Do Covid 19 masks work?

[Smithydog]

10 hours ago, longwood50 said:

No you cherry picked the data.  Take Sweden out of the equation.  You have low covid rates in the countries you mentioned, Norway, Denmark, and Finland.  Now you have high covid infection rates in other countries in the region such as Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, and the Netherlands.  Now all of the mentioned countries have similar to identical protocols.  If the masks were so effective in Denmark, Finland, and Norway, why were the same masks so ineffective in Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, and the Netherlands.  

Why would identical protocols in the USA show high rates of covid infection in New York and New Jersey but a rate 50% lower in very urban, very minority, Washington D.C. ? 

There are zero statistics to show that any of the quarantine, mask, lockdown, social distancing mandates have shown improvement in areas with strict controls and higher covid infection rates in areas that don't have them.   The only anecdotal evidence you have is Sweden.  They did little to nothing, and their Covid rate of infection is lower than the Netherlands, and almost identical to Estonia, Lithuania, and Spain, France,  That to me pretty well demonstrates that the strict EU protocols were virtually useless.  If they were so effective those countries would have demonstrably lower covid infection rates than Sweden and they don't. 

Fine, lets not look at Sweden. I only used it as you used it as the example in your argument so it is a logical point for others to compare to. 

The Cambridge Dictionary defines"Cherry-Pick" as"to pick only the best people or things from a group, so that only people or things that are less good remain". That is what we both are doing. Now we can go back and forth, each cherry-picking data to illustrate their perspective, but what is the point. Neither will convince the other! 

You asked why would identical protocols show a difference? Easy. The data we are all using only lists numbers of people. The separate data on types of measure in use (for which I gave you an example of such data), does not break down to a local level where, especially in the US, local mandates have been overridden by a variety of means.

Generally, no data shows compliance with measures employed (eg How many people were actually wearing masks complying with a measure). In some cases, a secondary impact can be observed like the monetary effects of a lockdown on jobs etc. But on the primary reason, the war against Covid-19, you can only make assumptions from what you are seeing in the data, on news reports etc. and not draw valid conclusions backed up by data. It is why often people really can't prove something on either side of the debate in many cases. 

You are entitled to your opinion. Personally, I don't agree but that is my opinion and no less based on assumptions than your opinion is. As I said in my post, in my opinion:

"The reality is no-one can accurately say what actions delivered the actual results. Only the people of that country can say they are happy or not with what happened to deliver results in their own country."

People's perspectives on the value of measures can and does change (as shown in the attached article and yes about Sweden!). I am sure you could equally find articles and reports that show changes of minds the other way as well.

https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-admits-coronavirus-strategy-underestimated-strenght-virus-lofven-stefan-2020-12

[shanghailoz]

Quote

Masks are just virtue signaling. If you have actual verified facts that masks reduced the spread, then show it. 

Some evidence to the contrary.

No peer studies, just factual verifiable references.

Flu isn't covid, but the same principles apply.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/04/22/science/flu-season-coronavirus-pandemic.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-worldwide-during-the-covid-pandemic1/

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/articles/flu-cases-decline-dramatically-this-season

 

With people still wearing masks, washing their hands frequently and physically distancing, he expected these measures to temper the flu this year. And, with most public schools — major transmission routes for flu — likely remaining closed, in addition to restaurant and business closures, there were even fewer opportunities for flu to spread.

Klein was correct. The flu season generally peaks between December and February each year, bringing up to 45 million illnesses, 810,000 hospitalizations and 61,000 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This year, however, as of Feb. 5, there have been only 1,455 cases in the U.S.

...

Cases of other respiratory viruses besides influenza are down as well; the health system diagnosed only six positive cases of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) by the end of January. By this time in the previous two years, Johns Hopkins clinicians had already seen hundreds of RSV cases.

 

 

 

[mcambl61]

38 minutes ago, shanghailoz said:

Some evidence to the contrary.

No peer studies, just factual verifiable references.

