Bad News Thread

[watfly]

"A whopping 71 percent of Democrats in the United States want healthy people to stay home “as much as possible,” even as vaccinations soar and new coronavirus infections have plummeted, according to a new survey from Gallup.

In contrast, 87 percent of Republicans surveyed and 64 percent of independents said it was time for people to start living normally after more than a year of pandemic shutdowns and working from home."

Fascinating insight into the mindset of people.

Self reliance vs. the government will provide.
I know what's best for me vs. I know what's best for you

....to name a couple

 

[dad4]

Self reliance vs. the government will provide.
I know what's best for me vs. I know what's best for you

....to name a couple

I see it as more "I do what is right for me" versus "we do what is right for us".

Not sure how to bridge that gap, to be sure.

 

[Grace T.]

As has been explained to you before here, the "masks better than vaccines" comment came in a discussion involving a certain quality mask and a certain quality vaccine. In that circumstance the comment was correct. As it turns out, the vaccine ix much more effective than had been hypothesized in the discussion, thus tipping the judgment. Those who took the time to look at the whole context then and now understood what it meant. Now we are left with just a few who ignore the math and science of the discussion in an attempt to score cheap political points.

It's not an attempt to score cheap political points. The statement itself was imprecise and ignored the science. He didn't say "it's possible that certain masks such as an N95 might even be more effective than some of the vaccines in the pipeline in preventing illness, particularly since those vaccines may come in substantially less than 100% effective." It was a sales job that masks are so good they are even better than vaccines. It was an oversell, for the purposes outlined above.

 

[watfly]

I see it as more "I do what is right for me" versus "we do what is right for us".

Not sure how to bridge that gap, to be sure.

Best for me: Return to normal
Best for you: Not get Covid (you, as in others like the aforementioned 71%, I won't claim to speak for you, Dad4)

The brilliant thing about our country is we can accommodate both at the same time.

 

[Grace T.]

The evidence is that cloth or surgical masks, on the recipient, help a little. Cloth or surgical masks, on the source/infected person, help a lot.

But that isn’t the answer you want, so you keep returning to “what if you’re on an airplane”. It asks the wrong question, as a rhetorical device to get the wrong answer.

It’s a silly question. If you are unvaccinated, then you really should not be on an airplane during a respiratory pandemic. The risk to you and others is too high.

There is no real need to ask “what kind of mask should I wear while riding in the aluminum germ tube?”. The simpler answer is ”don’t get in the aluminum germ tube if you don’t need to.”

Then you can go back to the right question. Do cloth or surgical masks reduce transmission from me to others by a meaningful amount? (10% or more)

The answer to that question is a clear yes.

Keep preaching. Admire the faith.

 

[espola]

It's not an attempt to score cheap political points. The statement itself was imprecise and ignored the science. He didn't say "it's possible that certain masks such as an N95 might even be more effective than some of the vaccines in the pipeline in preventing illness, particularly since those vaccines may come in substantially less than 100% effective." It was a sales job that masks are so good they are even better than vaccines. It was an oversell, for the purposes outlined above.

"I threw back in the face of the school safety officer that everyone was masked and the cdc director had just said masks were better than vaccines. It was a super sweet moment. "

That's a cheap political point.

 

[Grace T.]

"I threw back in the face of the school safety officer that everyone was masked and the cdc director had just said masks were better than vaccines. It was a super sweet moment. "

That's a cheap political point.

No it's not. I couldn't care less about the guys politics. It won me the argument because he had no rebuttal to it and was totally pinned least he be accused of not following the science. They did not make kiddo take the COVID test for the 1 hour.

 

[dad4]

Keep preaching. Admire the faith.

I see that you are reduced to evidence-free responses, like “keep preaching”. That’s because you have no respectable articles to point to.

Take a look at the evidence.

Face masks: what the data say

The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough?

www.nature.com

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission...

www.pnas.org

Effectiveness of Mask Wearing to Control Community Spread of SARS-CoV-2

This JAMA Insights CDC review summarizes accumulating evidence that mask wearing reduces spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection and that universal mandatory mask wearing policies reduce infections and deaths and emphasizes face masks are one component of pandemic control measures, including physical...

jamanetwork.com

You’ve been giving people bad medical advice for 15 months now. You can stop.

 

[Grace T.]

I see that you are reduced to evidence-free responses, like “keep preaching”. That’s because you have no respectable articles to point to.

Take a look at the evidence.

Face masks: what the data say

The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough?

www.nature.com

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission...

www.pnas.org

Effectiveness of Mask Wearing to Control Community Spread of SARS-CoV-2

This JAMA Insights CDC review summarizes accumulating evidence that mask wearing reduces spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection and that universal mandatory mask wearing policies reduce infections and deaths and emphasizes face masks are one component of pandemic control measures, including physical...

jamanetwork.com

You’ve been giving people bad medical advice for 15 months now. You can stop.

weve posted round and round before. Nothings going to shake your faith. But as to medical advice, I’ve pointed out in the past the micro effects are probably greater than the macro effects. Nothing is going to stop you from getting the virus on that plane even if the 2 of you seated next to each other are wearing n95s. It may stop you from getting it if you are 10 rows back but it’s reduced your low chances already. On a macro level, for all the reasons we’ve gone round and round on, they don’t do much. And in any case given the cdc advice on the vaccinated and masking, aren’t you the one currently giving out advice contra to the established science? Oh I forgot. It’s not advice...it’s preaching.

