Now the counter-idiocy of the left that is just as bad as anti-vaxxers

[UCFBS]

So, I'm one of those people who have read a lot of journals and studies and believe even those vaccinated, just like those not infected or asymptomatic, just like pets, can still spread any coronavirus, up to 1/3rd as much as those showing symptoms.

But, even someone like me can point out...
- If you are outside, and vaccinated, or...
- If you are indoors, but vaccinated, with others who are vaccinated...
Wearing a mask is not necessary.

Even the CDC says so.

To require someone to do so, when they are vaccinated, and others are vaccinated indoors, or socially distanced outside...

Well, this the left we all hate, and Saager nails it. Professional Managerial Class (PNC).

These are the Progressives we were warning about in college a decade ago. And now they, like all these elitist, intellectuals, 'know better.'

 

[goodknightfl]

There was a lady walking outside on the sidewalk by herself with a plastic face guard and a mask. Really? How do we pull these people back into reality?

you can't they are fear struck and mentally ill.

 

[Trigeek]

Remember the crazy shut the beaches down and all that noise? Remember that lawyer that got photo ops posing as the grim repear? Covid isn't going to spread wild outdoors to begin with. It is healthy for your immune system to be outside. Take it a step further and those fully vaccinated to be wearing a mask outside? WTF?

There was a lady walking outside on the sidewalk by herself with a plastic face guard and a mask. Really? How do we pull these people back into reality?

Why do you care? If a women wants to walk around the block wrapped in bubble wrap. Why does that bother you? She obviously gets comfort from it....

 

[sk8knight]

Because I wonder about the mental state of these folks. Clearly they are that fearful of the virus. You can't live in constant fear.

You're right of center; you're not supposed to care about people.

 

[Trigeek]

Because I wonder about the mental state of these folks. Clearly they are that fearful of the virus. You can't live in constant fear.

Sounds like you're concerning yourself with nonsense and judgmental thoughts about people around you. Do you find yourself constantly approaching people with low hanging pants or nose rings, purple hair. Perhaps you should worry more about you.... Just a suggestion...

 

[sk8knight]

Sounds like you're concerning yourself with nonsense and judgmental thoughts about people around you. Do you find yourself constantly approaching people with low hanging pants or nose rings, purple hair. Perhaps you should worry more about you.... Just a suggestion...

You vote for and defend a political party that is based upon sticking their noses into other peoples’ concerns and trying to fix everyone’s problems whether it’s welcome or not. This is a super ironic post.

 

[Trigeek]

You vote for and defend a political party that is based upon sticking their noses into other peoples’ concerns and trying to fix everyone’s problems whether it’s welcome or not. This is a super ironic post.

You don't know that...

 

[Ucfmikes]

Because I wonder about the mental state of these folks. Clearly they are that fearful of the virus. You can't live in constant fear.

We should be worrying about these people, because they spread fear and makes it difficult for life to get back to normal. For this pandemic to end. Biden is basically one of them.

 

[hemightbejeremy]

Remember the crazy shut the beaches down and all that noise? Remember that lawyer that got photo ops posing as the grim repear? Covid isn't going to spread wild outdoors to begin with. It is healthy for your immune system to be outside. Take it a step further and those fully vaccinated to be wearing a mask outside? WTF?

There was a lady walking outside on the sidewalk by herself with a plastic face guard and a mask. Really? How do we pull these people back into reality?

Depends. If they are at a beach they are speeding it but if they are at a George Floyd rally they can’t spread it. Oh and vice versa.

 

[Crazyhole]

I wonder if by vaccinating so many people we aren't creating a MRSA type of situation with the virus. Is it possible that we are forcing the virus to actually mutate up?

 

[sk8knight]

I wonder if by vaccinating so many people we aren't creating a MRSA type of situation with the virus. Is it possible that we are forcing the virus to actually mutate up?

Yes it could happen but it’s less likely. The virus is constantly mutating. If a strain isn’t covered by the vaccine then it stands a better chance of surviving. But the best way to combat that is to slow or stop the spread of the current virus so that there are less incubators walking around. Hence the vaccines.

 

[UCFBS]

I wonder if by vaccinating so many people we aren't creating a MRSA type of situation with the virus. Is it possible that we are forcing the virus to actually mutate up?

We actually don't know what we are doing, and are more like 'hoping.'

We expect Big Pharma to solve it overnight, and same with Dr. Fauci to know everything.

All we have is that the vaccines to date do massively reduce the chance of serious illness, and usually any infection.

But the spread isn't talked about, and people assume those who are vaccinated cannot spread it, but that's not true at all.

The only thing we know is that people who are not infected or asymptomatic spread no more than 1/3rd of those who are symptomatic.

Which is why people who are vaccinated are still speeding it as we've seen in entirely closed groups of people vaccinated. Their risk of death and serious illness is greatly reduced though, of they are elderly or high risk.