Flu isn't covid, but the same principles apply.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/04/22/science/flu-season-coronavirus-pandemic.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-worldwide-during-the-covid-pandemic1/

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/articles/flu-cases-decline-dramatically-this-season

With people still wearing masks, washing their hands frequently and physically distancing, he expected these measures to temper the flu this year. And, with most public schools — major transmission routes for flu — likely remaining closed, in addition to restaurant and business closures, there were even fewer opportunities for flu to spread.

Klein was correct. The flu season generally peaks between December and February each year, bringing up to 45 million illnesses, 810,000 hospitalizations and 61,000 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This year, however, as of Feb. 5, there have been only 1,455 cases in the U.S.

...

Cases of other respiratory viruses besides influenza are down as well; the health system diagnosed only six positive cases of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) by the end of January. By this time in the previous two years, Johns Hopkins clinicians had already seen hundreds of RSV cases.

Sorry, but trying to tie flu data to assertions that masks reduces spread of covid is just lazy and pointless. 

 

I asked for proof, you provide articles about the reduced flu stats during a pandemic. 

 

Do you actually think people are reporting their flu symptoms as normal during a pandemic? 

 

There will never be zero covid. The ridiculous overreaction and fear mongering does not make it any better, in fact it produces more harm and misery than any virus ever could. 

Sadly, weak compliance without questioning methods or motive is now the normal for so much of the population, just what governments have wanted for decades. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by mcambl61

[mcambl61]

40 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

Fine, lets not look at Sweden. I only used it as you used it as the example in your argument so it is a logical point for others to compare to. 

The Cambridge Dictionary defines"Cherry-Pick" as"to pick only the best people or things from a group, so that only people or things that are less good remain". That is what we both are doing. Now we can go back and forth, each cherry-picking data to illustrate their perspective, but what is the point. Neither will convince the other! 

You asked why would identical protocols show a difference? Easy. The data we are all using only lists numbers of people. The separate data on types of measure in use (for which I gave you an example of such data), does not break down to a local level where, especially in the US, local mandates have been overridden by a variety of means.

Generally, no data shows compliance with measures employed (eg How many people were actually wearing masks complying with a measure). In some cases, a secondary impact can be observed like the monetary effects of a lockdown on jobs etc. But on the primary reason, the war against Covid-19, you can only make assumptions from what you are seeing in the data, on news reports etc. and not draw valid conclusions backed up by data. It is why often people really can't prove something on either side of the debate in many cases. 

You are entitled to your opinion. Personally, I don't agree but that is my opinion and no less based on assumptions than your opinion is. As I said in my post, in my opinion:

"The reality is no-one can accurately say what actions delivered the actual results. Only the people of that country can say they are happy or not with what happened to deliver results in their own country."

People's perspectives on the value of measures can and does change (as shown in the attached article and yes about Sweden!). I am sure you could equally find articles and reports that show changes of minds the other way as well.

https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-admits-coronavirus-strategy-underestimated-strenght-virus-lofven-stefan-2020-12

Sorry, but the referenced article has many untrue claims. For instance, the claim that hospitals were full of covid patients. Totally false. 

 

Sweden's data does not lend any valid credibility to any lockdown or mask mandates that other countries have used while destroying hundreds of millions of people's livelihood and businesses. 

[ChristyS]

13 hours ago, longwood50 said:

No you cherry picked the data.  Take Sweden out of the equation.  You have low covid rates in the countries you mentioned, Norway, Denmark, and Finland.  Now you have high covid infection rates in other countries in the region such as Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, and the Netherlands.  Now all of the mentioned countries have similar to identical protocols.  If the masks were so effective in Denmark, Finland, and Norway, why were the same masks so ineffective in Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, and the Netherlands.  

Why would identical protocols in the USA show high rates of covid infection in New York and New Jersey but a rate 50% lower in very urban, very minority, Washington D.C. ? 

There are zero statistics to show that any of the quarantine, mask, lockdown, social distancing mandates have shown improvement in areas with strict controls and higher covid infection rates in areas that don't have them.   The only anecdotal evidence you have is Sweden.  They did little to nothing, and their Covid rate of infection is lower than the Netherlands, and almost identical to Estonia, Lithuania, and Spain, France,  That to me pretty well demonstrates that the strict EU protocols were virtually useless.  If they were so effective those countries would have demonstrably lower covid infection rates than Sweden and they don't. 

