CDC updates guidance, recommends vaccinated people wear masks indoors in certain areas

[Mark Quayle]

CDC updates guidance, recommends vaccinated people wear masks indoors in certain areas | CNN

I did the right thing during 2020, wore a mask and kept distance...

Did the right thing in 2021, got vaccinated...

This particular reversal in mask guidance? I'm not so sure...

Given the CDC directors comments and statements earlier, there seems to be a breakdown in the logic somewhere.

She openly acknowledged that the chance of contracting any serious level of disease when vaccinated is low... she also acknowledged that while it's still possible to transmit with an asymptomatic infection, it's less likely.

We know that the vaccine is widely available for anyone who wants to get one and there's no supply issues stopping anyone from getting vaccinated.

We know that infections in the age group that's not currently eligible are overwhelmingly mild or asymptomatic.

Given these pieces of info, wouldn't that mean that me going back to wearing a mask is solely for the benefit of anti-vaccine types who don't take it seriously and have no intention of getting vaccinated anyway?


Maybe we can come up with a new term for people like myself who have no interest in going back to masking for the benefit of people who've used words like "sheeple" to describe me for the last 18 months. Maybe "second wave anti-mask"? Sort of like the term "second wave feminist"?

Maybe they're getting their directives from somewhere else.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

there is a 15% chance a vaccinated person could be carrying the Delta variant, which would be dangerous for the unvaccinated people he's around. As I said, this isn't something I'm concerned about, inasmuch as they've had a chance to get their vaccination.

That's my basic premise...

I'm not going to go out of my way to protect people who both A) don't take the virus seriously, and B) have done nothing but mock us for taking it seriously.


It may be a poor analogy, but...

It'd be like making a family member's car payment for them when you know they have a gambling problem they have no intention of addressing.

The longer you cover for them, the longer you enable the problematic behavior.

 

[FireDragon76]

That's my basic premise...

I'm not going to go out of my way to protect people who both A) don't take the virus seriously, and B) have done nothing but mock us for taking it seriously.


It may be a poor analogy, but...

It'd be like making a family member's car payment for them when you know they have a gambling problem they have no intention of addressing.

The longer you cover for them, the longer you enable the problematic behavior.

You aren't doing it to be nice to anti-vaxxers, per se. Nobody is asking you to sit around and sing Kumbaya with them, much less approve of their irresponsible behavior. I sure won't. You're doing it because one less person who is infected is one less person who can spread the disease and crowd our hospitals.

 

[Tanj]

That's my basic premise...

I'm not going to go out of my way to protect people who both A) don't take the virus seriously, and B) have done nothing but mock us for taking it seriously.


It may be a poor analogy, but...

It'd be like making a family member's car payment for them when you know they have a gambling problem they have no intention of addressing.

The longer you cover for them, the longer you enable the problematic behavior.

I kind of agree. However, it's quite clear now that masks have a significant impact on disease spread.
World-first study shows effectiveness of masks in preventing COVID transmission | Burnet Institute

Studies done in/on Australia are good because of our unique position, since we are effectively covid free (well, were until recently) and get well traced and audited epidemic outbreaks which can be well classified.

My position is that we are still dealing with a bunch of unknowns. We don't know what long term immunity looks like and we have no idea where this virus will go next. We do know that by the time we have detected something new it's already been bubbling around under the surface for weeks.

As such, rather than framing this in terms of vaccinated vs unvaccinated, or using phrases like "really small chance of", mask wearing ensures that if this virus goes off the rails, again, the impact will be less if we were masked up beforehand.

A weak analogy would be I don't wait seconds before a crash before reaching for my seatbelt.

-------
(from the article)
“We had a unique situation in Melbourne where masks were made mandatory as a single policy change, and compliance went from low use to very high use of masks in the community very rapidly,”

“What we saw was a significant 20-30 percent reduction in the effective reproduction rate that correlated with that policy, so it turned the epidemic around from case numbers that were increasing every day to a situation where we could see the numbers were getting back under control.”

 

[ThisIsMe123]

CDC updates guidance, recommends vaccinated people wear masks indoors in certain areas | CNN

I did the right thing during 2020, wore a mask and kept distance...

Did the right thing in 2021, got vaccinated...

This particular reversal in mask guidance? I'm not so sure...

Given the CDC directors comments and statements earlier, there seems to be a breakdown in the logic somewhere.

She openly acknowledged that the chance of contracting any serious level of disease when vaccinated is low... she also acknowledged that while it's still possible to transmit with an asymptomatic infection, it's less likely.

We know that the vaccine is widely available for anyone who wants to get one and there's no supply issues stopping anyone from getting vaccinated.

We know that infections in the age group that's not currently eligible are overwhelmingly mild or asymptomatic.

Given these pieces of info, wouldn't that mean that me going back to wearing a mask is solely for the benefit of anti-vaccine types who don't take it seriously and have no intention of getting vaccinated anyway?


