Vaccine

watfly said:
And that is the great myth that is unfortunately driving policy. You can't get ahead of the infections, you can't eliminate the virus, you can only hope to mitigate it. The cost in trying to eliminate the virus far outweighs any benefit (see lockdowns). Blanket policies that throw the healthy in with the sick, diminish the sicks's responsibility for the transmission. Studies have shown that asymptomatics only contribute to 17% to transmissions. Do you really want the sick that are spreading 83% of the cases thinking masks provide significant protection? 100% no, and the sick teacher spreading it to her students is Exhibit A. How much promotion of condoms would we see if they only filtered out 50% of guys' little swimmers? Let's be brutally honest about masks, and for F' sakes stop mandating them for children.
Click to expand...
I take it you're done complaining about the lack of message clarity, and have returned to your main job of obfuscating the message.

The message is not simply "stay home if you are sick". The school districts already put out that message. They even give us checklists and have us mark the checklist every morning: "Time for school. Come on, kids. Get zapped."

Guess what? Some fraction of symptomatic people go to school anyway. They think it is a cold, or allergies. Or they never noticed the fever, because they forgot to take their temperature. And there they are in a room with 18 to 30 other people. Maybe they shouldn't be there, but they are.

And, if you have your way, they are also unvaccinated and unmasked.
 
dad4 said:
I take it you're done complaining about the lack of message clarity, and have returned to your main job of obfuscating the message.

The message is not simply "stay home if you are sick". The school districts already put out that message. They even give us checklists and have us mark the checklist every morning: "Time for school. Come on, kids. Get zapped."

Guess what? Some fraction of symptomatic people go to school anyway. They think it is a cold, or allergies. Or they never noticed the fever, because they forgot to take their temperature. And there they are in a room with 18 to 30 other people. Maybe they shouldn't be there, but they are.

And, if you have your way, they are also unvaccinated and unmasked.
Click to expand...
...and then what?
 
met61 said:
...and then what?
Click to expand...
Better question is "what will you do when we don't"?

I don't see much evidence that Delta can spread within a masked vaccinated population. The Martha's Vineyard experiment seems to say "no".

That is not, of course, the population we have.
 
dad4 said:
I take it you're done complaining about the lack of message clarity, and have returned to your main job of obfuscating the message.

The message is not simply "stay home if you are sick". The school districts already put out that message. They even give us checklists and have us mark the checklist every morning: "Time for school. Come on, kids. Get zapped."

Guess what? Some fraction of symptomatic people go to school anyway. They think it is a cold, or allergies. Or they never noticed the fever, because they forgot to take their temperature. And there they are in a room with 18 to 30 other people. Maybe they shouldn't be there, but they are.

And, if you have your way, they are also unvaccinated and unmasked.
Click to expand...
How'd did those masks work for the children in that teacher's class? I'm not anti-mask for children, I'm anti mask mandates for children, I'm pro-choice and pro-truth about masks (aka they provide limited protection against the virus). I'm very pro-vaccine and pro-natural immunity, as natural immunity provides significantly better immunity than vaccination.

There are many ways to tackle the pandemic besides masks and vaccines, but we have to be rational about the fact we can't stop the virus. Our goals have to be rational and reasonable, and have to go beyond myopic thinking by including cost/benefit/risk analysis. Btw there is nothing rational about making unvaccinated kids get tested twice a week to play outdoors sports. Which means every kid under 12. Insanity.
 
dad4 said:
Better question is "what will you do when we don't"?

I don't see much evidence that Delta can spread within a masked vaccinated population. The Martha's Vineyard experiment seems to say "no".

That is not, of course, the population we have.
Click to expand...
Israel Hawaii and Iceland beg to disagree. You’ll explain those away no doubt. But we have the great experiment underway: Canada with some provinces with very high vaccination and as of a week ago almost all have mask mandates back in place, while they are also no moving into season.
 
watfly said:
How'd did those masks work for the children in that teacher's class? I'm not anti-mask for children, I'm anti mask mandates for children, I'm pro-choice and pro-truth about masks (aka they provide limited protection against the virus). I'm very pro-vaccine and pro-natural immunity, as natural immunity provides significantly better immunity than vaccination.

There are many ways to tackle the pandemic besides masks and vaccines, but we have to be rational about the fact we can't stop the virus. Our goals have to be rational and reasonable, and have to go beyond myopic thinking by including cost/benefit/risk analysis. Btw there is nothing rational about making unvaccinated kids get tested twice a week to play outdoors sports. Which means every kid under 12. Insanity.
Click to expand...
The children in masks were less likely to spread the virus to other people. As advertised.

