Coronavirus

2,001,691 Views | 19844 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by Werewolf
Colonel Armstrong
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Utah actually has the youngest median age of any state (31.2).

Regardless of restrictions, lockdowns, mask wearing.... all that really matters is the youth and health of the population. Young healthy people, and states, are just fine.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/median-age-by-state
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wayland, I appreciate your post man. My point was that you can pick states to prove or disprove whichever side you are on in the mask mandate debate.

To me, TN is similar enough to NC with large urban areas and spread out rural towns as far as geography goes. I also live within a couple of hours of the TN line, so I've visited many times. It's difficult to compare NC and VA since both have had mask mandates. TN and NC were similar enough with dissimilar governing decisions on the mask mandate to make my point above.
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
King Leary said:

Utah actually has the youngest median age of any state (31.2).

Regardless of restrictions, lockdowns, mask wearing.... all that really matters is the youth and health of the population. Young healthy people, and states, are just fine.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/median-age-by-state


I wouldn't say it is the only thing that matters, but I do think you are on to something there. I'm sure it plays a huge role.

Climate, geography, etc. all play a role in any virus transmission which does make it difficult to say one factor didn't help at all or was the only thing that helped, if that makes sense.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So here's some data about coronavirus.
USA
328 million people
30 million cases
549000 deaths attributed to virus
40 million people in my age bracket in US
Can't find cases in my age bracket
15400 deaths in my age bracket
I'm fully vaccinated. Not my vaccine, but a similar vaccine 90% protection against virus. 94% against serious illness for all age brackets. One would have to assume it's even better for my age bracket.

For the last year plus I've worked in facilities with coronavirus cases. For the last year plus I've been in box stores and other breeding grounds for coronavirus every work day. Since restaurants have been open I've been out to eat at least once a week. Most weeks more than that.

Data shows I was quite safe without the vaccination. With the vaccination, even more so. That is why I don't feel the need to wear a mask in places it is not required. That is why I feel safe. That is why I don't fear the virus. I don't want it, but if I get it, the odds are very much in my favor I'll be just fine. I drive a truck everyday. That's something much more dangerous to me than the coronavirus.
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

So here's some data about coronavirus.
USA
328 million people
30 million cases
549000 deaths attributed to virus
40 million people in my age bracket in US
Can't find cases in my age bracket
15400 deaths in my age bracket
I'm fully vaccinated. Not my vaccine, but a similar vaccine 90% protection against virus. 94% against serious illness for all age brackets. One would have to assume it's even better for my age bracket.

For the last year plus I've worked in facilities with coronavirus cases. For the last year plus I've been in box stores and other breeding grounds for coronavirus every work day. Since restaurants have been open I've been out to eat at least once a week. Most weeks more than that.

Data shows I was quite safe without the vaccination. With the vaccination, even more so. That is why I don't feel the need to wear a mask in places it is not required. That is why I feel safe. That is why I don't fear the virus. I don't want it, but if I get it, the odds are very much in my favor I'll be just fine. I drive a truck everyday. That's something much more dangerous to me than the coronavirus.



I'm proud of you.

No, seriously, no one is arguing your points here. They are all valid. We were only discussing whether masks lower transmission of COVID or not which we have ample amount of evidence that they do. No one is trying to shame anyone on here for not wearing one especially after being vaccinated.

ETA: Well, I tried to reconcile...
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No. We were discussing whether mandates worked. Then it evolved into mask shaming.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
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?

No. The answer is no.

Anti-maskers are pushing back against all the shaming, leftist media mandatory mask religion, government intrusion in their lives, virtue signaling, government shutdowns, mask mandates, and many other politicized aspects of the fight to beat back COVID.

