You are entitled to your opinion. Bless your heart 
You claimed that mandating masks in public would lower fatalities by 50%.
And even if that were true, it wouldn’t make Libertarianism any more reasonable.
Yes. Since transmission is through “virus-laden large droplets (particles >5 µm in diameter) that are generated when infected persons cough or sneeze”, masks, properly worn, would definitely reduce transmission. Thus reducing fatalities.
Do you have any cites to studies that do NOT undermine your argument?
So it’s gone from 40,000 to 20,000 to “reducing fatalities”.
And this proves that libertarianism is a good thing how again?
See above.
Would people wear the masks indoors? But it doesn’t matter, because there is no way this sort of law would ever pass.
In any case, regardless of whatever random distraction you post, it doesn’t make Libertarianism suddenly anything but a fantasy.
I gave you the study that showed up to 50% reduction in transmission. Now - if there is a 50% reduction in transmission, what reduction in fatalities would you expect?
I don’t make guesses. And neither do the scientists at the CDC.
the only one you produced so far showed no effect for the mask condition.
Please indicate where anyone said anything even close to this.
It showed the 50% reduction in transmission for mask+hand hygiene. But not for either separately. So great - legislate both.
It’s also pointless to ask how many deaths there are right now due to antibiotic-resistant germs, because right now we have regulations about antibiotic abuse. The real relevant question is how many deaths there would be, if we repealed the regulations.
You’re now trying to say that legislating hand washing is the same as restricting unfettered access to antibiotic drugs for those who don’t need them.
OK then.
Yes, Chicken Little, that is the question.
You know, once someone resorts to name calling in the Great Debates forum, that’s when you know the debate part is over.
Are there other areas of science you choose to ignore? Do you fuel your car with water or eat small ball bearings as snacks?
This needs to be mentioned explicitly: You are willing to ignore facts (like antibiotic resistance) to preserve your ideology. That’s not right. You’re like a creationist disregarding evolution because it is inconvenient.
Wrong. Point to one statement of mine that “ignores antibiotic resistance”.
Chronos asked “how many [more] deaths there would be, if we repealed the regulations”. I am asking “how many [fewer] deaths there would be, if you mandated masks/hand hygiene”.
If you think Chronos’s question is relevant, then so is mine. And neither is fully answerable until you either repeat the regulations in first case or mandate stuff in second.
Terr, why use face-masks when we could rightfully be swallowing antibiotics like tic-tacs?
I gave you a note earlier today about insulting comments. I guess it didn’t sink in, so this is a formal warning: insults are only allowed in the Pit.