DC is a majority Black city and they don't go with right wing conspiracy theories. 

[Ballbearing]

A bit of a controversial subject but would like to add my 10 cents worth.

Do masks protect us from inhaling COVID particulates ? - unless they are industrial type masks my opinion is no.

Do masks reduce the risk of an individual transmitting COVID particulates - in my opinion yes.

All over the world wherever decisions are being made, they are being made with no prior knowledge of how to react to this pandemic.

We are in unchartered waters.

Nobody has the answers, It is basically trial and error.

Knowledgeable people have recommended a specific distance for social distancing.

That is obviously based on the presumed distance a cough, sneeze or heavy breath can travel.

So what happens when you put an obstacle in the way of that cough, sneeze or heavy breath (mask) ?

The distance it can travel is greatly reduced.

Threat reduction - plain & simple.

The world in this day and age lives and breathes the internet and there is that much rubbish it is no wonder nobody knows what is true and what is false.

Only fact I know is wearing a mask will not stop me catching COVID and it will not stop me possibly transmitting COVID.

What it will do is greatly reduce the possibility / chance of either.

If I am considerate enough to put up with the inconvenience of a mask to protect you then it would be appreciated if you do the same for me.

[mcambl61]

5 minutes ago, Ballbearing said:

A bit of a controversial subject but would like to add my 10 cents worth.

Do masks protect us from inhaling COVID particulates ? - unless they are industrial type masks my opinion is no.

Do masks reduce the risk of an individual transmitting COVID particulates - in my opinion yes.

All over the world wherever decisions are being made, they are being made with no prior knowledge of how to react to this pandemic.

We are in unchartered waters.

Nobody has the answers, It is basically trial and error.

Knowledgeable people have recommended a specific distance for social distancing.

That is obviously based on the presumed distance a cough, sneeze or heavy breath can travel.

So what happens when you put an obstacle in the way of that cough, sneeze or heavy breath (mask) ?

The distance it can travel is greatly reduced.

Threat reduction - plain & simple.

The world in this day and age lives and breathes the internet and there is that much rubbish it is no wonder nobody knows what is true and what is false.

Only fact I know is wearing a mask will not stop me catching COVID and it will not stop me possibly transmitting COVID.

What it will do is greatly reduce the possibility / chance of either.

If I am considerate enough to put up with the inconvenience of a mask to protect you then it would be appreciated if you do the same for me.

Again, there is no viable evidence that masks "greatly" reduce the spread of covid as you claim. 

 

And to end your post, you revert to the virtue signaling that your view of wearing a mask makes you feel "considerate" and those who don't, are not. 

That is quite a sad thing.

It's that exact same attitude that is the problem. 

 

There will never be zero covid. Deal with the realities of the data and the fatality rates and who are the most vulnerable.

 

Let people live without the ridiculous overreaction and fear mongering. 

[mcambl61]

40 minutes ago, ChristyS said:

DC is a majority Black city and they don't go with right wing conspiracy theories. 

Correction. 

 

DC is one of the the most corrupt self serving disaster areas in the country. 

 

They ignore all information and events that do not fit in their ridiculous narratives and ideology. They are precisely what is wrong with the country. 

[Benroon]

On 8/13/2021 at 9:02 AM, Faraday said:

I'll have you know, young man that I worked at the

 Oxford University Virology Department!

Actually quite true, however it was sterilising pipette tips, for about 4 weeks one summer.

Ergo, I is an exapert...!

To be fair you are now probably the most qualified person on here and should be referred to for all things virusy! 

[Benroon]

18 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

Again, there is no viable evidence that masks "greatly" reduce the spread of covid as you claim. 

And to end your post, you revert to the virtue signaling that your view of wearing a mask makes you feel "considerate" and those who don't, are not. 

That is quite a sad thing.

It's that exact same attitude that is the problem. 

There will never be zero covid. Deal with the realities of the data and the fatality rates and who are the most vulnerable.

Let people live without the ridiculous overreaction and fear mongering. 

There is no viable evidence it doesn’t.
 

I thought it was very clearly explained to you very well by ballbearing, that to not wear one, even on a reassuring your fellow human level, makes you, with respect, a clown! Just not a very funny one. 