But when the rubber hits the road, virtually all of them know masks help and would wear a mask in your hypothetical situation.

wolfman18
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How can you be an "anti masker" but wear a mask to work everyday? The need for people to not just do as directed but also to BELIEVE is mind blowing. This is where it gets to religion.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks for posting that. That's exactly what i was saying earlier when asked why one should wear a mask after vaccination when knowingly exposed to a covid positive person.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Which is still good. Yes, it's not 100%. But it's still pretty damn good. After vaccination there is a 10% chance to catch a virus that most age brackets are 95+% likely not to have any serious side effects from and probably a ridiculously large percentage to ever even know they would test positive without random test. I quit taking math 30 some years ago, but I would say those probabilities are pretty dang good.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

How can you be an "anti masker" but wear a mask to work everyday? The need for people to not just do as directed but also to BELIEVE is mind blowing. This is where it gets to religion.


Arguing against what one feels is misinformation ("masks don't work") does not imply a "need" for anything. If i argue with a Carolina fan who writes on the internet that "all you cow college grads are red necks who couldn't get into Carolina" i don't "need" that flatulant fool to BELIEVE anything, but I'll argue against him spreading what i feel is misinformation. The simple fact is that, when it comes to health care, if people BELIEVE in the management option they are much more likely to be compliant and "do as directed." If a person believes me when i say they should stop smoking and it'll reduce their risk of dying of lung cancer, it'll help them have the motivation to stop if they BELIEVE that cigs might kill them. And if smokers who don't believe smoking has any correlation with lung cancer start typing "stopping smoking doesn't work," I'm likely to argue with them that they are wrong, or at least devise an unlikely scenario forcing them to explain the logic behind their feelings lol. Because people who are on the fence about stopping smoking and are wondering if smoking really could lead to lung cancer could be influenced by the misinformed tweets and arguments of the smokers who not only do not believe but also don't do as directed.

Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They're very good. But nobody's writing these articles about individuals like you. Statements regarding public health have to include all comers, and so recommendations have to consider the fact that a 10% risk of a 5% chance of a poor outcome among 330 million people is still a big number and could slow our assent to normal?
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

packgrad said:

How can you be an "anti masker" but wear a mask to work everyday? The need for people to not just do as directed but also to BELIEVE is mind blowing. This is where it gets to religion.


Arguing against what one feels is misinformation ("masks don't work") does not imply a "need" for anything. If i argue with a Carolina fan who writes on the internet that "all you cow college grads are red necks who couldn't get into Carolina" i don't "need" that flatulant fool to BELIEVE anything, but I'll argue against him spreading what i feel is misinformation. The simple fact is that, when it comes to health care, if people BELIEVE in the management option they are much more likely to be compliant and "do as directed." If a person believes me when i say they should stop smoking and it'll reduce their risk of dying of lung cancer, it'll help them have the motivation to stop if they BELIEVE that cigs might kill them. And if smokers who don't believe smoking has any correlation with lung cancer start typing "stopping smoking doesn't work," I'm likely to argue with them that they are wrong, or at least devise an unlikely scenario forcing them to explain the logic behind their feelings lol. Because people who are on the fence about stopping smoking and are wondering if smoking really could lead to lung cancer could be influenced by the misinformed tweets and arguments of the smokers who not only do not believe but also don't do as directed.




So you're arguing against something no one is arguing for. Who is saying masks don't work? I think strong arguments can be made for how well they work, but who is arguing they don't provide any benefit?
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

Mormad said:

packgrad said:

How can you be an "anti masker" but wear a mask to work everyday? The need for people to not just do as directed but also to BELIEVE is mind blowing. This is where it gets to religion.


Arguing against what one feels is misinformation ("masks don't work") does not imply a "need" for anything. If i argue with a Carolina fan who writes on the internet that "all you cow college grads are red necks who couldn't get into Carolina" i don't "need" that flatulant fool to BELIEVE anything, but I'll argue against him spreading what i feel is misinformation. The simple fact is that, when it comes to health care, if people BELIEVE in the management option they are much more likely to be compliant and "do as directed." If a person believes me when i say they should stop smoking and it'll reduce their risk of dying of lung cancer, it'll help them have the motivation to stop if they BELIEVE that cigs might kill them. And if smokers who don't believe smoking has any correlation with lung cancer start typing "stopping smoking doesn't work," I'm likely to argue with them that they are wrong, or at least devise an unlikely scenario forcing them to explain the logic behind their feelings lol. Because people who are on the fence about stopping smoking and are wondering if smoking really could lead to lung cancer could be influenced by the misinformed tweets and arguments of the smokers who not only do not believe but also don't do as directed.




