Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Government Response To The Coronavirus


James Daulton

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Awesome!

Thanks!  It was!   Headed to Madison WI tomorrow, and then Minneapolis two weeks later.  Maybe even Kansas City at some point.   This is how cooped up I've been the past year --- Kansas City sounds exciting and sexy.   

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Thanks!  It was!   Headed to Madison WI tomorrow, and then Minneapolis two weeks later.  Maybe even Kansas City at some point.   This is how cooped up I've been the past year --- Kansas City sounds exciting and sexy.   

Never been.   Id go for the BBQ.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, John123 said:

Fauci admitting he hasn't been truthful about mask wearing, again because he didn't want to give "mixed signals."  This guy truly believes it's ok to lie:

https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1394614545151414276

In the content of the tweet linked, Fauci didn't lie at all.

Fauci wearing a mask while vaccinated didn't mean "I am in danger and must remain masked -- and so should you". He explicitly says that he was instead wearing a mask to avoid giving mixed signals to the public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Doug B said:

In the content of the tweet linked, Fauci didn't lie at all.

Fauci wearing a mask while vaccinated didn't mean "I am in danger and must remain masked -- and so should you". He explicitly says that he was instead wearing a mask to avoid giving mixed signals to the public.

I love the pretzel logic some of you go through to defend things.  Here he is in front of congress saying the exact opposite:

https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1372568301084286977

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the states truly followed the science consistently. Maybe there’s an outlier but red states went with emotions over science and blue states used science when it was convenient.

Part of the problem is the ‘science’ has been hard to follow. In an ideal world the science can be put out there unfiltered and policies can follow them. But we don’t. Instead we need to delay mask recommendations to prevent making a mask shortage worse. And have to wait to update mask recommendations to try and make sure enough people get vaccinated first.

If they had announced in March that you could ditch the mask in public once you’re fully vaccinated, how do you think our vaccination rates would be? In a perfect world that would have driven everyone to go get vaccinated but it reality it would have driven people to stop taking precautions knowing that nobody is going to ask for proof of vaccination. Human nature has killed ‘science’.

I think some states and communities did a good job of using community spread data to dictate openings, etc but most that did were too aggressive and led to pushback. I would have liked to see vaccinate rates worked into those calculations. Some states did it but needed to be more aggressive. We should have been nearly phased out by now based on vaccination rates. It shouldn’t have been a switch flipped from masks everywhere to masks nowhere.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, John123 said:

I love the pretzel logic some of you go through to defend things.  Here he is in front of congress saying the exact opposite:

https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1372568301084286977

Keep in mind that this was a mid-March 2021 hearing.

Rand Paul went off the rails a bit around the 5:50 mark of the linked video, talking about "... the nanny state's going to be there for three more years, and you've got to wear a mask forever" and "there's no science behind this." Paul continues: "If you already have immunity, you wearing a mask to give comfort to others. You're not wearing a mask because of any science."

Fauci THEN responds "I totally disagree with you."

Dr. Fauci -- just moments earlier -- invoked the contemporary understanding of the risk of variants and thus reasonably defended his decision to continue masking. In addition to that, Fauci's words expressed disagreement about the "nanny state" and "masks forever" quips.

And yes, seven more weeks of data collection since that March hearing did, in fact, make enough of a difference for the CDC to change guidance and for Fauci to get on board. Not that there wasn't any human factor involved in the changed guidance.

All that said ... of course he was wearing the masks back then to serve as an example. I don't think that was ever in doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Doug B said:

Keep in mind that this was a mid-March 2021 hearing.

Rand Paul went off the rails a bit around the 5:50 mark of the linked video, talking about "... the nanny state's going to be there for three more years, and you've got to wear a mask forever" and "there's no science behind this." Paul continues: "If you already have immunity, you wearing a mask to give comfort to others. You're not wearing a mask because of any science."

Fauci THEN responds "I totally disagree with you."

Dr. Fauci -- just moments earlier -- invoked the contemporary understanding of the risk of variants and thus reasonably defended his decision to continue masking. In addition to that, Fauci's words expressed disagreement about the "nanny state" and "masks forever" quips.

And yes, seven more weeks of data collection since that March hearing did, in fact, make enough of a difference for the CDC to change guidance and for Fauci to get on board. Not that there wasn't any human factor involved in the changed guidance.

