of children and adults with acute respiratory illness. Surgical face masks significantly reduced detection of influenza virus RNA in respiratory droplets and coronavirus RNA in aerosols, with a trend toward reduced detection of coronavirus RNA in respiratory droplets. Our results indicate that surgical face masks could prevent transmission of human coronaviruses and influenza viruses from symptomatic individuals.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2

[Golden Duck]

57 minutes ago, and then said:

I stand corrected.  The flow of the discussion seemed to lead otherwise but, I overlooked the point you make - my bad.  I think the point being asserted was that they do almost nothing and certainly not enough to justify the risks they cause to health when used improperly and long term.  Interestingly enough, IIRC, the first widespread use of these kinds of masks  - cloth over mouth and nose - came with the original H1N1 in 1917-1920.  Was it effective then?  The numbers skew widely from 50 to 100 million dead and I don't recall any dedicated study of them but with that kind of death all around, I don't think there was a high level of noncompliance.  

If the doctor, in the OP, is infinitely more qualified than me it's reasonable to expect that he is circumspect with his statements.  As a health professional it's expected he communicates with people that need health advice.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Golden Duck

[Golden Duck]

11 minutes ago, and then said:

As I've said, the real issue seems to be more about how we are defining efficacy and I don't think there IS a standard measure we've all agreed to.  When I was training to dispense ionizing radiation for medical imaging in X-Ray and CT suites, I was taught the biological effects on various tissues of the body and which were more susceptible to long term cell damage from that kind radiation.  EVERY X-Ray exam held some risk of damaging DNA in cells.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.  People are generally casual about annual chest X-Rays or radiographs of broken fingers, toes, arms, etc.  The main indicator for risk was the number of exposures, the dose, and the period of time between those doses.  The doctrine was all about acceptable risk in exchange for gaining necessary information for the person's health.  It was a trade-off.  

Masks are better than nothing so long as they aren't constantly and improperly used for excessive periods of time.  It's about balancing risk.  

Yeah, true.  And I expect most people get that it's balancing risk.

Before the pandemic, in early 2020, the precedent for using masks as in previous SARS outbreaks, and the possible environmental impact.  Well,  circumstances dictate the competing priorities get reordered.

Do you treat fever or cancer?

[Grim Reaper 6]

23 minutes ago, and then said:

I stand corrected.  The flow of the discussion seemed to lead otherwise but, I overlooked the point you make - my bad.  I think the point being asserted was that they do almost nothing and certainly not enough to justify the risks they cause to health when used improperly and long term.  Interestingly enough, IIRC, the first widespread use of these kinds of masks  - cloth over mouth and nose - came with the original H1N1 in 1917-1920.  Was it effective then?  The numbers skew widely from 50 to 100 million dead and I don't recall any dedicated study of them but with that kind of death all around, I don't think there was a high level of noncompliance.  

The Doctor in the OP is not a Surgeon, he is a discredited  QAnon supporter his Oklahoma Medical Board profile lists his specialties as general preventive medicine, nutrition and addiction medicine. The guy is a Quack Doctor with no credibility so Duck you most likely do know more than him. Andthen before you support something research it, it is always best to know what and who you are supporting.  see post 62 I have supplied sources to my comments.

Meehan is a licensed medical doctor who operates in Tulsa. His Oklahoma Medical Board profile lists his specialties as general preventive medicine, nutrition and addiction medicine. He  often preaches against vaccines on and wearing face masks on Twitter. In his Twitter bio, Meehan lists hashtags for “Medical Freedom,” a popular tag for the anti-vaccine movement, and for QAnon, a far-right fringe conspiracy that believes a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles runs a child sex-trafficking ring across the world that also schemes against President Donald Trump. Some members of QAnon believe Trump is secretly sending them coded messages on various websites to update them. 
https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/thehead-of-an-oklahoma-public-health-committee-invited-anti-vax-doctors-to-talk-with-lawmakers-about-the-coronavirus/

10 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

If the doctor, in the OP, is infinitely more qualified than me it's reasonable to expect that he is circumspect whith his statements.  As a health professional it's expected he communicates with people that need health advice.

 

[psyche101]

9 hours ago, itsnotoutthere said:

"A response to people who use the classic fallacious argument, “Well, if masks don’t work, then why do surgeons wear them?”

I’m a surgeon that has performed over 10,000 surgical procedures wearing a surgical mask. However, that fact alone doesn’t really qualify me as an expert on the matter. More importantly, I am a former editor of a medical journal. I know how to read the medical literature, distinguish good science from bad, and fact from fiction. Believe me, the medical literature is filled with bad fiction masquerading as medical science. It is very easy to be deceived by bad science.

First, let’s be clear. The premise that surgeons wearing masks serves as evidence that “masks must work to prevent viral transmission” is a logical fallacy that I would classify as an argument of false equivalence, or comparing “apples to oranges.”