So you're arguing against something no one is arguing for. Who is saying masks don't work? I think strong arguments can be made for how well they work, but who is arguing they don't provide any benefit?
Have you not made this very argument in this thread already? I may be misreading or misunderstanding your points, but it seems that you have been saying this very thing.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

They're very good. But nobody's writing these articles about individuals like you. Statements regarding public health have to include all comers, and so recommendations have to consider the fact that a 10% risk of a 5% chance of a poor outcome among 330 million people is still a big number and could slow our assent to normal?
But the articles are interpreted by individuals like me. I can look at the data and make my own assumptions and calculations, and not be some ignorant redneck who doesn't follow the data or is only making decisions "politically".

The 10% of 5% would be 65 and up. 429,600 of the deaths have been 65 and up. 80% of the deaths from 16% of the population. There's a Pareto principle correlation somewhere here that I don't have time to work out into a cogent point at the moment.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackPA2015 said:

packgrad said:

Mormad said:

packgrad said:

How can you be an "anti masker" but wear a mask to work everyday? The need for people to not just do as directed but also to BELIEVE is mind blowing. This is where it gets to religion.


Arguing against what one feels is misinformation ("masks don't work") does not imply a "need" for anything. If i argue with a Carolina fan who writes on the internet that "all you cow college grads are red necks who couldn't get into Carolina" i don't "need" that flatulant fool to BELIEVE anything, but I'll argue against him spreading what i feel is misinformation. The simple fact is that, when it comes to health care, if people BELIEVE in the management option they are much more likely to be compliant and "do as directed." If a person believes me when i say they should stop smoking and it'll reduce their risk of dying of lung cancer, it'll help them have the motivation to stop if they BELIEVE that cigs might kill them. And if smokers who don't believe smoking has any correlation with lung cancer start typing "stopping smoking doesn't work," I'm likely to argue with them that they are wrong, or at least devise an unlikely scenario forcing them to explain the logic behind their feelings lol. Because people who are on the fence about stopping smoking and are wondering if smoking really could lead to lung cancer could be influenced by the misinformed tweets and arguments of the smokers who not only do not believe but also don't do as directed.




So you're arguing against something no one is arguing for. Who is saying masks don't work? I think strong arguments can be made for how well they work, but who is arguing they don't provide any benefit?
Have you not made this very argument in this thread already? I may be misreading or misunderstanding your points, but it seems that you have been saying this very thing.
No. You just haven't been able to separate mandates and masks in the discussion.
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10-4. Just seems when you were directly asked about masks in the specific situation around a COVID positive, that was about wearing a mask specifically and if it works or not, not the mask mandate, but I must have misunderstood.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

Mormad said:

packgrad said:

How can you be an "anti masker" but wear a mask to work everyday? The need for people to not just do as directed but also to BELIEVE is mind blowing. This is where it gets to religion.


Arguing against what one feels is misinformation ("masks don't work") does not imply a "need" for anything. If i argue with a Carolina fan who writes on the internet that "all you cow college grads are red necks who couldn't get into Carolina" i don't "need" that flatulant fool to BELIEVE anything, but I'll argue against him spreading what i feel is misinformation. The simple fact is that, when it comes to health care, if people BELIEVE in the management option they are much more likely to be compliant and "do as directed." If a person believes me when i say they should stop smoking and it'll reduce their risk of dying of lung cancer, it'll help them have the motivation to stop if they BELIEVE that cigs might kill them. And if smokers who don't believe smoking has any correlation with lung cancer start typing "stopping smoking doesn't work," I'm likely to argue with them that they are wrong, or at least devise an unlikely scenario forcing them to explain the logic behind their feelings lol. Because people who are on the fence about stopping smoking and are wondering if smoking really could lead to lung cancer could be influenced by the misinformed tweets and arguments of the smokers who not only do not believe but also don't do as directed.