Maybe we can come up with a new term for people like myself who have no interest in going back to masking for the benefit of people who've used words like "sheeple" to describe me for the last 18 months. Maybe "second wave anti-mask"? Sort of like the term "second wave feminist"?

Yep, that that talk Radio Show host "Valentine", who was on a ventilator only now acknowledges getting vaccinated.

Now, did he deserve to get the virus or choose to get infected by choosing not vaccinating?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

From a public health standpoint, that doesn't matter. Public health is about protecting human lives, even the lives of dumb or stubborn people.

You must be more kind-hearted than I am...

I'm about done protecting anti-vaxxers from their own poor decisions.

That's a contrived scenario. Nobody in the US really knows who else is and isn't vaccinated, for all practical purposes.

Furthermore, as the virus continues to evolve, the vaccines that we've taken will provide less and less protection against sickness. We're already seeing that happen, in fact. We're lucky the vaccines out there continue to protect against severe disease, but who knows how long that will last? This is no time for complacency.

Doesn't matter if I know who's vaccinated and who isn't. Anyone who isn't has had ample chance to do so and is actively refusing it for stupid reasons. (with the exception of very rare instances where someone has a legitimate medical reason for not doing so...but even then, it's the unvaccinated putting them in the most danger, and the anti-vaxxers aren't going to get vaccinated)

...but by continuing to modify our own behavior to protect them, aren't we just prolonging it (giving the virus more time to mutate)?

In a certain way (and it sounds bad), the delta variant could be the quicker path to herd immunity. If it rips through the unvaccinated adults, the ones who survive will get their immunity one way or the other.

As the Ohio Health Director said in an interview recently... "with the delta variant in play, your choices are going to be to get the vaccine, or get the virus". Basically "we can do this the easy way, or the hard way"


Make no mistake about it, regardless of what we do, the die-hard anti-vaxxers aren't going to get the vaccine. I'm convinced at this point they're not going to have a "Come to Jesus" moment where they see the error of their ways and get the shot. Their heels are dug in. If we go out of our way to shield them from delta, then we'll just have to do again for Lambda, and the next one, and the next one...

How long are we going to prolong this to protect people who don't even think it's real?

 

[Mark Quayle]

That's my basic premise...

I'm not going to go out of my way to protect people who both A) don't take the virus seriously, and B) have done nothing but mock us for taking it seriously.


It may be a poor analogy, but...

It'd be like making a family member's car payment for them when you know they have a gambling problem they have no intention of addressing.

The longer you cover for them, the longer you enable the problematic behavior.

Are you a proponent of Government extraction of money from the wealthy to pay for the effects of the bad habits of those who can't afford those effects?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Now, did he deserve to get the virus or choose to get infected by choosing not vaccinating?

At this point, it's definitely a choice.

It'd be like saying everyone has to only drive 5 MPH so that we don't accidentally hurt the person who has a conspiracy theory about how "seatbelts are just a tool for government control"

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Are you a proponent of Government extraction of money from the wealthy to pay for the effects of the bad habits of those who can't afford those effects?

No

 

[ThisIsMe123]

You must be more kind-hearted than I am...

I'm about done protecting anti-vaxxers from their own poor decisions.



Doesn't matter if I know who's vaccinated and who isn't. Anyone who isn't has had ample chance to do so and is actively refusing it for stupid reasons. (with the exception of very rare instances where someone has a legitimate medical reason for not doing so...but even then, it's the unvaccinated putting them in the most danger, and the anti-vaxxers aren't going to get vaccinated)

...but by continuing to modify our own behavior to protect them, aren't we just prolonging it (giving the virus more time to mutate)?

In a certain way (and it sounds bad), the delta variant could be the quicker path to herd immunity. If it rips through the unvaccinated adults, the ones who survive will get their immunity one way or the other.

As the Ohio Health Director said in an interview recently... "with the delta variant in play, your choices are going to be to get the vaccine, or get the virus". Basically "we can do this the easy way, or the hard way"


Make no mistake about it, regardless of what we do, the die-hard anti-vaxxers aren't going to get the vaccine. I'm convinced at this point they're not going to have a "Come to Jesus" moment where they see the error of their ways and get the shot. Their heels are dug in. If we go out of our way to shield them from delta, then we'll just have to do again for Lambda, and the next one, and the next one...

How long are we going to prolong this to protect people who don't even think it's real?

If you read between the lines. It's just survival of the fittest at this point. Natural selection.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

You aren't doing it to be nice to anti-vaxxers, per se. Nobody is asking you to sit around and sing Kumbaya with them, much less approve of their irresponsible behavior. I sure won't. You're doing it because one less person who is infected is one less person who can spread the disease and crowd our hospitals.

...but trying to protect them from their own bad choices isn't working.

