Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boss is one of these people still hung up on covid. He's very educated, very intelligent and accomplished. But he spends too much time on Twitter, and the echo chamber of covid nonsense in his ultraliberal feed has done him in. I met with him today, and I was struggling not to laugh during our meeting because he looks like a duck when he's talking with his N95 on. I had to look down for much of the meeting so I'd stop picturing a duck.

Those duck masks are hilarious. I can't take anyone seriously who is wearing one of those. Not that I really take anyone seriously who is still wearing a mask, but at this point, it's a great way to let me know who to avoid!

Cool for you. I like my brain more.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1602620024807723010.html

Which study in the linked thread are you referring to? The first one is probably the most relevant (Severe COVID-19 is associated with molecular signatures of aging in the human brain https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-022-00321-w), but it studied autopsied brains from hospitalized people who died of covid from Sept 2020 to Dec 2021 and matched them with brain tissue in deep freeze from before 2019. I'm not sure how relevant the findings are to vaccinated people getting covid now. Also, it doesn't tell us anything about brain function because, well, all the subjects were already dead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are riding high on the moral ground that COVID gives them to look down on anyone who doesn't agree with them. "I'm such a good person! I wear my mask! I do whatever the cdc tells me to do. If Fauci says boost, I say shoot me up!"

Thankfully this forum isn't real life. No one cares irl.

It differs from place to place. My in laws live in a community full of Trumpsters and nearly everyone is unmasked and few are fully vaccinated let alone boosted. Although many of their neighbors and coworkers have had Covid more than once or are struggling with long Covid, they can’t deviate from what the people around them do. Yet they are shocked when Grandma dies or Junior is hospitalized.

Both are wrong. COVID purity moralizing is extremely off putting. Nobody who doesn't already agree with you is going to be convinced to change their behavior. If you are just literally posting about rising case rates or your personal experience with long COVID, I do think that can be valuable. But if you are just shouting into the abyss about people not taking COVID seriously enough, you're not achieving anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are riding high on the moral ground that COVID gives them to look down on anyone who doesn't agree with them. "I'm such a good person! I wear my mask! I do whatever the cdc tells me to do. If Fauci says boost, I say shoot me up!"

Thankfully this forum isn't real life. No one cares irl.

It differs from place to place. My in laws live in a community full of Trumpsters and nearly everyone is unmasked and few are fully vaccinated let alone boosted. Although many of their neighbors and coworkers have had Covid more than once or are struggling with long Covid, they can’t deviate from what the people around them do. Yet they are shocked when Grandma dies or Junior is hospitalized.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there's one covid positive kid in that class and they're napping next to a different person than they're working next to, the masks can be working fwiw. It won't protect the napping kid (or the kid eating next to the sick kid), but it will protect the working kid.

I understand you're saying it's still being transmitted. I think the idea is to prevent transmission where possible. Kids have to eat and nap without masks, I guess. But it could help the other kids, and seems like reducing transmission as much as is reasonably possible was the goal all along.

I understand we have different limits on what reasonable is. Just explaining that limits that still allow some transmission while preventing other transmission might still be reasonable in preventing some but not all spread. Imperfect, but still reasonable.

A s someone who saw a lot of pictures of my child's daycare, neither my CHD more others wore their mask over their nose for any significant period of time. You may think it is the benefit exceeds the risk, but many parents, teachers and health authorities globally
.
You act like masking my child was some kind of personal choice and that those that did not want to do it were respected. We were not. I can tell you that my child developed some very concerning behavior when she started being required to wear a mask. We didn't want to assume it was the mask and paid thousands out of pocket for private therapy to address it. The therapy was a difficult process as it typically is, but I don't think it's a coincidence that we started seeing dramatic progress after masks stopped being required. I think the CDC's and the AAPs stubbornness on this topic is criminal. This notion that 2 year olds should be masked, no questions asked, no flexibility, is absurd.

I don't see anyone on this thread arguing for mask mandates for 2 year olds. The thread was about people who warn about Covid on social media. They are not one and the same.

Someone above said it doesn't make sense to criticize the government for maintaining onerous guidelines for too long. Yet the CDC still recommends that toddlers year olds mask when community levels are high. It should come as no surprise then, that a lot of people ignore the CDC. There is a cost to recommending something that is ridiculous and potentially harmful, as asserted by the World Health Organization and by numerous health authorities globally. Continuous toddler masking is not the norm globally.