So you're arguing against something no one is arguing for. Who is saying masks don't work? I think strong arguments can be made for how well they work, but who is arguing they don't provide any benefit?


That's what i find so funny, my friend! You've never said they don't work, you've said you wear your mask for your own reasoning, so I'm not sure why you're carrying the flag for those whose beliefs I'm arguing against. I've certainly made a clear distinction between my feelings on mask wearing vs mask mandates. And I've read on this thread "masks don't work" and "masks have made no difference" more than i care to count. My posed question thru my scenario never really involved people who think like you, though i admit I've really appreciated your civil discussion and your thoughts because selfishly it's allowed me to share more of mine!! So, thanks!
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackPA2015 said:

10-4. Just seems when you were directly asked about masks in the specific situation around a COVID positive, that was about wearing a mask specifically and if it works or not, not the mask mandate, but I must have misunderstood.


Yes and you extrapolate a specific situation into something else. I never said a mask doesn't work in that situation. I said I wouldn't feel the need to wear one in that specific situation that would never happen in real life.
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Experts on Biden's COVID transition team are now recommending delaying the 2nd dose to get more shots in different arms to battle the new increases in cases across the country.

Side not, if you are interested in medicine and the practice of it, Atul Gawande's (part of that team) novels are incredible reads.

Delaying Second Dose of COVID Vaccine
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

packgrad said:

Mormad said:

packgrad said:

How can you be an "anti masker" but wear a mask to work everyday? The need for people to not just do as directed but also to BELIEVE is mind blowing. This is where it gets to religion.


Arguing against what one feels is misinformation ("masks don't work") does not imply a "need" for anything. If i argue with a Carolina fan who writes on the internet that "all you cow college grads are red necks who couldn't get into Carolina" i don't "need" that flatulant fool to BELIEVE anything, but I'll argue against him spreading what i feel is misinformation. The simple fact is that, when it comes to health care, if people BELIEVE in the management option they are much more likely to be compliant and "do as directed." If a person believes me when i say they should stop smoking and it'll reduce their risk of dying of lung cancer, it'll help them have the motivation to stop if they BELIEVE that cigs might kill them. And if smokers who don't believe smoking has any correlation with lung cancer start typing "stopping smoking doesn't work," I'm likely to argue with them that they are wrong, or at least devise an unlikely scenario forcing them to explain the logic behind their feelings lol. Because people who are on the fence about stopping smoking and are wondering if smoking really could lead to lung cancer could be influenced by the misinformed tweets and arguments of the smokers who not only do not believe but also don't do as directed.




So you're arguing against something no one is arguing for. Who is saying masks don't work? I think strong arguments can be made for how well they work, but who is arguing they don't provide any benefit?


That's what i find so funny, my friend! You've never said they don't work, you've said you wear your mask for your own reasoning, so I'm not sure why you're carrying the flag for those whose beliefs I'm arguing against. I've certainly made a clear distinction between my feelings on mask wearing vs mask mandates. And I've read on this thread "masks don't work" and "masks have made no difference" more than i care to count. My posed question thru my scenario never really involved people who think like you, though i admit I've really appreciated your civil discussion and your thoughts because selfishly it's allowed me to share more of mine!! So, thanks!


For the simple folks like myself, I can accept there is some benefit simply by thinking about a sneeze in the air versus a sneeze through a gaiter. How much benefit can be debated though.

Apologies for thinking your scenario was directed towards me or those who feel differently than the poster you were quoting when you created the family scenario.

I enjoy the debate and discussion. I think some take it more seriously than I do and I'm sorry that they're bothered by my differing opinion. I realize that words on the internet read differently than when said in person, and hell in person sometimes I can come off differently than I intend as well. But it's nice to be able to have the discussion as most in my core group share similar thoughts to me. So it's always nice to hear different perspectives. We don't have to agree, but we can try to understand.