All that said ... of course he was wearing the masks back then to serve as an example. I don't think that was ever in doubt.

Paul gave Fauci the opportunity to support his assertion about variants.  He gave Fauci FACTS regarding that and Fauci did not dispute them.  He just kept giving hypotheticals.  And, now, with his most recent admission, he acknowledges he's at "very low risk" of getting Covid since he's vaccinated, and that he wore a mask to avoid sending "mixed signals."  He just loves to lie to us in our own "best interests."  Sorry, I find it pretty disgusting.  That's not his job.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, HellToupee said:

He loves yapping in front of a mic. 

Yeah- he really played the long game perfectly.  Spent decades of service out of the limelight just waiting for a pandemic to make him a star at age 80.  Good call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Yeah- he really played the long game perfectly.  Spent decades of service out of the limelight just waiting for a pandemic to make him a star at age 80.  Good call.

Eh, he was a star in the late 80s / early 90s with the AIDS epidemic. 

Edited by The Z Machine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Fauci creating more confusion again:

https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-am-7b43e22d-0749-4880-984d-f36a14771bce.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top

And, to be clear, here is the current CDC guidance for vaccinated people:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html

Gee, I wonder why vaccinated people would misinterpret the above guidance to mean that they can stop wearing a mask. 

:wall:

Edited by John123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John123 said:

Fauci creating more confusion again:

https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-am-7b43e22d-0749-4880-984d-f36a14771bce.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top

And, to be clear, here is the current CDC guidance for vaccinated people:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html

Gee, I wonder why vaccinated people would misinterpret the above guidance to mean that they can stop wearing a mask. 

:wall:

Huh? He said removal of masks is for vaccinated not unvaccinated. What's so confusing?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John123 said:

Fauci creating more confusion again:

https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-am-7b43e22d-0749-4880-984d-f36a14771bce.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top

And, to be clear, here is the current CDC guidance for vaccinated people:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html

Gee, I wonder why vaccinated people would misinterpret the above guidance to mean that they can stop wearing a mask. 

Reading both links ... Fauci explicitly agrees that vaccinated people can stop wearing masks. What did he say to AXIOS that caused confusion? Do you meant this part specifically -- because it is right in line with the CDC's new guidance:

Quote

"I think people are misinterpreting, thinking that this is a removal of a mask mandate for everyone. It's not," Fauci told me. "It's an assurance to those who are vaccinated that they can feel safe, be they outdoors or indoors."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone (governments, stores, etc.) is being beyond foolish with the idea that unvaccinated people can stop wearing masks but we'll use the honor system.  The Venn diagram of people who don't want to wear masks because "muh freedom", people who will refuse vaccinations, and people who lie about having been vaccinated to avoid wearing masks is almost a perfect overlap.  You might as well just announce no one needs to wear a mask or get vaccinated.  Businesses following this policy will lose my business and politicians following this policy will lose my vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Everyone (governments, stores, etc.) is being beyond foolish with the idea that unvaccinated people can stop wearing masks but we'll use the honor system.  The Venn diagram of people who don't want to wear masks because "muh freedom", people who will refuse vaccinations, and people who lie about having been vaccinated to avoid wearing masks is almost a perfect overlap.  You might as well just announce no one needs to wear a mask or get vaccinated.  Businesses following this policy will lose my business and politicians following this policy will lose my vote.

At this point, though, I just don't care whether unvaccinated people wear masks or not.  They're a threat to themselves, not me or my family.  Don't want to get vaccinated and don't want to wear a mask?  What do I care?  You do you and I'll mind my own business.

"Mind your own business" is not a lifestyle that has a lot of support these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

At this point, though, I just don't care whether unvaccinated people wear masks or not.  They're a threat to themselves, not me or my family.  Don't want to get vaccinated and don't want to wear a mask?  What do I care?  You do you and I'll mind my own business.

"Mind your own business" is not a lifestyle that has a lot of support these days.