Although surgeons do wear masks to prevent their respiratory droplets from contaminating the surgical field and the exposed internal tissues of our surgical patients, that is about as far as the analogy extends. Obviously, surgeons cannot “socially distance” from their surgical patients

The CoVID-19 pandemic is about viral transmission. Surgical and cloth masks do nothing to prevent viral transmission. We should all realize by now that face masks have never been shown to prevent or protect against viral transmission. Which is exactly why they have never been recommended for use during the seasonal flu outbreak, epidemics, or previous pandemics."

https://www.algora.com/Algora_blog/2020/09/23/if-masks-dont-work-then-why-do-surgeons-wear-them

 

 

The surgeon is Dr Meehan. 

He was cited as a medical professional in a court case regarding Connecticut school mandates. 

The judge said he wasn't qualified in this area as a vision specialist and denied his contribution.

In short, he's an anti mask nutter.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ctpost.com/news/coronavirus/amp/Judge-rejects-doctors-testimony-in-student-15607158.php

 

Moukawsher also refused to accept as an expert Dr. James Meehan Jr., an ophthalmologist from Oklahoma. The state had sought to disqualify Meehan in part based on his past statements that mask mandates were “about symbolism, fear, and psychological operations to control the population.” The state also objected to his marketing and profit from vitamin sales as an alternative to face masks.

[odas]

10 hours ago, itsnotoutthere said:

"And if the other side wears the mask for same or simmilar reasons we, while not completle eliminate, minimize the danger."

I have no idea what that sentence means. Sorry.

I say things in misterious ways.

[zep73]

10 hours ago, itsnotoutthere said:

"And if the other side wears the mask for same or simmilar reasons we, while not completle eliminate, minimize the danger."

I have no idea what that sentence means. Sorry.

I think, what he means, is that if both parties (infected and not infected) wear them, it minimizes the contagion risk.

[Grim Reaper 6]

33 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

 

The surgeon is Dr Meehan. 

He was cited as a medical professional in a court case regarding Connecticut school mandates. 

The judge said he wasn't qualified in this area as a vision specialist and denied his contribution.

In short, he's an anti mask nutter.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ctpost.com/news/coronavirus/amp/Judge-rejects-doctors-testimony-in-student-15607158.php

 

Moukawsher also refused to accept as an expert Dr. James Meehan Jr., an ophthalmologist from Oklahoma. The state had sought to disqualify Meehan in part based on his past statements that mask mandates were “about symbolism, fear, and psychological operations to control the population.” The state also objected to his marketing and profit from vitamin sales as an alternative to face masks.

He is not even a Surgeon he is only a liar nothing more. Here are his credentials - His Oklahoma Medical Board profile lists his specialties as general preventive medicine, nutrition and addiction medicine. The is a antivaxer and also a QAnon Supporter which is also included in the link from the Oklahoma State medical board, what a piece of crap!

In his Twitter bio, Meehan lists hashtags for “Medical Freedom,” a popular tag for the anti-vaccine movement, and for QAnon, a far-right fringe conspiracy that believes a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles runs a child sex-trafficking ring across the world that also schemes against President Donald Trump. 

https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/thehead-of-an-oklahoma-public-health-committee-invited-anti-vax-doctors-to-talk-with-lawmakers-about-the-coronavirus/

Peace my friend!

[odas]

20 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I think, what he means, is that if both parties (infected and not infected) wear them, it minimizes the contagion risk.

Zep? Really?

 

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Manwon Lender said:

He is not even a Surgeon he is only a liar nothing more. Here are his credentials - His Oklahoma Medical Board profile lists his specialties as general preventive medicine, nutrition and addiction medicine. The is a antivaxer and also a QAnon Supporter which is also included in the link from the Oklahoma State medical board, what a piece of crap!

In his Twitter bio, Meehan lists hashtags for “Medical Freedom,” a popular tag for the anti-vaccine movement, and for QAnon, a far-right fringe conspiracy that believes a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles runs a child sex-trafficking ring across the world that also schemes against President Donald Trump. 

https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/thehead-of-an-oklahoma-public-health-committee-invited-anti-vax-doctors-to-talk-with-lawmakers-about-the-coronavirus/

Peace my friend!

 

 

Spot on bro.

I should have said, the alleged surgeon mentioned in the article

[Grim Reaper 6]

Just now, psyche101 said:

 

 

Spot on bro.

I should have said, the alleged surgeon mentioned in the article

Thanks I thought you missed it and I thought you would enjoy the truth behind the idiot. It’s amazing that some people start threads with nonsense sources like this how do they think they can maintain any credibility do this! It’s actually a shame that politics to these me people are more important than the truth, I really just don’t get it my friend.

Peace!