 

[espola]

No it's not. I couldn't care less about the guys politics. It won me the argument because he had no rebuttal to it and was totally pinned least he be accused of not following the science. They did not make kiddo take the COVID test for the 1 hour.

Please continue.

 

[Grace T.]

Please continue.

No thanks. See U trolling again.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

The evidence is that cloth or surgical masks, on the recipient, help a little. Cloth or surgical masks, on the source/infected person, help a lot.

But that isn’t the answer you want, so you keep returning to “what if you’re on an airplane”. It asks the wrong question, as a rhetorical device to get the wrong answer.

It’s a silly question. If you are unvaccinated, then you really should not be on an airplane during a respiratory pandemic. The risk to you and others is too high.

There is no real need to ask “what kind of mask should I wear while riding in the aluminum germ tube?”. The simpler answer is ”don’t get in the aluminum germ tube if you don’t need to.”

Then you can go back to the right question. Do cloth or surgical masks reduce transmission from me to others by a meaningful amount? (10% or more)

The answer to that question is a clear yes.

You working for OSHA now?

 

[dad4]

weve posted round and round before. Nothings going to shake your faith. But as to medical advice, I’ve pointed out in the past the micro effects are probably greater than the macro effects. Nothing is going to stop you from getting the virus on that plane even if the 2 of you seated next to each other are wearing n95s. It may stop you from getting it if you are 10 rows back but it’s reduced your low chances already. On a macro level, for all the reasons we’ve gone round and round on, they don’t do much. And in any case given the cdc advice on the vaccinated and masking, aren’t you the one currently giving out advice contra to the established science? Oh I forgot. It’s not advice...it’s preaching.

Airplanes again? That's because your argument fails anywhere outside the aluminum germ tube.

I disagree with CDC on policy, not science. CDC and I both claim that all unvaccinated people should mask up. I just think that, as a matter of policy, there is no way to draw a line between vax and unvax. The only way to get masks on the unvaccinated is if everyone wear masks. CDC believes in the honor system. I don't.

Crush proves my point on this. Some people will lie about their vax status to get out of wearing masks. Crush already did exactly that. Not everyone is honorable.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

As has been explained to you before here, the "masks better than vaccines" comment came in a discussion involving a certain quality mask and a certain quality vaccine. In that circumstance the comment was correct. As it turns out, the vaccine ix much more effective than had been hypothesized in the discussion, thus tipping the judgment. Those who took the time to look at the whole context then and now understood what it meant. Now we are left with just a few who ignore the math and science of the discussion in an attempt to score cheap political points.

Masks, as they are in their current form, will never be better than a good vaccine because people wear them.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

I see it as more "I do what is right for me" versus "we do what is right for us".

Not sure how to bridge that gap, to be sure.

Because everybody agrees about what is right for "us"

 

[Bruddah IZ]

Not everyone is honorable.

Agree. You've already proven many times that you are not honorable.

 

[watfly]

 

[Bruddah IZ]

I see that you are reduced to evidence-free responses, like “keep preaching”. That’s because you have no respectable articles to point to.

Take a look at the evidence.

Face masks: what the data say

The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough?

www.nature.com

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission...

www.pnas.org

Effectiveness of Mask Wearing to Control Community Spread of SARS-CoV-2

This JAMA Insights CDC review summarizes accumulating evidence that mask wearing reduces spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection and that universal mandatory mask wearing policies reduce infections and deaths and emphasizes face masks are one component of pandemic control measures, including physical...

jamanetwork.com

You’ve been giving people bad medical advice for 15 months now. You can stop.

You've been ignoring at least 50 years of virus history. Shall I retrieve your mask mea culpa?

 

[Bruddah IZ]

Masks reduce the probability of transmission. That’s all. They do not come close to eliminating transmission.

Nearly 30 pages later and Dad4 still arguing with himself.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

I see that you are reduced to evidence-free responses, like “keep preaching”. That’s because you have no respectable articles to point to.

Take a look at the evidence.

Face masks: what the data say

The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough?

www.nature.com

An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19

The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission...

www.pnas.org

Effectiveness of Mask Wearing to Control Community Spread of SARS-CoV-2

This JAMA Insights CDC review summarizes accumulating evidence that mask wearing reduces spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection and that universal mandatory mask wearing policies reduce infections and deaths and emphasizes face masks are one component of pandemic control measures, including physical...

jamanetwork.com

You’ve been giving people bad medical advice for 15 months now. You can stop.

Yahoo needs to explain how, if "lockdown" states are doing better economically than "loose" states, why there are 21 states in the "weak restrictions, strong recovery" quadrant while there are 2 in the "strong restrictions, strong recovery" quadrant...and they barely made the cut