The bolded is 100% false.  Vaccinations prevent spread.  Masks prevent spread.  These facts are not debatable.  Spread increases the chance for mutations, some of which will become more likely to be able to bypass the vaccines.  Ergo, increasing spread = increased risk for me.  Ergo, decreasing spread (masks + vaccines) = decreased risk for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

The bolded is 100% false.  Vaccinations prevent spread.  Masks prevent spread.  These facts are not debatable.  Spread increases the chance for mutations, some of which will become more likely to be able to bypass the vaccines.  Ergo, increasing spread = increased risk for me.  Ergo, decreasing spread (masks + vaccines) = decreased risk for me.

Until that risk is quantified I'm gonna act like it doesn't exist.  There have already been countless mutations and to this point no proof that the vaccines don't work against them.  I'm not chasing ghosts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rich Conway said:

The bolded is 100% false.  Vaccinations prevent spread.  Masks prevent spread.  These facts are not debatable.  Spread increases the chance for mutations, some of which will become more likely to be able to bypass the vaccines.  Ergo, increasing spread = increased risk for me.  Ergo, decreasing spread (masks + vaccines) = decreased risk for me.

If you're sincerely worried about the so-far theoretical risk of vaccine-resistant mutation, you should be infinitely more worried about the massive reservoir of unvaccinated people who are going to be with us for the next several years in the developing world.  The relatively small pocket of unvaccinated folks in the US is unlikely to create any problems that weren't inevitable in the first place.

But that's not what this is really about.  It's about "Unvaccinated people are making a bad decision and therefore must be punished somehow."  I'm not on board with that.  Just mind your own business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going around harassing people about wearing masks -- either because they're unmasked and you think they should be masked, or if they're masked and you think they should be unmasked -- you are the bad guy in this narrative.  Mind. Your. Own. Business.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

If you're sincerely worried about the so-far theoretical risk of vaccine-resistant mutation, you should be infinitely more worried about the massive reservoir of unvaccinated people who are going to be with us for the next several years in the developing world.  The relatively small pocket of unvaccinated folks in the US is unlikely to create any problems that weren't inevitable in the first place.

But that's not what this is really about.  It's about "Unvaccinated people are making a bad decision and therefore must be punished somehow."  I'm not on board with that.  Just mind your own business.

I'm not harassing or punishing anyone.  I'm suggesting exactly what I wrote above.  Those making decisions that "vaccinated people can go maskless but we won't ask for proof" are making stupid decisions and I will refuse to support them with my dollars or votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A policy of "Vaccinated people don't have to wear masks.  Unvaccinated people do have to wear masks.  There will be no efforts made to discern whether maskless people have been vaccinated." is a guarantee that unvaccinated people will choose to go maskless.  To say otherwise ignores human nature and what that particular group of people have repeatedly shown us over the last 14 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

I'm not harassing or punishing anyone.  I'm suggesting exactly what I wrote above.  Those making decisions that "vaccinated people can go maskless but we won't ask for proof" are making stupid decisions and I will refuse to support them with my dollars or votes.

We should revisit this topic after independence day or so, when nobody is enforcing any of this stuff because we've all come to our senses.  I'll bet you'll be right there with the rest of us.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, John123 said:

Until that risk is quantified I'm gonna act like it doesn't exist.  There have already been countless mutations and to this point no proof that the vaccines don't work against them.  I'm not chasing ghosts.

There are lots of risks which you can't quantify, yet I'd be willing to bet you don't pretend they don't exist.  Why the different approach here?  Dare I suggest it's due to political biases?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

There are lots of risks which you can't quantify, yet I'd be willing to bet you don't pretend they don't exist.  Why the different approach here?  Dare I suggest it's due to political biases?

You can suggest anything you want I guess, but it doesn't make it true.  Feel free to offer examples instead of speaking in generalities.  But we have scientists doing research on this virus 24/7 for over a year.  Everything I've heard them say is that they have not seen any Covid variant that the viruses don't work against.  And it's not like there haven't been hundreds if not thousands of variants.

Life has risks.  I don't avoid walking across the street simply due to the small chance a car I didn't see will hit me.  It's a risk I'm willing to take. 

For the record, I've had one Pfizer shot with the second coming this Sunday.  And I will wear a mask in public for two weeks after getting that shot. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

I'm not harassing or punishing anyone.  I'm suggesting exactly what I wrote above.  Those making decisions that "vaccinated people can go maskless but we won't ask for proof" are making stupid decisions and I will refuse to support them with my dollars or votes.

