Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Wow. You are clueless. You mean like removing children from their homes when they had polio? Quarantining homes, moving classrooms outside. You consider all those things non-disruptive?
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Wow. You are clueless. You mean like removing children from their homes when they had polio? Quarantining homes, moving classrooms outside. You consider all those things non-disruptive?
You don’t seem to understand what an epidemic is and how it differs from our current situation.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
Just stop. Seriously. Stop.
I really can't tell if you understand the situation. We're not at unusually high levels of covid right now. So, to the extent you want certain measures taken, you're effectively proposing them as permanent policies.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
You are so desperate to forget the past. People sent to TB centers? You missed all that. Where did you go to school that you think polio numbers were anywhere close to covid numbers. Polio was nothing compared to covid and yet families were ripped apart, homes were isolated, schools and pools were closed. Clearly you have no idea what went on.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
You are so desperate to forget the past. People sent to TB centers? You missed all that. Where did you go to school that you think polio numbers were anywhere close to covid numbers. Polio was nothing compared to covid and yet families were ripped apart, homes were isolated, schools and pools were closed. Clearly you have no idea what went on.
You’re focused on the raw numbers, but what distinguishes an epidemic is the difference from normal levels. When cases are well above normal levels, mitigations can help bring them back down to normal levels. And when you lift those mitigations, you’ll still stay at normal levels.
When cases are are normal levels, no matter now how high, mitigations reduce the numbers, but only temporarily. When you lift the mitigations, cases will go back up to normal levels.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
You are so desperate to forget the past. People sent to TB centers? You missed all that. Where did you go to school that you think polio numbers were anywhere close to covid numbers. Polio was nothing compared to covid and yet families were ripped apart, homes were isolated, schools and pools were closed. Clearly you have no idea what went on.
You’re focused on the raw numbers, but what distinguishes an epidemic is the difference from normal levels. When cases are well above normal levels, mitigations can help bring them back down to normal levels. And when you lift those mitigations, you’ll still stay at normal levels.
When cases are are normal levels, no matter now how high, mitigations reduce the numbers, but only temporarily. When you lift the mitigations, cases will go back up to normal levels.
"I don't want to have to do anything." That's you.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
You are so desperate to forget the past. People sent to TB centers? You missed all that. Where did you go to school that you think polio numbers were anywhere close to covid numbers. Polio was nothing compared to covid and yet families were ripped apart, homes were isolated, schools and pools were closed. Clearly you have no idea what went on.
You’re focused on the raw numbers, but what distinguishes an epidemic is the difference from normal levels. When cases are well above normal levels, mitigations can help bring them back down to normal levels. And when you lift those mitigations, you’ll still stay at normal levels.
When cases are are normal levels, no matter now how high, mitigations reduce the numbers, but only temporarily. When you lift the mitigations, cases will go back up to normal levels.
"I don't want to have to do anything." That's you.
Anonymous wrote:Unless my kid is exhibiting symptoms, my kid going to school. At this point, it's no worse than the flu, and we should treat it as such.
It is no worse than influenza except for when it is worse than influenza.
For the vast vast majority of people, it is not worse than the flu.
If you didn't quarantine for 5 days after being exposed to the flu but had no symptoms, then you don't need to with covid.
Every year, some people die from complications from the flu, yet we didn't force kids to quarantine for just being exposed.
I get that we needed to quarantine when covid first hit because we didn't know enough about the virus, and also we did not have a vax, but we do now, and it's no worse than the flu.
Except for the people for whom it is worse than influenza.
C’mon. You know we’re talking about the vast vast majority of people. Why do you keep saying that?
I guess you don’t drive either. Because driving is relatively safe - most people don’t die in an accident. I know I know - except for the people who have died in a car accident
Do you use seatbelts? Airbags? Drive the speed limit? Obey traffic lights? Use car seats? Layered mitigation does wonders. We are g doing the same for covid
Part of layered mitigation, for covid, is staying home when you're sick, to reduce the possibilities of infecting other people with an infectious disease. Masks are another part of layered mitigation, especially in health care settings.
High-quality masks are used as personal protective equipment to protect staff from acquiring illnesses from patients known to have highly infectious diseases.
There wasn’t universal masking in health care settings before covid, and there isn’t now. If you’re worried, wear a mask to protect yourself— just like doctors and nurses who did so while directly treating unmasked patients with covid.
There's a lot more now, and it really ought to be standard, just like gloves are standard in health care settings. As you know, masks are more effective when everyone is wearing a mask.
Gloves aren’t standard in every health care setting or interaction. And there certainly isn't universal "gloving" for providers and patients. Like masks, gloves are primarily personal protective equipment to protect health care workers from acquiring infections from bodily fluids.
Are masks more effective at preventing transmissions when everyone wears them? Intuitively you would expect so, but there really isn't good data demonstrating a practical effect at reducing transmissions in real-world settings. Even if we assume there is a benefit, we very regularly make choices that are less than the best available protection. Did you install a five-point harness in your car for yourself, or do you continue to use a three-point seat belt?
I'm really, really tired of the argument that we should accept easily-mitigable risks in health care, on grounds that we accept uniquely (compared to other wealthy countries) high risks in driving.
