IseWolf22 said:
I appreciate the civil debate Wayland and PackPA
Literally this debate has given me hope that humanity is not totally fooked. Close but not totally.
IseWolf22 said:
I appreciate the civil debate Wayland and PackPA
Forget it Wayland... he ain't budging no matter what.Wayland said:
nm. Not even worth debate at this point.
I actually listened to Up First this morning and they clarified that this was a batch that was not currently expected to contribute to the current projections J&J is giving. This is a facility that was still in a testing / approval phase so it's actually good that the issue was caught. They'll work with the FDA and regulators to ensure the facility gets up to standards before the product would be distributed.kmb717 said:statefan91 said:
I would assume this is a big deal, but exactly how big of a deal?
If I could post the graphs, I would. Look up NC and TN covid cases and deaths since these states are similar demographically. Normalize the graphs by population size to "per 100K" and you will find evidence there to show that mask mandates work. TN has no mask mandate and cases and deaths were significantly higher than in NC where we do have a mask mandate. You see we can all pick a random 2 states and find a way to prove our side of the argument.TheStorm said:Forget it Wayland... he ain't budging no matter what.Wayland said:
nm. Not even worth debate at this point.
Those are some pretty damn compelling graphs that you posted in my personal opinion... but hey! look over there! Indiana dropped initially right after their mandate started! (oh wait, that was actually Missouri that dropped when Indiana's mandate started).
Listen though. I've worn - and I continue to wear - a mask everywhere that I am required to wear one (probably just like everybody that has participated in this thread)... and I can actually think of one known benefit that I feel the general public received from it if nothing else... psychologically maybe it was our "cloak of invisibility"... it allowed some of us to actually continue to go about our lives - without even thinking twice about it - just because we had that "magic" mask on... kind of silly to type, but I really think it's true.
In the big picture I think it's pretty obvious that masks didn't really do a whole lot to stem the virus (akin to stopping the storm surge from a hurricane)... that should be pretty evident by now.
packgrad said:
Why would you wear a mask visiting family with Covid if you've been vaccinated? Maybe the vaccines aren't the mark of the devil. The masks are.
Mormad said:
I suspect there is not one single person here who, if forced to visit a family member with covid, wouldn't wear a mask except under very specific circumstances (ie, recent infection). And I'm not convinced vaccination status would change the ultimate decision.
Mormad said:packgrad said:
Why would you wear a mask visiting family with Covid if you've been vaccinated? Maybe the vaccines aren't the mark of the devil. The masks are.
Why wouldn't you?
Mormad, I appreciate your contribution but I am a little lost on what you are saying. Why, all of the sudden, do you think people will want to visit people who are not well. Will we not just go back to the norm of not being around people that are sick? I get a flu shot each year, I still avoid going to visit others with the flu. To me this is common sense and what I would expect most would feel is getting back to normal.Mormad said:
True, and that's exactly how we both want it to be. But the vaccines aren't 100% effective in trials in which the standard was how many vaccinated peeps got infected or disease vs how many unvaccinated peeps got the same, but only in real world, everyday life. Nobody studied vaccinated people exposed to known positives without ppe. The closest thing to my scenario, which I'm using as a litmus test for those who want to say masks make no difference, is the one looking at hospital staff who i assume are exposed more often than the average bear in the other studies. We don't even know how many people in the studies were actually exposed to virus, much less unmasked. And the hospital staff studied wear full PPE (N95, face shield, gown, shoe covers, gloves) when with known positives. Fully vaccinated ID docs wear the same full PPE when visiting known positives. Are they wrong? Do they not understand the disease? Do they not understand the vaccine? Has Monica Ghandi stopped wearing PPE when managing covid pts? Of course she hasn't. So the litmus test remains, is there anybody so convinced that masks don't lower risk of transmission that they'll expose themselves to known positives without a mask? And then go home and play with their kids lol.
And don't get me wrong. I don't think 2 vaccinated people who aren't suspected to be infected need to mask anymore. But that's again very different than saying we're fully at a point in this thing that you shouldn't protect yourself against known positives until we know for sure the vaccine is like a brick wall.
Mormad said:
True, and that's exactly how we both want it to be. But the vaccines aren't 100% effective in trials in which the standard was how many vaccinated peeps got infected or disease vs how many unvaccinated peeps got the same, but only in real world, everyday life. Nobody studied vaccinated people exposed to known positives without ppe. The closest thing to my scenario, which I'm using as a litmus test for those who want to say masks make no difference, is the one looking at hospital staff who i assume are exposed more often than the average bear in the other studies. We don't even know how many people in the studies were actually exposed to virus, much less unmasked. And the hospital staff studied wear full PPE (N95, face shield, gown, shoe covers, gloves) when with known positives. Fully vaccinated ID docs wear the same full PPE when visiting known positives. Are they wrong? Do they not understand the disease? Do they not understand the vaccine? Has Monica Ghandi stopped wearing PPE when managing covid pts? Of course she hasn't. So the litmus test remains, is there anybody so convinced that masks don't lower risk of transmission that they'll expose themselves to known positives without a mask? And then go home and play with their kids lol.
