patrick.net

From the article

"Another experiment in the Syrian hamster model simulated surgical masking of the animals and showed that with simulated masking, hamsters were less likely to get infected, and if they did get infected, they either were asymptomatic or had milder symptoms than unmasked hamsters."

How do they do "surgical masking" of hamsters?

indc says

I liked their explanation on why masks are good for stopping wuhan virus spread.

So you like preventing our immune system from doing what it's supposed to do? So future virus are more lethal? That's what wearing a mask is doing. I 100% disagree with mask wearing outside of the medical sphere, which even there has proven ineffective at stopping bacterial and viral infections in studies that have even been posted here and are easily searchable (not on google).

We are going to have viruses. We cannot run and hide from them or wear a mouth diaper. Unfortunately people die from things. It sucks. My dad died from cancer and we're seemingly doing little to nothing besides stuffing "researchers" pockets. Remember that every mask you put on is almost certainly made it China.

Wash your hands. Cover your mouth if you have a cough or sneeze. Problem is there are too many morons out there that don't understand this basic sanitary behavior. So now we get links like this that prove nothing and the sheep gobble it up.

Onvacation says

and if they did get infected, they either were asymptomatic or had milder symptoms than unmasked hamsters."

This is the bogus fake news trophy. Hamsters were either infected, or they weren't. If they were, their bodies determined the outcome of disease severity, not the mask. The mask did not 'adjust' their immune response by being worn or not worn.

Person who wrote this was too stupid to realize their fake news propaganda was absurd on its face. On its face? I made a punsky.