Anonymous wrote:They are riding high on the moral ground that COVID gives them to look down on anyone who doesn't agree with them. "I'm such a good person! I wear my mask! I do whatever the cdc tells me to do. If Fauci says boost, I say shoot me up!"

Thankfully this forum isn't real life. No one cares irl.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there's one covid positive kid in that class and they're napping next to a different person than they're working next to, the masks can be working fwiw. It won't protect the napping kid (or the kid eating next to the sick kid), but it will protect the working kid.

I understand you're saying it's still being transmitted. I think the idea is to prevent transmission where possible. Kids have to eat and nap without masks, I guess. But it could help the other kids, and seems like reducing transmission as much as is reasonably possible was the goal all along.

I understand we have different limits on what reasonable is. Just explaining that limits that still allow some transmission while preventing other transmission might still be reasonable in preventing some but not all spread. Imperfect, but still reasonable.

A s someone who saw a lot of pictures of my child's daycare, neither my CHD more others wore their mask over their nose for any significant period of time. You may think it is the benefit exceeds the risk, but many parents, teachers and health authorities globally
.
You act like masking my child was some kind of personal choice and that those that did not want to do it were respected. We were not. I can tell you that my child developed some very concerning behavior when she started being required to wear a mask. We didn't want to assume it was the mask and paid thousands out of pocket for private therapy to address it. The therapy was a difficult process as it typically is, but I don't think it's a coincidence that we started seeing dramatic progress after masks stopped being required. I think the CDC's and the AAPs stubbornness on this topic is criminal. This notion that 2 year olds should be masked, no questions asked, no flexibility, is absurd.

I don't see anyone on this thread arguing for mask mandates for 2 year olds. The thread was about people who warn about Covid on social media. They are not one and the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there's one covid positive kid in that class and they're napping next to a different person than they're working next to, the masks can be working fwiw. It won't protect the napping kid (or the kid eating next to the sick kid), but it will protect the working kid.

I understand you're saying it's still being transmitted. I think the idea is to prevent transmission where possible. Kids have to eat and nap without masks, I guess. But it could help the other kids, and seems like reducing transmission as much as is reasonably possible was the goal all along.

I understand we have different limits on what reasonable is. Just explaining that limits that still allow some transmission while preventing other transmission might still be reasonable in preventing some but not all spread. Imperfect, but still reasonable.

A s someone who saw a lot of pictures of my child's daycare, neither my CHD more others wore their mask over their nose for any significant period of time. You may think it is the benefit exceeds the risk, but many parents, teachers and health authorities globally
.
You act like masking my child was some kind of personal choice and that those that did not want to do it were respected. We were not. I can tell you that my child developed some very concerning behavior when she started being required to wear a mask. We didn't want to assume it was the mask and paid thousands out of pocket for private therapy to address it. The therapy was a difficult process as it typically is, but I don't think it's a coincidence that we started seeing dramatic progress after masks stopped being required. I think the CDC's and the AAPs stubbornness on this topic is criminal. This notion that 2 year olds should be masked, no questions asked, no flexibility, is absurd.

Anonymous wrote:If there's one covid positive kid in that class and they're napping next to a different person than they're working next to, the masks can be working fwiw. It won't protect the napping kid (or the kid eating next to the sick kid), but it will protect the working kid.

I understand you're saying it's still being transmitted. I think the idea is to prevent transmission where possible. Kids have to eat and nap without masks, I guess. But it could help the other kids, and seems like reducing transmission as much as is reasonably possible was the goal all along.

I understand we have different limits on what reasonable is. Just explaining that limits that still allow some transmission while preventing other transmission might still be reasonable in preventing some but not all spread. Imperfect, but still reasonable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boss is one of these people still hung up on covid. He's very educated, very intelligent and accomplished. But he spends too much time on Twitter, and the echo chamber of covid nonsense in his ultraliberal feed has done him in. I met with him today, and I was struggling not to laugh during our meeting because he looks like a duck when he's talking with his N95 on. I had to look down for much of the meeting so I'd stop picturing a duck.

Those duck masks are hilarious. I can't take anyone seriously who is wearing one of those. Not that I really take anyone seriously who is still wearing a mask, but at this point, it's a great way to let me know who to avoid!

