What its the point of arguing with evidence if you are not going to read it?
I read it. And, it's not worth a damn. What's hilarious is that you don't realize it doesn't make your point!
Hyperbole much again?
There are studies that show a clear increase in survival between soldiers and law enforcement wearing vests and those not wearing it. Also vests are lab tested extensively before producing.
Where was there hyperbole? It was an analogy and a valid analogy. You seem to have a problem understanding simple analogies.
Again, hyperbole.
Would putting tinfoil over the vest increase my survivability? tinfoil is a solid so there needs to be strength to break through, does that means that its worth spending money on tinfoil to put over vests?
What the hell are you talking about?
Not worth my time arguing with hyperbolic comparisons, we are both graduates i presume so we can argue in a scientific basis.
No, really you can't. You want impossibly specific data. If you wanted me to present evidence that fomites are sources of infection and washing them reduces risk of infection, or something applicable to the argument and available, then I could do that. But, you want ridiculously specific stats that just don't exist.
No it was not, and analogies have no point in scientific discussions, unless you can prove an analogic equivalent through evidence.
Analogies have purpose in that they allow you to understand a concept. If you fail to understand a concept, which you do, then an analogy is in order.
Science is specific, you can draw an hypothesis but its validity must be proven.
Science is often focused, but we don't have highly focused scienctifici literature for every imaginable topic. This particular topic I searched for a good half hour and came up with the two articles you already pointed out. Neither of which, by the way, made a sufficiently good argument for either of us.
I searched for 5 minutes and found the article that i mentioned over and over and you blatantly ignored. I even gave you hints of where to look (Japanese epidemiological studies)
Here is the study that quotes it again.
OUTBREAK OF TINEA GLADIATORUM IN WRESTLERS IN TEHRAN (IRAN)
Although the actual quoted article its not available for free.
A nationwide survey of Trichophyton tonsurans infection among combat sport club members in Japan using a questionnaire form and the hairbrush method.
Shiraki Y, Hiruma M, Hirose N, Sugita T, Ikeda S.
Department of Dermatology, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
[email protected]
You can always write the author an email.
You seem to have a spec of intellectual honesty, so you expect to have a good discussion or do you want to flamewar/troll away?
Like I said, I read it. But, I'm starting to wonder if you did.
From the article YOU posted (ironically), " However, dermatophytes have been isolated from several inanimate objects, including hairbrushes, combs, pillowcases, other bedding material and dormitory floors.3
Inanimate objects or fomites may be responsible for prolonged transmission of ringworm infections;4 the competitive wrestling environment includes many omits as possible source of contagion."
I know, I know... they didnt specifically mention "gi", right? *sigh* As if one cotton fomite is different from another *sigh again*
I didn't bother to post that b/c, it's not sufficient evidence of anything to the degree you requested. There isn't any literature available with the specific focus you require before you'll start washing your gi.
There is nothing I can do to convince you. You won't deal with any evidence other than a perfect, situation specific match. We don't have that luxury because one doesn't exist. The best we can do is extrapolate based on existing data and knowledge. But, you've already stated that's unacceptable, so I'm not going to waste my time digging through research databases and reading through articles when you will not be convinced--I've got more important things to do.
