News

23310 readers

3536 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

526

Face mask effectiveness: What science knows now (www.cbsnews.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

138 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In an interview for 60 Minutes, CBS News chief medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook posed that question to Linsey Marr, a Virginia Tech University professor specializing in aerosol science.

"They are very helpful in reducing the chances that the person will get COVID because it's reducing the amount of virus that you would inhale from the air around you," Marr said about masks.

No mask is 100% effective. An N95, for example, is named as such because it is at least 95 percent efficient at blocking airborne particles when used properly. But even if a mask has an 80% efficiency, Marr said, it still offers meaningful protection.

"That greatly reduces the chance that I'm going to become infected," Marr said.

Marr said research shows that high-quality masks can block particles that are the same size as those carrying the coronavirus. Masks work, Marr explained, as a filter, not as a sieve. Virus particles must weave around the layers of fibers, and as they do so, they may crash into those fibers and become trapped.

Marr likened it to running through a forest of trees. Walk slowly, and the surrounding is easy to navigate. But being forced through a forest at a high speed increases the likelihood of running into a tree.

"Masks, even cloth masks, do something," she said.

Not that I expect most people to believe it at this point...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mindbleach 2 points 1 year ago

They're reasoning backwards from a conclusion. And they think that's the way you're supposed to do it. They suck at keeping their excuses straight because they don't know why that would matter.

From their perspective, we're the idiots. We suck at keeping our conclusions straight. It's like we're not even trying. Yesterday we said a celebrity did something good, and today we said that celebrity did something bad. We can't even make up our minds. Is that person evil or not? Actions can only be good because good people do them.

I desperately need everyone to understand - this is a stable worldview. They look around and see evidence they're correct. They're wrong, and sometimes that delusion has a body count. But if you start from the assumption that everyone's just faking everything, confirmation is easy to find.

Confirmation is what humans do by default. We're so good at maintaining beliefs, we had to invent science to prove ourselves wrong. Smart people are better at keeping stupid beliefs. They're harder to trick, but once they're there, they're stuck.

These people are perfectly capable of being rational. That's just not what they're doing. It's not a property. It's a behavior. And it can be really fucking difficult to judge how someone is thinking based on observation alone.

My precursor to this explanation was the Yo Mama Hypothesis. In short, insulted kids heard "it's a joke, calm down" and think that means "shut up and take it." They memorize the ritual.

They're not p-zombies. They're not morons, either. They're adherents to a simpler, more ingrained, and more satisfying way of experiencing reality. They're not faking it, and they're not about to be ousted from it by highlighting contradictions they do not view as relevant. This is just another internally-consistent way to explain what they see in the world.

Which is so much worse.