WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

236

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

You would wear that without a law for enforcement. If not, you would suffer the consequences. But you like the control aspect.

Exactly same thing.

Masks do nothing. It's an airborne virus. It's all theater. It's about control. This is a classic case of a "good reason" vs. the "real reason."

It's actually moisture. Small particles of moisture from your mouth, hence why you should cover your mouth.

[–] 0 pt
[–] 0 pt

Nice source, bud:

Study in Danish.

Randomized

It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both.

Results came from Surveys LOL.

gj

[–] 0 pt

You don't like the Danish?

Randomized Control Trials are considered reliable.

Yeah, people can lie on surveys, but in a study of this magnitude, it's not an uncommon method.

It's peer reviewed and published.

What's your justification for enforcing it on all people? Common sense?