And for the record, I did make the comment "masks don't work" way earlier in the thread, but later clarified I meant mandates. I don't remember the specific situation but I know there was hype from a game and perhaps alcohol involved as well.
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

PackPA2015 said:

10-4. Just seems when you were directly asked about masks in the specific situation around a COVID positive, that was about wearing a mask specifically and if it works or not, not the mask mandate, but I must have misunderstood.


Yes and you extrapolate a specific situation into something else. I never said a mask doesn't work in that situation. I said I wouldn't feel the need to wear one in that specific situation that would never happen in real life.
Okay, misunderstood your point since we were discussing directly individuals who are "anti-mask" and whether they would wear a mask or not around a COVID positive. Carry on my friend.

ETA: Just read your ending comment in the post above. I thought I was going crazy for a second. Thanks for the clarification.
wilmwolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Do masks work in some way to slow the transmission of covid and similar? Yes. Undeniably.

Are mask mandates THE reason for the difference in cases between locales? Highly debatable. There may be correlation, but there are simply too many other variables involved to say with statistical certainty IMO.

Does that mean people shouldn't wear them? No.

Is it ok to question mask effectiveness, mask mandates, and the accompanying virtue signaling without being labeled a heathen, or devolving into political hogwash? Yes.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
Daviewolf83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackPA2015 said:

Experts on Biden's COVID transition team are now recommending delaying the 2nd dose to get more shots in different arms to battle the new increases in cases across the country.

Side not, if you are interested in medicine and the practice of it, Atul Gawande's (part of that team) novels are incredible reads.

Delaying Second Dose of COVID Vaccine
I hope they do this, but I also believe by the end of the month we will have enough doses for first and second doses, without needing to space out doses. Just yesterday, I was looking at a site to see what the supply looks like across NC, in preparation for my Group being allowed to start getting vaccinated the middle of next week. I found appointments for the J&J vaccine across large portions of NC and I could have had my pick of appointment times in multiple towns. So, I think we are getting close to the point where people who want a vaccine, can get a vaccine - at least in NC.

Related to this, I was talking to a co-worker this week who is based in the UK. He is not vaccinated yet, but his wife, his mother, and his in-laws are all fully vaccinated. He will be able to get his vaccine around the same time as me (he is in his late 30's). He said they are doing very well from an infection standpoint and they are now allowed to meet with other friends and family members in small groups, outdoors, with no masks required.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wilmwolf80 said:

Do masks work in some way to slow the transmission of covid and similar? Yes. Undeniably.

Are mask mandates THE reason for the difference in cases between locales? Highly debatable. There may be correlation, but there are simply too many other variables involved to say with statistical certainty IMO.

Does that mean people shouldn't wear them? No.

Is it ok to question mask effectiveness, mask mandates, and the accompanying virtue signaling without being labeled a heathen, or devolving into political hogwash? Yes.


Absolutely agree on all accounts
RunsWithWolves26
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If you are in onslow county, you can sign up on starmed and get your shot. They are doing them at the american legion building and they have plenty. They had 800 extra yesterday morning and people were walking in and getting it. It's the Pfizer shot for anyone interested. They don't care if you're from out of the county either.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All good points. I think you could even make arguments about masking and quarantine only for 65 and up and the immunocompromised. Let it burn through the rest of us that most likely will not have complications. Has the slow burn been better than a fast burn? I don't think the hospitals would be overfilled with the younger age groups without the media induced fear porn with the fast burn. I think all of it, and the effectiveness of what we've done, is up for discussion. There is no science or data that shows that anything we've done has been effective in slowing the virus except for the vaccines.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

All good points. I think you could even make arguments about masking and quarantine only for 65 and up and the immunocompromised. Let it burn through the rest of us that most likely will not have complications. Has the slow burn been better than a fast burn? I don't think the hospitals would be overfilled with the younger age groups without the media induced fear porn with the fast burn. I think all of it, and the effectiveness of what we've done, is up for discussion. There is no science or data that shows that anything we've done has been effective in slowing the virus except for the vaccines.