Leave the science to one side for one moment whilst it develops, stop getting taken in by the conspiracy theories and just do your bit. To a normal person that’s such a tiny thing to ask! 

Edited August 14, 2021 by Benroon

[Smithydog]

1 hour ago, mcambl61 said:

4 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

Sorry, but the referenced article has many untrue claims. For instance, the claim that hospitals were full of covid patients. Totally false. 

Sweden's data does not lend any valid credibility to any lockdown or mask mandates that other countries have used while destroying hundreds of millions of people's livelihood and businesses. 

In response to you comment, the article was only intended to show that people can change their minds. Nothing more than that. Other articles indicate the same was said which contrasts with what was previously said and done by that person or country. That clearly indicates a change of mind and hence why a valid source for my points raised.

Nothing else. Take what else you want from it and use it as you see fit. It is in the public domain so go for it.

I did not seek to challenge your actual opinion on the value of measures as you are both clearly against them from your writings. I am equally for them. Neither of us will change the opinion of the other on that subject so a waste of time debating it!

My opinions are, and my only opinions offered, are these about data to support opinions. They equally apply to us both and reflect the limitations sometimes that goes unacknowledged.

1. Data can be Cherry-picked to suit your opinion and everyone does it.

2. No available data reflects in accuracy whether measures worked or did not work for any country.

In support of the second point, I can find none that offers true verification of a measure's actual performance at the time in relation to Covid-19 control of infection. 

As there seems to be a lacking of data, either before or during its implementation, of how a measure performed in assisting or not, a Covid-19 infection, for a village, town, city or country, opinions on performance good or bad can only be assessed as assumptions of the person choosing to offer them.

I also offer that due to the large number of possible variable factors affecting whether a person caught Covid-19 or not when under a measure, it would be very challenging for anyone, no matter their opinion, to present any unbiased scientific study. I suggest, compliance with the measure would, at very best, be difficult to monitor in a large enough group of people going about their normal daily lives.

 

[shanghailoz]

1 hour ago, mcambl61 said:

Sorry, but trying to tie flu data to assertions that masks reduces spread of covid is just lazy and pointless. 

I asked for proof, you provide articles about the reduced flu stats during a pandemic. 

Do you actually think people are reporting their flu symptoms as normal during a pandemic? 

There will never be zero covid. The ridiculous overreaction and fear mongering does not make it any better, in fact it produces more harm and misery than any virus ever could. 

Sadly, weak compliance without questioning methods or motive is now the normal for so much of the population, just what governments have wanted for decades. 

I don't think so.

 

One airborne virus that infects the lungs is provenly mitigated by mask wearing and washing hands.

I guess that will have absolutely zero correlation for reducing effectiveness for a similar airborne virus that infects the lungs.

 

 

[longwood50]

2 hours ago, Smithydog said:

Fine, lets not look at Sweden

Swedens rate of covid infection per million is less than countries like Luxenburg, and the Netherland.  It is virtually identical to bordering countries Lithuania and Estonia.  It is not significantly statistically higher than Spain, Portugal, the UK or France. 

Bottom Line.  If masks and other protocols were so "effective' in preventing the spread of Covid those countries that employed those measures would have lower rates of infection and Sweden's rate would be the highest.  Both of those are not true. 

Now I can show you that, but obviously I can not help you understand that. 

[mcambl61]

1 hour ago, Benroon said:

There is no viable evidence it doesn’t.
 

I thought it was very clearly explained to you very well by ballbearing, that to not wear one, even on a reassuring your fellow human level, makes you, with respect, a clown! Just not a very funny one. 

Leave the science to one side for one moment whilst it develops, stop getting taken in by the conspiracy theories and just do your bit. To a normal person that’s such a tiny thing to ask! 

So, you have no actual verified evidence that masks have reduced the spread of the virus, but say that doesn't mean that it doesn't, while again virtue signaling that your opinions make you a better person. 

 

Amazing. Sad, but still amazing. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by mcambl61

[mcambl61]

52 minutes ago, shanghailoz said:

I don't think so.

One airborne virus that infects the lungs is provenly mitigated by mask wearing and washing hands.