Show us your papers!!!  Eh, comrade?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Everyone (governments, stores, etc.) is being beyond foolish with the idea that unvaccinated people can stop wearing masks but we'll use the honor system.  The Venn diagram of people who don't want to wear masks because "muh freedom", people who will refuse vaccinations, and people who lie about having been vaccinated to avoid wearing masks is almost a perfect overlap.  You might as well just announce no one needs to wear a mask or get vaccinated.  Businesses following this policy will lose my business and politicians following this policy will lose my vote.

I think it’s quite clear that no one has the expectation of the ‘honor system’ being followed. I believe we reached the point where the CDC believes enough people have been vaccinated that allowing everyone to go maskless won’t cause a significant uptick in cases.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Well, technically you should get vaccinated and then mind your own business.  The vaccine is your ticket to live your life how you want and also a license to stop looking over your neighbor's shoulder.

Tell that to my 8 year olds.  Those people that are lying about their vaccination status or simply not following guidelines are putting my family at risk.  Might not affect your family, but it certainly affects lots of families.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, John123 said:

Show us your papers!!!  Eh, comrade?

Stop.  This is beyond stupid.  You need to show ID to buy alcohol.  You need to show ID to board a flight.  You need to obtain a driver's license to drive a car.  None of those things make us the Soviet Union.  Stores would be well within their rights to require a vaccine card or a mask and you know it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, John123 said:

You can suggest anything you want I guess, but it doesn't make it true.  Feel free to offer examples instead of speaking in generalities.  But we have scientists doing research on this virus 24/7 for over a year.  Everything I've heard them say is that they have not seen any Covid variant that the viruses don't work against.  And it's not like there haven't been hundreds if not thousands of variants.

Life has risks.  I don't avoid walking across the street simply due to the small chance a car I didn't see will hit me.  It's a risk I'm willing to take. 

For the record, I've had one Pfizer shot with the second coming this Sunday.  And I will wear a mask in public for two weeks after getting that shot. 

 

But you do look both ways before crossing, I imagine?  You don't simply pretend the risk doesn't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

I think it’s quite clear that no one has the expectation of the ‘honor system’ being followed. I believe we reached the point where the CDC believes enough people have been vaccinated that allowing everyone to go maskless won’t cause a significant uptick in cases.

No one has said this out loud publicly ... but I wonder if the CDC looked at COVID case data from Texas, Florida, and Georgia since around March 1 and drew their own conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Stop.  This is beyond stupid.  You need to show ID to buy alcohol.  You need to show ID to board a flight.  You need to obtain a driver's license to drive a car.  None of those things make us the Soviet Union.  Stores would be well within their rights to require a vaccine card or a mask and you know it.

Meh...Not sure I agree with that.  And do we stop at only covid?  Why don't we have vaccination cards for EVERYTHING.  Measles, mumps, polio, etc.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Everyone (governments, stores, etc.) is being beyond foolish with the idea that unvaccinated people can stop wearing masks but we'll use the honor system.  The Venn diagram of people who don't want to wear masks because "muh freedom", people who will refuse vaccinations, and people who lie about having been vaccinated to avoid wearing masks is almost a perfect overlap.  You might as well just announce no one needs to wear a mask or get vaccinated.  Businesses following this policy will lose my business and politicians following this policy will lose my vote.

Why? If you are vaccinated WHO CARES?

Im the opposite. If a store enforces masks vs another store does not I am choosing the store WITHOUT the masks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:

Tell that to my 8 year olds.  Those people that are lying about their vaccination status or simply not following guidelines are putting my family at risk.  Might not affect your family, but it certainly affects lots of families.

Your 8 year olds were never at serious risk from covid-19, and they'll all be back in school this fall if they weren't already this spring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rich Conway said:

Stop.  This is beyond stupid.  You need to show ID to buy alcohol.  You need to show ID to board a flight.  You need to obtain a driver's license to drive a car.  None of those things make us the Soviet Union.  Stores would be well within their rights to require a vaccine card or a mask and you know it.

What's your stance on voter ID?  I'm not engaging with you with regards to the above activities because we're talking about basic liberty versus individual activities.  If you really want to do that I guess we can but it will be a give and take and probably dominate and derail this thread.  I don't see the value in that but to say that I think you're making ridiculous comparisons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

But you do look both ways before crossing, I imagine?  You don't simply pretend the risk doesn't exist.