At the basis of all of these arguments against masks, in limited settings, to prevent transmission of communicable things, is: "I don't wanna wear a mask." Which, ok, you don't wanna wear a mask. So say so. Don't dress it up. We know that masks would work, if people would wear them.
no we do not know that masks would work in a classroom of kindergarteners. nobody is going to put 5 year olds in fit-tested n95s that stay on 100% of the day. and we also know that covering up kindergarteners and their teacher’s faces has repercussions on learning and socializing. and we also know that covid is low risk now. ignoring all this and insisting that “masks work!!!” is idiotic.
A teacher masking in a classroom is just fine. Covid is not low risk for many. It may be low risk for you, but not for the rest of us.
It is a fact that the population that is at risk of severe consequences is in fact the minority, and not the majority. You cut into your credibility and message when you pretend otherwise.
Despite being in the numerical minority, I think my life is important enough that other people should GAF. Same goes for the life of the teacher.
Sorry, but you don’t make policies based on the numerical minority. Public health doesn’t work that way.
LOL hey how many people ever got polio? You might want to check those numbers.
The vaccine was developed so no one would get polio. It wasn’t developed to protect a few who were most vulnerable. That’s the whole point of vaccines.
Neither were the covid vaccines. We just got lucky with the polio vaccines. Vaccines that are effective at reducing severity of illness are still vaccines.
Lucky? Polio was around a long time before a successful vaccine was developed. The polio virus is also a different type of virus than the one that causes covid.
Agreed, we also got lucky with the covid vaccines, and it's ironic (and depressing) that so many vaccinated people are all ho-hum about them. To say nothing about the vaccine deniers.
You need to stop hiding behind these vaccines. They are not stopping transmission and the only way to stop this is with a better vaccine or behavior.
Yes actually vaccines limit transmission. You are spreading misinformation.
The paid RW astroturfers with their antivax misinformation are always out in force here.
94% in Montgomery county have had two shots. It it stopped transmission why are so many vaccinated getting it?
Is this a good example of Whataboutery?
In this case it’s pretty valid. It’s clear you’re not going to stop transmission. Significantly reducing transmission requires extraordinary measures that cannot be maintained. As we’ve always done with other common endemic diseases, we just need to accept that being part of civilization means we’ll get covid every year so, knowing that acquired immunity provides strong protection against severe illness.
Measles, for example. Polio. Chickenpox. RSV. Diphtheria. Whooping cough. Mumps. Smallpox! We just need to accept that being part of civilization means we'll get sick a lot from infectious diseases we could prevent getting sick from, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't want to.
Right. When those were endemic, did society go to employ disruptive, universal mitigations in an empty to minimize their spread? Or did we largely treat them as acceptable risks until vaccines offering durable immunity came along?
Have you heard about polio?
Exactly. That’s a good example of what I was talking about. What did we do before the polio vaccine when it was spreading at endemic levels?
Please go look this up for yourself.
You don’t want to tell the class what sustained efforts were taken before the development of the vaccine?
You appear to be referring to short-term, localized efforts in response to polio outbreaks in a particular area. What you haven't been able to point to any sustained efforts maintained throughout the early 20th century when polio was spreading at endemic levels.
The current situation is what endemic covid spread looks like. Covid isn't at unusually high levels. Could we do another lockdown and get levels lower? Sure, but they would go right back up when we'd reopen. That's the difference between handling an epidemic versus an illness spreading at endemic levels.
You are so desperate to forget the past. People sent to TB centers? You missed all that. Where did you go to school that you think polio numbers were anywhere close to covid numbers. Polio was nothing compared to covid and yet families were ripped apart, homes were isolated, schools and pools were closed. Clearly you have no idea what went on.
You’re focused on the raw numbers, but what distinguishes an epidemic is the difference from normal levels. When cases are well above normal levels, mitigations can help bring them back down to normal levels. And when you lift those mitigations, you’ll still stay at normal levels.
When cases are are normal levels, no matter now how high, mitigations reduce the numbers, but only temporarily. When you lift the mitigations, cases will go back up to normal levels.
"I don't want to have to do anything." That's you.
“I’m unable to accept reality.” That’s you
Eh? No. I'm accepting reality. Specifically, I'm accepting the reality that you, and many others like you, don't want to have to do anything. There are things we could do to reduce risks for vulnerable people, but you and many others like you don't want to do them.
If I am ever tempted to underestimate how much trauma COVID inflicted on people, seeing posters here taking a hard line “it’s perfectly reasonable for this extra number of people to die or be disabled by a disease I now refer to as ‘normal’ even though I had never heard of it four years ago” reminds me.
Denial is a powerful defense mechanism against things like the thing we’re in.
Anonymous wrote:If I am ever tempted to underestimate how much trauma COVID inflicted on people, seeing posters here taking a hard line “it’s perfectly reasonable for this extra number of people to die or be disabled by a disease I now refer to as ‘normal’ even though I had never heard of it four years ago” reminds me.
Denial is a powerful defense mechanism against things like the thing we’re in.
It's not a big deal to them until it happens to them. We have always been very careful. I lost a parent to covid. Its amazing to me how people will justify their behavior at the expense of others and yet claim it takes a village.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
