![]() |
Ohiobuckeye
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
True, but this is usually the case when a new virus or infectious disease breaks out. It takes time to gain an understanding of what is happening and how to combat it. The best recent example I can think of is the anthrax that popped up after 9/11. The first case in each city died. After that, we knew to start flouroquinolones for each case and suspected case and no one else died. |
The new Coronavirus has far too many undefined risks to be certain about anything. Authorities don’t know its length of contagiousness nor its rate of serious illness or even a valid death rate. There is no vaccine, no reliable test kit, and no approved drug for treatment. There seems to be consensus that it is most deadly for older males most of whom got very sick within a few days. Does that sound like a good risk to take for fun?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
You may get on that cruise, but no guarantee when you will get off if someone gets a fever
|
Quote:
Yippee ! :a040: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
If masks don’t keep out some particles, then how do they filter dust & pollen?
Also, if normal masks don’t protect you from others who are sick then why do so many medical personnel wear them? Last, if masks potentially do more harm than good, why has ever CDC interview been followed with a statement about how a mask shortage would adversely affect first responders and medical personnel’s ability to do their jobs? Their logic is flawed so maybe masks are better than they say? |
Quote:
No flaw in logic at all |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by
DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.