What did you think the masks were for? They are source control, not PPE.

If you look at the class map, it's a clear explanation for why moderate distance is not a substitute for masking. The nine kids closest to the teacher all got it. Neither 3 nor 6 feet was protective.
 
dad4 said:
The children in masks were less likely to spread the virus to other people. As advertised.

What did you think the masks were for? They are source control, not PPE.

If you look at the class map, it's a clear explanation for why moderate distance is not a substitute for masking. The nine kids closest to the teacher all got it. Neither 3 nor 6 feet was protective.
Click to expand...
"The nine kids closest to the teacher all got it."

... resulting in what?
 
dad4 said:
What did you think the masks were for? They are source control, not PPE.
Click to expand...
You know full well that they are promoted as both.

Let me ask you a question...is it misinformation to say that masks provide limited protection from the virus?
 
watfly said:
How'd did those masks work for the children in that teacher's class? I'm not anti-mask for children, I'm anti mask mandates for children, I'm pro-choice and pro-truth about masks (aka they provide limited protection against the virus). I'm very pro-vaccine and pro-natural immunity, as natural immunity provides significantly better immunity than vaccination.

There are many ways to tackle the pandemic besides masks and vaccines, but we have to be rational about the fact we can't stop the virus. Our goals have to be rational and reasonable, and have to go beyond myopic thinking by including cost/benefit/risk analysis. Btw there is nothing rational about making unvaccinated kids get tested twice a week to play outdoors sports. Which means every kid under 12. Insanity.
Click to expand...

Acquiring natural immunity means passing through the risks of severe symptoms, hospitalization, and death.

I'll take the less effective vaccine, thank you.
 
Grace T. said:
Israel Hawaii and Iceland beg to disagree. You’ll explain those away no doubt. But we have the great experiment underway: Canada with some provinces with very high vaccination and as of a week ago almost all have mask mandates back in place, while they are also no moving into season.
Click to expand...
You're using Hawaii as an example of a highly vaccinated population?

Check your data. Last time we talked HI, they were barely over the US average.

If you can name a place with an enforced, or at least well observed, mask mandate and over 90% adult vax rate, let's look at their numbers. I bet it would be low. We could also look at anywhere with a 70% adult vax rate and significant past cases.
 
watfly said:
You know full well that they are promoted as both.

Let me ask you a question...is it misinformation to say that masks provide limited protection from the virus?
Click to expand...
I would call that misinformation. The mask provides significant protection against spreading the virus.

Saying " limited protection from the virus" is similar to saying that seat belts don't prevent car crashes. You've choosen a wording which deliberately misses the point.
 
dad4 said:
You're using Hawaii as an example of a highly vaccinated population?

Check your data. Last time we talked HI, they were barely over the US average.

If you can name a place with an enforced, or at least well observed, mask mandate and over 90% adult vax rate, let's look at their numbers. I bet it would be low. We could also look at anywhere with a 70% adult vax rate and significant past cases.
Click to expand...
dad4 said:
You're using Hawaii as an example of a highly vaccinated population?

Check your data. Last time we talked HI, they were barely over the US average.

If you can name a place with an enforced, or at least well observed, mask mandate and over 90% adult vax rate, let's look at their numbers. I bet it would be low. We could also look at anywhere with a 70% adult vax rate and significant past cases.
Click to expand...
*PRESTO!* You rule the world:

1. What is your goal...no one gets it? or what % getting it is acceptable?

2. At what cost?
 
dad4 said:
And bringing it home to their families. The kids were an infection vector to other parts of the community. You forgot that part.
Click to expand...

In the same report were noted other infections in the same school in different classrooms. One case was a cluster of three who had spent a night together at a sleepover (presumably unmasked and at close distance). No other students in that masked classroom were affected. Since the researchers were testing all the students to track the course of the infection, they found 4 other students in separate classrooms who tested positive, but none of their classmates did. That is strong evidence (not an anecdote) that masking students in school situations reduces the risk of transmission.
 
dad4 said:
I would call that misinformation. The mask provides significant protection against spreading the virus.

Saying " limited protection from the virus" is similar to saying that seat belts don't prevent car crashes. You've choosen a wording which deliberately misses the point.
Click to expand...
That analogy isn't remotely comparable.

That teacher thought the same thing you did that it provided significant protection, which is patently false. You're only encouraging the infected to go out in public which is insanity.

Please note that the 79% effectiveness of masks you quote was only for those that wore masks prior to showing symptoms. Symptomatics are a much different equation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top