191–200 of 925 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a trolley problem. Someone gets hurt if you put the mask on, someone gets hurt if you don't put the mask on. You're assuming that there is an objectively good decision here.
nobody gets hurt if you put the mask on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This right here is the argument, and has been since February 2020. We got a little lost along the way, but our original social measures to reduce the spread of COVID was due to our inability to protect those who couldn't protect themselves. Now that we have the vaccines, we have no moral reason to now baby the people who refuse to protect themselves.
Children can't get vaccinated yet, though, and I do still want to protect them. It's why my wife and I, though fully vaccinated, haven't totally returned to normal, since our toddler and infant are still susceptible.
I would like to see the mathematical analysis that concludes it is unsafe for a vaccinated person to fly on an airplane without a mask while it is safe for a masked unvaccinated person.
The issue is that now there's no way to tell whether the unmasked person next to you is vaccinated and safe or unvaccinated and dangerous.
Anyways, studies show distance to be more preventative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hah, that's a cool idea
It's genius. US should do a federal one. I liked the idea of paying people to get vaccinated [1], but since that encountered public opposition, this is the next best thing. [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/01/13/955594105/should-the-governme...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That assumes that the vaccine is 100% effective, and that everyone who is at risk can safely take the vaccine. Neither of those are true.
Pfizer and Moderna are both effective to within the mid-high 90's, was my understanding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re absolutely right. Six months ago I would have said something like that (and indeed many months before even when the CDC was spewing the bullshit that started all this anti mask stuff). I probably wouldn’t have hassled someone I didn’t know, just avoided them altogether. However, the difference is, by wearing a mask where it might not strictly be necessary, I am choosing to inconvenience myself in a way that do…
It's a trolley problem. Someone gets hurt if you put the mask on, someone gets hurt if you don't put the mask on. You're assuming that there is an objectively good decision here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. This American fascination with “health” is very odd. My grandparents in Bangladesh lived as long as the average life expectancy in the US today, and they’re not even remarkable. Once you have antibiotics and make it past child mortality, you’re very close to hitting diminishing returns.
and make it past child mortality That's the hard part in less developed countries. In 1960 Bangladesh had a child mortality rate of almost 30%. At that time the US was under 3%. Even today with antibiotics etc., Bangladesh is about 5x higher than the US. I'm honestly not sure what you mean by America's fascination with health: I'm an American, so it of course would seem normal to me. But whatever we're doing, Banglad…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They won't ever reach 95%; not gonna happen.
Berkeley 94707 zip code was already at 98% of eligible population with at least one shot on April 30th. [1] I would guess a number of cities will be overall in the 90% range pretty soon. [1] https://abc7news.com/california-vaccination-rate-sf-vaccine-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are literally zero downsides to wearing a mask in public, and it's crazy that anyone would shame someone for it. In many Asian countries it is considered civilized and thoughtful to wear a mask when feeling ill to prevent the spread of disease. I too hope this becomes the norm in the US.
That is kind of like saying there is zero downsides to wearing a helmet or a bulletproof vest in public. It’s fine if you want to do it, but people not wanting to do it is also fine. The problem is both sides often have a degree of judgement that their way is better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it is responsible in the slightest to go to a crowded movie theater, unvaccinated, only wearing a paper mask. Even more so when a safe an effective vaccine is available. I understand your point, but this road goes both ways.
Do you think that no children under 12 should be going to movie theaters today? Because none of them are allowed to be vaccinated yet.
Since this is the dogma I choose to eat, the one supported by facts and data, I would say that it would be fine for unvaccinated 12 year olds to visit movie theaters. As long as they aren't able to spread it to vulnerable family members who are unable to get the vaccine due to medical reasons. But even then, that should be a decision the family makes. Not the government