LogFAQs > #944767314

Clench281 posted...

Even a moderate reduction, well below 100%, would spell the difference between a disease that spreads like wildfire and one that dies out on its own without a vaccine.

Heck, even a 5% reduction would become significant in the long run, due to the exponential nature of viral spread. A 5% reduction per iteration turns into a 40% reduction by the time you reach 10 iterations (0.95^10=0.5987), which for this virus would be approximately 2-3 months. That's huge (at current US death rates, a 40% reduction over 2-3 months would save ~10 times as many lives as were lost in 9/11), and 5% is well below what empirical data (i.e. people actually looking at what's happening and not just watching one video that shows that sneezes leak around the edges) indicates masks are able to do.

Quite simply, the notion that anything less than 100% protection is pointless is insanely idiotic. No protective measure can ever provide 100% protection, short of completely avoiding the thing you're trying to be protected from. Protective measures exist to reduce risks to acceptable levels such that we can conduct the corresponding activities in reasonable safety, not to eliminate those risks entirely. Masks are no different: the only way to truly be 100% protected from Covid is to stay away from all people and never do anything, but wearing masks and maintaining distancing while in public can provide enough safety to allow people to not be hermits indefinitely.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.