point. You chose not to answer it. That's not my fault and it's not my responsibility to try to guess what you're trying to say. Asking you a question in an attempt to gain clarity is the exact opposite of making an assumption. Note that you still did not answer what your point was with that. So I will ask again... what was your point with that comment?

Glad you concede that you used the words I said you used. Again baby steps.

"Medical personnel wear the masks to prevent spraying patients and open wounds. Did common family physicians wear them all day? Do nurses or doctors when not attending to patients?"

Again glad you concede the point there. The average person wearing one to the grocery store will have it on for a much shorter time than any doctor, nurse, surgeon, etc. I see you avoided the fact that doctor's offices have potential flu patients wear them... you know to protect others who aren't sick. The same concept behind people wearing them with COVID19. Different businesses have been requiring their employees to wear them at work and yet I haven't heard of any mass deaths or illnesses reported. Because it's just flat out not true. You did the exact thing you accuse others of. Read or heard one thing somewhere and accepted it as gospel instead of seeking out more information.

"Asians wear them to filter particulate from the air due to air quality issues, not viruses."

Why they wear them is not relevant to this particular point which was that wearing masks is "potentially harmful". Does wearing them for air quality issues somehow protect you from those "potentially harmful effects"? Does the mask magically know what its purpose is and thus if it's for "air quality" there are no "potentially harmful effects" but for viruses there are? And of course they don't just wear them for air quality issues. They learned a lesson back when they got burned by SARS.

"The harmful part was not my personal addition to the previous warning on general wearing of masks so I suppose you need to search out the researcher who made the statement "

Again it's not my job to search out your incorrect arguments. You posted the "potentially harmful" stuff so it most certainly is your argument. You're defending it. Never mind that you cited no source and didn't even provide any logic for saying it. It's the same with that "interesting chart" that you posted that was anything but. It was an Excel spreadsheet that literally could have been created by anyone with calculations intended to minimize the death rate. And yet you ate it up hook, line, and sinker and reposted here as if it was something groundbreaking or "interesting". And then when you got called out on how shoddy it was you tried to hide behind "I didn't make it". No but you brought it here and spread the misinformation and tried to defend and justify it. If you don't want people to call you out for your incredibly inaccurate or misleading posts then don't make incredibly inaccurate or misleading posts... pretty simple.

I've made very few if any assumptions about your positions. I've repeatedly used your direct quotes and words in my responses to you. If you want to talk about assumptions we can start with you continuing to assume that my information/views/etc comes from TV. Of course I just ignore it b/c it's not accurate but since you're whining about assumptions I figured I'd bring it up. Once again you're guilty of the very thing you accuse others of. THAT seems to be a recurring theme with you.