Could this be combined with masks for greater efficacy?
Meanwhile, air purifiers use a bit of power (probably less of an environmental impact than the inevitable littering of masks which are basically all microplastic while looking like harmless paper), probably cost less per filter change than a week's supply of mask, and have a relatively negligible comfort impact.
Adults could probably reduce how many colds they get by wearing masks everywhere, but most people don't think it's worth the effort.
For reference, I live in a country that had one of the highest masking rates in the world (probably top 10), and this does not seem to be an issue here whatsoever. Not a single time I've heard it mentioned, and given just how huge the focus on child development is here, there's no way it wouldn't be a massive topic.
Do you have many cases of children being in homes where they have limited access to people speaking the national language? Do you talk to individuals who are directly responsible for teaching those folks the language?
While it's reasonable such an adverse effect would be stronger in cases where at home a different language is spoken than the national language, it's very unlikely that it would only have a noticeable effect for exactly those families, with zero noticeable effect otherwise. And here, where masking rates were extremely high and amount of attention put on/money spent on child development is higher than almost anywhere else in the world, no one has ever brought it up.
This doesn't even touch upon the fact that unprivileged families are much harder hit by epidemics (let alone Covid) in general, due to a host of other factors.
> But of course if the facts go against the government narrative, the “studies” will not report them.
The studies showing that masks were incredibly effective at preventing disease spread went against the US "government narrative" at the time, since I imagine you're talking about the US.
So literally calling for anecdotes over data?
I've known multiple people who swore potatoes cured their sickness. Yes, potatoes. No, not eaten - worn.
My sample size is greater than yours. Does that mean potatoes cure illness purely by being in proximity to people? Probably not.
People are dumb and unreliable. People are fueled by beliefs. And when those beliefs are challenged, almost every time this is taken as PROOF of the belief. They are untouchable. Agree with them and that's great, disagree and you're being silenced or the government or something thereby giving validity to their belief.
Anecdotes are not meaningful data.
This is beside the point however. Both the government studies and the boots on the ground in fact agree that masking causes significant developmental disabilities, the only disagreement is the extent.
Yes, things can have a political motive. But you ALSO have political motives, you just don't know it. For example the climate change denial has a very real political motive - to protect the oil and gas industry. Oil and gas have been denying climate since the 60s, and our government backed them because of political will.
Masking, during the pandemic, saved lives. This is not up for debate. Whether it's a good idea now is another question all together.
As for masking during the pandemic, it might have save some lives. It probably did. But it also contributed to long term damage of many others. Refraining from sniping an active gunman “saves lives” too, but that’s hardly the end of the discussion. Context matters.
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that simply distrusting the government isn't enough. It isn't enough to support any stance. You need more than that.
> As for masking during the pandemic, it might have save some lives. It probably did. But it also contributed to long term damage of many others
I mean... no, this just isn't true. Masks didn't hurt anyone because they literally can't.
This is what I'm talking about. The reason people didn't want to wear masks isn't because they thought they were harmful, but rather because they were TOLD to. They didn't have anything past that.
Even in the worst-case scenario where masks do nothing, there's still zero reason not to wear a mask. the only reason is "gov bad". That, to me, is not enough. That's a nothing-burger. But millions ran with that. There was also some misinformation about CO2 buildup or something but, go figure, that was entirely made up by alex jones types to justify the fact they didn't want to wear a mask.
I also agree that personal anecdotes from trusted parties are more valuable to my decision making than "data" — but those are personal anecdotes, not anecdotes from anonymous Internet personas.
We aren't your friends and we don't know you. Why should we trust you if you are vaguebooking about something that is a common conspiracy trope?
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/symptoms-long-cov...