So you are a Scientologist?
Vaccine
- Thread starter Multi Sport
- Start date
So you are a Scientologist?
Reuters says "The memo did not give a reason for Gruber’s or Krause’s departures."
So did you just make up the political points? Or are you believing someone else?
So you’re sticking with the brief ‘maskless’ interaction which by itself wouldn’t even qualify as a close-contact by CDC definition as the causal element in this situation?
Seriously? Occam would like to remind you that entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.
funny
Granted.
But here's how far down the rabbit hole you are. I don't even remember which post you are talking about nor do I really care (the system doesn't allow you to upvote parts and downvote others of a post). But you are monitoring who is giving thumbs up to who. Here's another little tid bit to blow your mind: who are your most vehement supporters? How do you feel about the company you keep?
There is no concrete evidence of multi universes. There are proposed solutions to Einstein's general relativity theory attempting to explain the singularities in the interior of black holes that can be solved in ways consistent with a multi-universe result, but there multiple other solutions to those equations that do not depend on that fiction.
Dr. R. P. Feynman made his reputation by "solving" some of the quantum mechanics equations that appeared to have infinite singularities simply by substituting for those singularities the known measured values of physical objects and effects where it seemed to be appropriate. To the best of my knowledge, no one has made a similar concrete case for multiple universes.
However, that doesn't stop Hollywood moviemakers, thus my question about Scientology.
“the causal element”? Why would I assume that the explanations are mutually exclusive? Simpler to say that the unmasked story time added risk, and being indoors with other people also added risk.
Delta is more transmissible. A 20 minute unmasked storytime seems plenty long to transmit covid. 7 hours masked in a ventilated room also seems plenty long to transmit covid. One does not preclude the other. She should not have gone to work with allergies AND she should not have taken off her mask.
Yes, the problem is that many do claim the higher ground which is causing problems all over the world (I find it incredibly ironic that any do). Religion in Afghanistan is much more compelling to the Afghans (actually the whole middle east) than Westernization. Our government seems to have trouble understanding that principle.
Desert Hound
DA
The following chart shows you how far from reality we have moved.
The understanding of actual risk is not there for a substantial portion of our population.
Note the risk of dying from various disease vs covid. Then note that we all the rest we live and don't even bat an eye.
Our press/politicians have taken covid out of context so to speak and are creating policies that do not line up with actual risk.
Look at the various outcomes we don't bat an eye with. Then look where covid ranks.
So many people detached from reality.
The understanding of actual risk is not there for a substantial portion of our population.
Note the risk of dying from various disease vs covid. Then note that we all the rest we live and don't even bat an eye.
Our press/politicians have taken covid out of context so to speak and are creating policies that do not line up with actual risk.
Look at the various outcomes we don't bat an eye with. Then look where covid ranks.
So many people detached from reality.
It's not going to solve the problem, but I think its better messaging than what we currently have. Can I get you to buy-in on the second part, if I changed it to "Don't assume that a mask will protect others if you're sick".
While I like this chart, I suspect these are lifetime odds which may overstate the current risks of many of the causes and understate the risks from Covid (relatively speaking); although the risks of Covid are still very small, and nearly non-existent for many age groups.
The risks of getting hit by lightning are nearly zero; however, if I'm out in a lightning storm my odds increase dramatically (relatively speaking). My lifetime risks of getting hospitalized by Covid are infinitesimal, but are relatively higher during a Covid pandemic. The risk of cancer is effectively always out there our entire lifetime.
It would be more appropriate to look at the current risk on a annual basis. I eyeballed that a number of months ago, and overall Covid was in the top ten. If you broke it down by age group it would plummet down the list as you looked at the younger age groups.
I obviously agree with you 100% in principle, I just think the chart is a little misleading.
Desert Hound
DA
Yes they are lifetime odds.
Desert Hound
DA
Well most people have no risk of covid.
But the point remains. If covid currently is in the top 10 ...we still easily live life with the other 9. In other words we accept the risk and move on. We make no attempt to micromanage people's lives. And we certainly do not do so with younger age groups.
what-happened
GOLD
They know. They see opposition to western ideology as profit. Nothing makes more money than intervention.
The “if you’re sick” clause gives me a ton of wiggle room to lie to myself about what exactly my runny nose means.
And “don’t assume that a mask will protect others” openly discourages a useful public health measure.
What you have created is a chimera of two bad public health messages.
what-happened
GOLD
Let the speculation begin.
Grace already started (or copied someone else's speculation).
The rumors circulating around the twitterverse is that they got tired of being pushed around by the white house/CDC/Fauci....the white house getting ahead of the booster thing was the last straw coming after 2 presidents playing ping pong with the FDA. Again, totally unconfirmed rumors..worth as much.
This is also making its way around the twitterverse
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
This is one of the larger consequences, and, almost certainly, intents, of the infodemic. To create an information space where there is no rational way to arbitrate one statement or position from another. At that point, any data driven assessment or quantitative metric can be used as just another weapon in a political dynamic that amplifies division, chips away common ground. For example, in the 1918 flu pandemic masks had their vocal proponents and opponents, just like today. But those positions weren't as overtly political as they are now. So why the difference? Disinformation is probably as old as warfare. But the new tools offer new means of execution. Research link => over-simplistic summary without context, a snippet, a fragment => policy statement => diametrically opposed political positions. My link against your link. Sound familiar? Likely just a warm up. Media mouthpiece R puts up one election map, media mouthpiece D puts up a different one. Who's to say which one is right and which one is wrong?
Well there is nothing we can do about the first line. There is no guarantee that people follow messaging whether it's my preferred messaging or yours. So that's not a valid criticism, just reality regardless of the protocols.
Your second line is pure overselling of masks. Which is more effective at preventing the spread, telling everyone sick and healthy that masks provide significant protection, or telling sick people not to assume masks will prevent you from transmitting the virus? Obviously its the latter. Blanket approaches obscure the problem which is sick people spreading the virus.
Your third line would require me to look up the exact meaning of chimera, so I'm going to abstain from providing an opinion.