Cool for you. I like my brain more.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1602620024807723010.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boss is one of these people still hung up on covid. He's very educated, very intelligent and accomplished. But he spends too much time on Twitter, and the echo chamber of covid nonsense in his ultraliberal feed has done him in. I met with him today, and I was struggling not to laugh during our meeting because he looks like a duck when he's talking with his N95 on. I had to look down for much of the meeting so I'd stop picturing a duck.

Those duck masks are hilarious. I can't take anyone seriously who is wearing one of those. Not that I really take anyone seriously who is still wearing a mask, but at this point, it's a great way to let me know who to avoid!

Cool for you. I like my brain more.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1602620024807723010.html

If you're still wearing a mask and screaming about COVID in almost-2023, I would question if your brain is working at 100%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boss is one of these people still hung up on covid. He's very educated, very intelligent and accomplished. But he spends too much time on Twitter, and the echo chamber of covid nonsense in his ultraliberal feed has done him in. I met with him today, and I was struggling not to laugh during our meeting because he looks like a duck when he's talking with his N95 on. I had to look down for much of the meeting so I'd stop picturing a duck.

Those duck masks are hilarious. I can't take anyone seriously who is wearing one of those. Not that I really take anyone seriously who is still wearing a mask, but at this point, it's a great way to let me know who to avoid!

Cool for you. I like my brain more.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1602620024807723010.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My boss is one of these people still hung up on covid. He's very educated, very intelligent and accomplished. But he spends too much time on Twitter, and the echo chamber of covid nonsense in his ultraliberal feed has done him in. I met with him today, and I was struggling not to laugh during our meeting because he looks like a duck when he's talking with his N95 on. I had to look down for much of the meeting so I'd stop picturing a duck.

Those duck masks are hilarious. I can't take anyone seriously who is wearing one of those. Not that I really take anyone seriously who is still wearing a mask, but at this point, it's a great way to let me know who to avoid!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who are still neurotic and blathering on on socials and in public are the long-term victims of a sustained and powerful PR campaign by mainstream media and government. At the beginning, this was probably warranted, as we didn't know much... but like all government programs, it went on for far too long. We now have a legion of people who are go on spreading the gospel, and will for some time. My advice is to ignore them. They'll stop eventually.

This makes zero sense. Some of y’all really do some serious mental gymnastics.

I am not the PP but they are making sense. Maybe you think they're wrong, but to say it doesn't make sense? It's absolutely true. For example, the CDC still strongly encourages 2 year olds to wear masks in all indoor spaces they share without household members if they are high risk or community levels are high, without acknowledging that:

A. Many 2 year olds are not developmentally able to wear a mask properly, and it's also difficult to find masks that properly fit them (which means that the benefit of masking in this population is minimal); and
B. Numerous health authorities across the world including the World Health Organization and the Tokyo Medical Association have expressed concerns about the developmental impacts of masks on young children (https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/05/16/national/masks-kids/)

The CDC dug in on young children wearing masks at the beginning of the pandemic, and now they will never reverse their position. Thankfully most now ignore them, which is good in this particular case but not great for the future of public health in general.

Where are all the people clamoring for two year olds in masks?

I cited the CDC. Since you are too lazy to look it up yourself, here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html

No one cares anymore. CDC can keep banging on about masks, but I ain't listening and neither are most people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who are still neurotic and blathering on on socials and in public are the long-term victims of a sustained and powerful PR campaign by mainstream media and government. At the beginning, this was probably warranted, as we didn't know much... but like all government programs, it went on for far too long. We now have a legion of people who are go on spreading the gospel, and will for some time. My advice is to ignore them. They'll stop eventually.

This makes zero sense. Some of y’all really do some serious mental gymnastics.

I am not the PP but they are making sense. Maybe you think they're wrong, but to say it doesn't make sense? It's absolutely true. For example, the CDC still strongly encourages 2 year olds to wear masks in all indoor spaces they share without household members if they are high risk or community levels are high, without acknowledging that:

A. Many 2 year olds are not developmentally able to wear a mask properly, and it's also difficult to find masks that properly fit them (which means that the benefit of masking in this population is minimal); and
B. Numerous health authorities across the world including the World Health Organization and the Tokyo Medical Association have expressed concerns about the developmental impacts of masks on young children (https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/05/16/national/masks-kids/)

The CDC dug in on young children wearing masks at the beginning of the pandemic, and now they will never reverse their position. Thankfully most now ignore them, which is good in this particular case but not great for the future of public health in general.

Where are all the people clamoring for two year olds in masks?

I cited the CDC. Since you are too lazy to look it up yourself, here is the link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html