Yep. I think these are great points. I would only suggest that i think the fact that we have remained well under early number predictions means that the measures taken have had some effect in reducing transmission and/or severity of dz, or the initial models were just terrible. I personally believe the former.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

packgrad said:

All good points. I think you could even make arguments about masking and quarantine only for 65 and up and the immunocompromised. Let it burn through the rest of us that most likely will not have complications. Has the slow burn been better than a fast burn? I don't think the hospitals would be overfilled with the younger age groups without the media induced fear porn with the fast burn. I think all of it, and the effectiveness of what we've done, is up for discussion. There is no science or data that shows that anything we've done has been effective in slowing the virus except for the vaccines.


Yep. I think these are great points. I would only suggest that i think the fact that we have remained well under early number predictions means that the measures taken have had some effect in reducing transmission and/or severity of dz, or the initial models were just terrible. I personally believe the former.


That's a fair point. You can't help but think there has been some benefit locking everything down and scaring the hell out of everybody for months on end. It had to have some effect. How much though? I think wayland has done an excellent job of presenting the seasonality of the virus. Were the mitigation strategies effective during the seasonality of the virus in their respective areas? I don't believe that was necessarily the case (but don't have the data to support my assumption right now sitting in my Chevy Silverado in a parking lot in front of a job site.)
Colonel Armstrong
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If vaccinated people continue to wear masks then we will never get back to normal. The virtue signaling freaks will never stop.

EDIT: Removing second part of my comment
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
King Leary said:

If vaccinated people continue to wear masks then we will never get back to normal. The virtue signaling freaks will never stop.

EDIT: Removing second part of my comment


This simply isn't true. I think everybody agrees that at some point enough will be vaccinated that masks will be worn only by certain people at certain times. There is, however, debate about when that time will be. Some think now. I think that's wrong.
Colonel Armstrong
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Idk man. I keep seeing people talking about they'll wear masks permanently moving forward.

I'm fine with others wearing them I just don't think people should be forced to. And for the past year we've been forced to. I have a hard time believing that ends easily or quickly based on what I've seen over the past year. As long as there's one case of COVID people will say it's too much and that we need restrictions.

Just my opinion
PackPA2015
How long do you want to ignore this user?
King Leary said:

Idk man. I keep seeing people talking about they'll wear masks permanently moving forward.

I'm fine with others wearing them I just don't think people should be forced to. And for the past year we've been forced to. I have a hard time believing that ends easily or quickly based on what I've seen over the past year. As long as there's one case of COVID people will say it's too much and that we need restrictions.

Just my opinion


I honestly do think that some people will wear masks during the winter/flu season from here on out for an added layer of protection. Heck, I've mentioned considering (mostly in a joking manner) wearing one during those months at work since I haven't had as much of a cold this season, but I tend to agree with Mormad. Some people may argue for masks as long as COVID is around, but I think the majority of sane people will understand that we won't eradicate COVID anytime soon and if cases are at a tolerable level and vaccination rates are good, then we won't need masks any longer.

I do understand that we are trying to predict a politician's decision-making process which is difficult at best. But Cooper has been slowly loosening them. Once we truly are open 100%, the only other option for loosening is losing the mask.
wilmwolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There is a group, probably just as much on the fringe as those hard-line anti maskers, who think that masking should be the new normal, vaccines or not. To my perspective they are much louder than the folks on the other side, but that may be colored by the fact that I am friends with one and see her posts every day on my Facebook feed. She will not go anywhere in public, indoors or out, vaccine or not, without a mask, makes children wear them everywhere, etc. Any time any of the restrictions are lightened, she's all over the comment sections screaming about how we're all going to die. There are kooks on both sides.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
First Page Last Page
Page 251 of 567
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.