If I as a vaccinated person wear a mask to try to protect an anti-vaxxer from the small chance of catching covid from me, when they're just going to go to a crowded house party or large indoor gathering an hour later (with other people who believe like them and are far more likely to give it to them than I am), what is it really accomplishing?

Like I mentioned in my reply to someone else. It's not pragmatic for the rest of us to drive 5 mph to try to protect the person who refuses to wear a seatbelt and plans on driving drunk.

 

[cow451]

Does no one find it the least bit incredible how blame for this virus has shifted FROM THE VIRUS to the unvaccinated?

The United States of America has officially become communist.

What a crock. The virus is behaving as it is programmed to do. It is using its resources. Humans refusing vaccines and resisting safety measures are not using their resources. Therefore accountability for the current surge is squarely on the unvaccinated.

 

[ThisIsMe123]

We got vaccinated so we wouldn't have to wear a mask.

 

[cow451]

This has been discussed by some medical experts for the past few weeks, like Dr. John Campbell, who has a Youtube channel I follow. Dr. Campbell is a British medical doctor that gives science-based analysis that is well supported.

A few weeks ago Dr. Campbell presented evidence from an Israeli study of the effectiveness of the mRNA vaccines against the Delta varient. He presented evidence that people who are vaccinated can still be carriers of the Delta variant, and that protection wanes somewhat after several months. The vaccine only reduced infection rates of the Delta variant by about 40 percent, though the vaccine remains effective against severe illness, hospitalization, and death.

Yes, unfortunately too many people aren’t capable of understanding that the vaccine is the single most powerful tool, but not the only to be used.

 

[FireDragon76]

You must be more kind-hearted than I am...

I'm about done protecting anti-vaxxers from their own poor decisions.



Doesn't matter if I know who's vaccinated and who isn't. Anyone who isn't has had ample chance to do so and is actively refusing it for stupid reasons. (with the exception of very rare instances where someone has a legitimate medical reason for not doing so...but even then, it's the unvaccinated putting them in the most danger, and the anti-vaxxers aren't going to get vaccinated)

...but by continuing to modify our own behavior to protect them, aren't we just prolonging it (giving the virus more time to mutate)?

In a certain way (and it sounds bad), the delta variant could be the quicker path to herd immunity. If it rips through the unvaccinated adults, the ones who survive will get their immunity one way or the other.

As the Ohio Health Director said in an interview recently... "with the delta variant in play, your choices are going to be to get the vaccine, or get the virus". Basically "we can do this the easy way, or the hard way"


Make no mistake about it, regardless of what we do, the die-hard anti-vaxxers aren't going to get the vaccine. I'm convinced at this point they're not going to have a "Come to Jesus" moment where they see the error of their ways and get the shot. Their heels are dug in. If we go out of our way to shield them from delta, then we'll just have to do again for Lambda, and the next one, and the next one...

How long are we going to prolong this to protect people who don't even think it's real?

I don't think die-hard anti-vaxxers are nearly as big as you presume. Once more employers start requiring vaccinations or regular testing, you're going to see people grudgingly accept it, for the most part. Especially if the FDA moves to fully approve the vaccines.

 

[cow451]

Other viruses exist. Why catch a cold when you do not need to?

It’s just a cold and why should I let anyone tell me what to do with my nasal passages?!?!? It’s communism, socialism, Antifa and BLM that are turning America into a dictatorship run by Liberals and AOC. And immigrants!

 

[cow451]

Blame for the virus was put on Trump. It is now put on the unvaccinated, who are seen as Trump supporters. So no real change in blame.

“EX President Trump” to you. He blamed CHY-na, so the natural progression has taken place since he was unceremoniously removed from power.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Does no one find it the least bit incredible how blame for this virus has shifted FROM THE VIRUS to the unvaccinated?

...simple, because we don't blame non-sentient organisms on matters of intent.

This isn't a new concept.

When someone drives drunk, we blame the driver, not the beer.

The United States of America has officially become communist.

Explain to me, in detail, how a virus response relates to a centrally planned economy with a sweeping public sector and compulsory participation in public sector vocations...

I'll wait...

 

[sfs]

At this point, it's definitely a choice.

It's not a choice for someone who's being treated for cancer or for an autoimmune disease or has a compromised immune system for other reasons. If you're fully vaccinated, you can very definitely become infected anyway, and with the delta variant there is a good chance you will have a high viral load and be infectious and give it to one of those people.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I don't think die-hard anti-vaxxers are nearly as big as you presume. Once more employers start requiring vaccinations or regular testing, you're going to see people grudgingly accept it, for the most part. Especially if the FDA moves to fully approve the vaccines.

Maybe you're right, but I have my doubts...

For people who have shown so much distrust in scientific institutions like the FDA, I'm skeptical that an organization, that they think is "in on the conspiracy", giving the vaccine a higher level of approval is going to suddenly change their minds.