I guess that will have absolutely zero correlation for reducing effectiveness for a similar airborne virus that infects the lungs.

Again, you are making assertions that masks have reduced the flu outbreak without considering that many people are not aware or reporting that they have the flu while they are cowering in fear while being fed ridiculous fear mongering by the media and governments. 

[mcambl61]

57 minutes ago, shanghailoz said:

I don't think so.

One airborne virus that infects the lungs is provenly mitigated by mask wearing and washing hands.

I guess that will have absolutely zero correlation for reducing effectiveness for a similar airborne virus that infects the lungs.

Correlation is not causation. 

 

Do you Understand what that means? 

[longwood50]

1 minute ago, mcambl61 said:

One airborne virus that infects the lungs is provenly mitigated by mask wearing and washing hands.

The only evidence is purely anecdotal.  Sweden is the only region I am aware of that masks, quarantines, social distancing, etc was not mandated.  It covid rate per million is less than neighboring Neitherlands, and is absolutely identical to Estonia and Lithuania.  Sweden's rate of Covid infection per million is only a small fraction higher than France, the UK, Spain, and Portugal.  

That to me is pretty sound empirical evidence that if the mask protocols and other restrictions were had any positive benefit at all, they were at best very marginal.  Otherwise Sweden's rate of infection would be markedly higher than the other European Countries and it is not.  Can masks help?  Perhaps.  But turning ones head away from a Covid infected person when they cough or sneeze "can help" too.  That does not mean that turning ones head away is a truly effective way of stopping the spread of Covid and the same is true of masks.  The governments around the world really don't have any effective means to stop Covid other than via vaccines.  However they need to have an answer when pressed what they are doing to protect their citizens.  The mask mandates, quarantines, lock downs etc. give them an answer.  The fact that those measures do little to nothing is irrelevant. 

[Fester]

17 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Yes but you are "cherry picking" the data. Yes Denmark, Norway, Finland are lower but Estonia, Lithuania, and the Netherlands are not.  Estonia, and Lithuania are just as close to Sweden as Denmark, Norway, and Finland.  

Again, if "masks" quarantines, lockdowns, etc were so effective every country not just selected ones would have lower covid infection rates than Sweden.  They don't.  Poland, borders Germany on one side, the Netherlands on the other.  Both Poland and the Netherlands have high rates of Covid infection while Germany has a low rate of infection.  All that proves is that there are reasons "other" than masks, quarantines, and lockdowns, that influence covid infection rates.  Otherwise all countries employing the same protocols would have similar infection rates and they don't. 

 Poland, borders Germany on one side, the Netherlands on the other! 

 

[BlueSphinx]

Attached an article written by Yinon Weiss end October 2020, aptly titled > These 12 Graphs show that mask-mandates do nothing to stop COVID 

Here also a link to a thread he launched on his Twitter account: > https://threader.app/thread/1321177359601393664 which contains a short version of the article attached.

And here a link to another of his twitter-threads with the very revealing 'Politics of Masks' quadrant.

 

 

1845616171_These12Graphsshowthatmask-mandatesdonothingtostopcovid_YinonWeissOct2020.pdf

[shanghailoz]

56 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

Correlation is not causation. 

Do you Understand what that means? 

Unless in this instance, correlation is very much causation.  
You asked for a study, here you go - 

Lets look at a study of mask studies:

 

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

 

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

A Cochrane review (15) on physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses included 67 RCTs and observational studies. It found that “overall masks were the best performing intervention across populations, settings and threats.” 

 

One preprint systematic review (19) including epidemiological, theoretical, experimental, and clinical evidence found that “face masks in a general population offered significant benefit in preventing the spread of respiratory viruses especially in the pandemic situation, but its utility is limited by inconsistent adherence to mask usage.”

(i.e. wear your mask over your nose, not under it, as I often see foreigners doing - at least 2 of those today walking along Sukhumvit, vs zero Thai...)

 

Randomized control trial evidence that investigated the impact of masks on household transmission during influenza epidemics indicates potential benefit. Suess et al. (21) conducted an RCT that suggests household transmission of influenza can be reduced by the use of nonpharmaceutical interventions, namely the use of face masks and intensified hand hygiene, when implemented early and used diligently.