Of course.  And then I take the risk.  You're welcome to stay home if you don't want to be exposed to people who aren't vaccinated, especially if you are vaccinated.  I think you're being unreasonable but that's your deal.  Do what makes you comfortable.  I'm comfortable being around others if I'm vaccinated, regardless of their vaccination status.  It's when you start asking others to make unreasonable concessions that I have a problem.

I also want to point out a fact that doesn't get spoken about any more.  As a general rule, you have to be exposed to the virus for 15 minutes in close quarters to get the disease.  You don't get Covid by walking by someone on an aisle in the grocery store.  This isn't something where if you get a whiff of it you're done.  It's very contagious, but not THAT contagious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2021 at 11:07 AM, Doug B said:

In the content of the tweet linked, Fauci didn't lie at all.

Fauci wearing a mask while vaccinated didn't mean "I am in danger and must remain masked -- and so should you". He explicitly says that he was instead wearing a mask to avoid giving mixed signals to the public.

What messgae does wearing a mask send if not that people should be wearing masks?  And why should people wear masks if not that there is danger?  

Mixed signals everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Your 8 year olds were never at serious risk from covid-19, and they'll all be back in school this fall if they weren't already this spring.

I don't think that's 100% settled, what with the long COVID stuff going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:

Tell that to my 8 year olds.  Those people that are lying about their vaccination status or simply not following guidelines are putting my family at risk.  Might not affect your family, but it certainly affects lots of families.

Covid is like a cold for kids. People need to stop worrying about the impact to children. Seriously. How much data and science do we need?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jobarules said:

Covid is like a cold for kids. People need to stop worrying about the impact to children. Seriously. How much data and science do we need?

Ok, Dr. Joba.

Quick googling leads to this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927578/.  Emphasis mine.

"Children seem to be fairly well-protected from the most severe symptoms of covid-19. According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, the majority of children don't develop symptoms when infected with the coronavirus, or their symptoms are very mild.

However, it is becoming increasingly apparent that a large number of children with symptomatic and asymptomatic covid-19 are experiencing long-term effects, many months after the initial infection."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its amazing how people screamed "FOLLOW THE SCIENCE" all year until the science tells them something they don't agree with and all of a sudden they disagree with the science.

The science says fully vaccinated people can go about their lives like normal. The science also says that COVID is barely a risk for children. Im not saying its 100% but Im comfortable with 99.99% risk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Z Machine said:

Ok, Dr. Joba.

Quick googling leads to this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927578/.  Emphasis mine.

"Children seem to be fairly well-protected from the most severe symptoms of covid-19. According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, the majority of children don't develop symptoms when infected with the coronavirus, or their symptoms are very mild.

However, it is becoming increasingly apparent that a large number of children with symptomatic and asymptomatic covid-19 are experiencing long-term effects, many months after the initial infection."

So you have the choice to keep them protected right?  Wear the masks if you want, don't join in the crowds?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:

I don't think that's 100% settled, what with the long COVID stuff going on.

How long are you going to wait for it to be "settled"?  2 years, 5 years, 10 years?

 

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, matuski said:

So you have the choice to keep them protected right?  Wear the masks if you want, don't join in the crowds?

Sure, but we can also help keep kids safe by being more insistent on having the non-vaccinated continue to mask up and social distance.  People that lie about their vaccination status and refuse to mask should be sanctioned in some way as they can potentially harm children.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, matuski said:

How long are you going to wait for it to be "settled"?  2 years, 5 years, 10 years?

 

I think insufficient research has been done on long COVID in children, which seems to be the greatest risk for that group since their acute illness rates are low.

Here's another quote from this website: https://theconversation.com/long-covid-in-children-what-parents-and-teachers-need-to-know-156185

"The Office for National Statistics estimates that around 13%-15% of children with COVID-19 have symptoms that last for more than five weeks. In Italy, a recent preprint (an early piece of research yet to be reviewed by other scientists) suggests that more than half of children with COVID-19 have at least one persisting symptom over 17 weeks after being diagnosed. Among them, 43% reported being impaired by their symptoms during daily activities."

That doesn't sound like a common cold to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...