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…
This argument (if it is not sarcastic, it’s hard to tell on the Internet) shows a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution and instead uses the language of social darwinism like “superior human”.
Evolution occurs in populations, not individuals. Furthermore, it doesn’t have a “goal,” it is just a natural process. Also, there are numerous ways different immune responses could be either advantageous or detrimental when combined with other variables.
I’m also not convinced that intelligence correlates to refusal to mask; as a counterpoint, smart people are also very good at justifying whatever position they already hold.
You won’t find most modern biologist using the phrase “survival of the fittest,” because it’s more confusing than illuminating. The preferred expression is “natural selection.”
It’s always about who is able to reproduce. Intelligence (not smart or dumb, just basic Intelligence) would lead you to take precautions during a pandemic. Washing hands, masks, vaccines. That is a level, fact is that those who didn’t take precautions were far more likely to become sick. Then you had to hope your immune system was up to the task.
It actually broke the idiotcracy delimma with a chunk of the human population with poorer genes and lower intelligence were removed from selection.
I mean, I just gave a counterpoint to this. Smart people are good at justifying and sustaining their current beliefs. Surely you don’t think intelligence is a measure of how correct one’s beliefs are?
This is just more social darwinist eugenicist pseudoscience.
You’re talking smart and dumb. I’m talking basic Intelligence or ability to stay alive on a daily basis.
By using debunked eugenicist arguments and supporting my point that smart people are good at justifying their false positions to themselves.