You can sit on top of each other, but wear a mask

by philg

Part of an email from the local public school here in Maskachusetts….

To assist you in planning, our bus protocol for the fall includes:

  • All students/drivers will wear masks on the bus
  • Windows will be open at least one inch
  • No social distancing will be in place
  • Seats will be assigned

(i.e., the exact opposite of WHO advice prior to June 2020; even the simplest mask will stop an aerosol virus and therefore you should feel comfortable in a crowded indoor environment)

4 thoughts on “You can sit on top of each other, but wear a mask”

  2. In several areas of Europe KN95 (FFP2) is mandatory in shops and crowded areas. Which helps only partly, since people with small and thin faces who wear the mask type that looks like coffee filters have a gap of 1-3 cm around the nose.

    Despite this inefficiency, the common cold and general coughing in public seem to have been eradicated.

    I wonder why no one does a study like this:

    Take 10 volunteer school or college classes, infect a number of people with the common cold (which is one type of corona virus), then test all sorts of mask types and maskless combinations and see if they |#StopTheSpread.

    Everyone seems to be talking about #Science, but apart from the pharmaceutical industry no one is practicing it.

    • The pharmaceutical industry spends most of it’s money on marketing and regulatory lobbying.

      Very little of what they call research actually does much good — most of the research is to flip around some atoms in old medicines so they can call them new, patent the new molecule, and claim exclusive license to sell the new molecules.

      The above statements are generalizations and there are exceptions to these trends, but for a very long time the gosl of the medical indudtrial complex has not been to promote health and cure disease, but to monetize disease and health.

    • > I wonder why no one does a study like this…

      The nearest thing is the Danish study in the spring of 2020. It found the protective effect of masks for their wearers was “not statistically significant”. This result somehow didn’t find a welcome reception: “three major journals refused to publish this study, delaying its publication by several months” (from SPR).

      Once published, it was promptly “fact checked“. As we all know, #Science demands that the burden of proof is on the skeptics, not on the Coronafaithful. So maybe someone did do a study resembling your description but it got the wrong answer so we’ve never heard of it.

      > Everyone seems to be talking about #Science,
      > but apart from the pharmaceutical industry
      > no one is practicing it.

      And with the power of #Science the pharma industry achieved a spectacular result!

Comments are closed.