 

Leffler et al. (29) used a multiple regression approach, including a range of policy interventions and country and population characteristics, to infer the relationship between mask use and SARS-CoV-2 transmission. They found that transmission was 7.5 times higher in countries that did not have a mask mandate or universal mask use, a result similar to that found in an analogous study of fewer countries 

 

Another study looked at the difference between US states with mask mandates and those without, and found that the daily growth rate was 2.0 percentage points lower in states with mask mandates

 

High viral titers of SARS-CoV-2 are reported in the saliva of COVID-19 patients. These titers have been highest at time of patient presentation, and viral levels are just as high in asymptomatic or presymptomatic patients, and occur predominantly in the URT (46, 47). Asymptomatic people seem to account for approximately 40 to 45% of SARS-CoV-2 infections (48). An analysis of SARS-CoV-2 viral load by patient age showed that viral loads of SARS-CoV-2 in children are similar to adults (49). Another paper showed no significant difference in saliva loads between mildly symptomatic and asymptomatic children. These findings support the contention that everyone, adults and children, should wear masks (50).

 

Van der Sande et al. (78) found that “all types of masks reduced aerosol exposure, relatively stable over time, unaffected by duration of wear or type of activity,” and concluded that “any type of general mask use is likely to decrease viral exposure and infection risk on a population level, despite imperfect fit and imperfect adherence.”

 

Their conclusion - 

Nonmedical masks have been effective in reducing transmission of respiratory viruses; and places and time periods where mask usage is required or widespread have shown substantially lower community transmission.

 

 

 

[Fester]

47 minutes ago, longwood50 said:

The only evidence is purely anecdotal.  Sweden is the only region I am aware of that masks, quarantines, social distancing, etc was not mandated.  It covid rate per million is less than neighboring Neitherlands, and is absolutely identical to Estonia and Lithuania.  Sweden's rate of Covid infection per million is only a small fraction higher than France, the UK, Spain, and Portugal.  

That to me is pretty sound empirical evidence that if the mask protocols and other restrictions were had any positive benefit at all, they were at best very marginal.  Otherwise Sweden's rate of infection would be markedly higher than the other European Countries and it is not.  Can masks help?  Perhaps.  But turning ones head away from a Covid infected person when they cough or sneeze "can help" too.  That does not mean that turning ones head away is a truly effective way of stopping the spread of Covid and the same is true of masks.  The governments around the world really don't have any effective means to stop Covid other than via vaccines.  However they need to have an answer when pressed what they are doing to protect their citizens.  The mask mandates, quarantines, lock downs etc. give them an answer.  The fact that those measures do little to nothing is irrelevant. 

Empirical my foot. Look at the relative population densities.

[Fester]

5 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

Attached an article written by Yinon Weiss end October 2020, aptly titled > These 12 Graphs show that mask-mandates do nothing to stop COVID 

Here also a link to a thread he launched on his Twitter account: > https://threader.app/thread/1321177359601393664 which contains a short version of the article attached.

And here a link to another of his twitter-threads with the very revealing 'Politics of Masks' quadrant.

1845616171_These12Graphsshowthatmask-mandatesdonothingtostopcovid_YinonWeissOct2020.pdf 3.3 MB · 0 downloads

Told you about pdf's already.

[Fester]

1 hour ago, longwood50 said:

Swedens rate of covid infection per million is less than countries like Luxenburg, and the Netherland.  It is virtually identical to bordering countries Lithuania and Estonia.  It is not significantly statistically higher than Spain, Portugal, the UK or France. 

Bottom Line.  If masks and other protocols were so "effective' in preventing the spread of Covid those countries that employed those measures would have lower rates of infection and Sweden's rate would be the highest.  Both of those are not true. 

Now I can show you that, but obviously I can not help you understand that. 

So simplistic -  only to be expected, I supose.

[BlueSphinx]

8 minutes ago, Fester said:

Told you about pdf's already.

Must have missed that, what do you mean...

[Fester]

21 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

Must have missed that, what do you mean...

I mean that we have enough viruses to worry about already.