And don't get me wrong. I don't think 2 vaccinated people who aren't suspected to be infected need to mask anymore. But that's again very different than saying we're fully at a point in this thing that you shouldn't protect yourself against known positives until we know for sure the vaccine is like a brick wall.
In your scenario, are we assigning scarlet letters to "known positives"? Is this someone I know, or am I able to tell they are a "known positive" by some other way? What is my relationship to the "known positive" and why am I visiting?PackPA2015 said:
I think what Mormad is saying is if you don't think masks work to lower transmission of COVID, would you be willing to go maskless around a known positive? Meaning how confident are you in that position to risk your own health/safety if you are wrong.
Mormad can correct me if I'm wrong.
packgrad said:In your scenario, are we assigning scarlet letters to "known positives"? Is this someone I know, or am I able to tell they are a "known positive" by some other way? What is my relationship to the "known positive" and why am I visiting?PackPA2015 said:
I think what Mormad is saying is if you don't think masks work to lower transmission of COVID, would you be willing to go maskless around a known positive? Meaning how confident are you in that position to risk your own health/safety if you are wrong.
Mormad can correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm very confident in my own health/safety not to contract the coronavirus and, if I do, not to get seriously ill. Simply based on the cdc data. Not on the religion of masks.
PackPA2015 said:packgrad said:In your scenario, are we assigning scarlet letters to "known positives"? Is this someone I know, or am I able to tell they are a "known positive" by some other way? What is my relationship to the "known positive" and why am I visiting?PackPA2015 said:
I think what Mormad is saying is if you don't think masks work to lower transmission of COVID, would you be willing to go maskless around a known positive? Meaning how confident are you in that position to risk your own health/safety if you are wrong.
Mormad can correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm very confident in my own health/safety not to contract the coronavirus and, if I do, not to get seriously ill. Simply based on the cdc data. Not on the religion of masks.
Say a hospitalized covid patient in an ICU. Not on the verge of death, but very ill. They are a friend of yours, not family. Assuming you could waltz in without a mask, do you feel confident in the fact that masks are cult items and worthless enough to risk severe illness or death in that situation? That is the question.
Not sure why these details are needed, but I will play along.
Also, I am honestly very glad that none of your family or friends or acquaintances have had severe moderate-to-severe COVID, but ask a medical provider who has treated these patients. You know them when you step in the door. There is no doubt it is COVID. You need no scarlet letter.
PackPA2015 said:
I really knew I shouldn't have jumped in this conversation. It's not the fever and cough that do it. It's part of a physical exam, their general appearance. I have mentioned this so many times before that moderate-to-severe COVID patients are the sickest patients I have ever seen in my medical career. Yes, mild covid can seem like many other illnesses, but that is not what I said in my post. I said moderate-to-severe.
As far as masks go, I can and have shared a million studies on this thread that show evidence of them lowering transmission of COVID. You will squirm and change an argument until the rest of us get tired of arguing. Kudos, I guess?
P.S. I still haven't gotten a response on the NC, TN comparison.
wilmwolf80 said:
No, I get it, but you did include vaccination status as a potential variable in your scenario, so that was the basis of my response. I think a person who doesn't think masks work, and who has been vaccinated, is probably going to roll with that in your scenario. I don't think they are guaranteed to get religion on masks is placed in your terrorist box. But that's really just a guess. I don't personally know anyone who doesn't wear a mask, regardless of what their feelings may be on their effectiveness. I'm sure there are hard liners out there, and if they are that convinced that they don't work, IMO that wouldn't change in your scenario.
Hey! Does this mean that we are actually going to acknowledge my "Cloak of Invisibility" analogy regarding masks?Mormad said:wilmwolf80 said:
No, I get it, but you did include vaccination status as a potential variable in your scenario, so that was the basis of my response. I think a person who doesn't think masks work, and who has been vaccinated, is probably going to roll with that in your scenario. I don't think they are guaranteed to get religion on masks is placed in your terrorist box. But that's really just a guess. I don't personally know anyone who doesn't wear a mask, regardless of what their feelings may be on their effectiveness. I'm sure there are hard liners out there, and if they are that convinced that they don't work, IMO that wouldn't change in your scenario.
That's exactly what I'm trying to figure out. When push comes to shove, do the anti maskers really truly believe masks make absolutely no difference in your risk if you are actually exposed to an infectious individual? Way to much was actually made of the scenario, which was made unrealistic for the majority, but had to be to get the question answered. No scarlet letters. No shaming.
That demographics and geography have more to do with case rates than mandates, still? Even without TN/NC correlation. It makes sense since the population centers of the states are not closely located.PackPA2015 said:
I really knew I shouldn't have jumped in this conversation. It's not the fever and cough that do it. It's part of a physical exam, their general appearance. I have mentioned this so many times before that moderate-to-severe COVID patients are the sickest patients I have ever seen in my medical career. Yes, mild covid can seem like many other illnesses, but that is not what I said in my post. I said moderate-to-severe.
As far as masks go, I can and have shared a million studies on this thread that show evidence of them lowering transmission of COVID. You will squirm and change an argument until the rest of us get tired of arguing. Kudos, I guess?
P.S. I still haven't gotten a response on the NC, TN comparison.