If they are younger, then it really doesn't infect, and kids hardly ever get it (as even Pfizer's only Placebo group showed), and almost all asymptomatic.

That's why kids and young, healthy people don't get it, but still spread it, like HCoV-OC43.

 

[Ucfmikes]

We actually don't know what we are doing, and are more like 'hoping.'

We expect Big Pharma to solve it overnight, and same with Dr. Fauci to know everything.

All we have is that the vaccine to date do massive reduce the chance of serious illness, and usually any infection.

But the spread isn't talked about, and people assume those who are vaccinated cannot spread it, but that's not true at all.

The only thing we know is that people who are not infected or asymptomatic spread no more than 1/3rd of those who are symptomatic.

Which is why people who are vaccinated are still speeding it as we've seen in entirely closed groups of people vaccinated. Their risk of death and serious illness is greatly reduced though, of they are elderly or high risk.

If they are younger, then it really doesn't infect, and kids hardly ever get it (as even Pfizer's only Placebo group showed), and almost all asymptomatic.

That's why kids and young, healthy people don't get it, but still spread it, like HCoV-OC43.

 

[UCFBS]

Stopped reading right here. You really have no fukcing idea what you are talking about.

Don't bother responding with some insanely long diatribe. I don't care whether or not your therapist thinks it's working for you.

Did you bother to read my entire post?!

We actually don't know what we are doing, and are more like 'hoping.'​

​

We expect Big Pharma to solve it overnight, and same with Dr. Fauci to know everything.​

​

All we have is that the vaccines to date do massively reduce the chance of serious illness, and usually any infection.​

Because I was criticizing people being critical of Pharma and Dr. Fauci too!

We have *0* certainty here!

Everyone needs to *stop* expecting certainty, and that means *stop* stating certainty too.

Geez you guys KEEP LYING when not only what I've said to date has been TRUTHFUL, but every 'warning' I've stated has been SPOT-ON.

Like the efficacy of mRNA vaccines dropping off at 4 months, so you'll need boosters every 6 months, or only be protected over the winter (if you get it in the fall).

Same with SPREADING. I've been right again and again and again because I'm NOT listening to the 'feel good, assume good' BS of the Media or CDC.

I'm actually reading the EMA, FDA, and countless journals. They are AT ODDS with the BS coming out of the mainstream.

NAME ONE THING I'VE BEEN WRONG ABOUT.

 

[UCFBS]

They have to know at this point if vaccinated folks can spread the virus. Over 150 doses and over 100 million folks vaccinated. We better have the data by now for that basic data.

Logically I can't imagine the vaccinated can spread the virus since you wouldn't be a good host of the virus. I think they want to keep the mask rules because there won't be a way to know who is vaccinated. Since the virus is micron size the mask will do very little either.

Ummm, where do you get your info?
You act like no comment means something.

Kids spread coronaviruses, so shouldn't we juts vaccinate all of them? Problem solved, right?

How about pets too? Seriously.

Heck, the US CDC just verified one of my earliest comments. That's 6' is *not* far enough.

I said 6m (20') from the get-go. Why? It's beyond how far the aerosol travels when people speak. 6' is within that distance.

Sigh... education of everything from coronaviruses to social distancing, even allowing people outside (as it's far better for various health and sanitation reasons)... is severely lacking in the US.

The US Media makes us dumb.

And people think all diseases and all vaccines are the same too. Sigh... assumptions, assumptions, assumptions.

This is why we Libertarians are utterly tired of both the left and right. They want to beat each other down with government, all while we Libertarians see the obviousness of the truth.

We, individually, are responsible for ourselves, not anyone else. Grandma dies because of what grandma does and who grandma is around.

Or if grandma has a caretaker, it's that caretaker that is responsible. No one else.

 

[Crazyhole]

They have to know at this point if vaccinated folks can spread the virus. Over 150 doses and over 100 million folks vaccinated. We better have the data by now for that basic data.

Logically I can't imagine the vaccinated can spread the virus since you wouldn't be a good host of the virus. I think they want to keep the mask rules because there won't be a way to know who is vaccinated. Since the virus is micron size the mask will do very little either.

Quit the rules. Everyone made their decision to Vax or not to Vax.

Imagine running into someone that is wearing a mask because they are afraid of catching the measles after getting the MMR vax.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

Did you bother to read my entire post?!

We actually don't know what we are doing, and are more like 'hoping.'​

​

We expect Big Pharma to solve it overnight, and same with Dr. Fauci to know everything.​

​

All we have is that the vaccines to date do massively reduce the chance of serious illness, and usually any infection.​

Because I was criticizing people being critical of Pharma and Dr. Fauci too!

We have *0* certainty here!

Everyone needs to *stop* expecting certainty, and that means *stop* stating certainty too.

Geez you guys KEEP LYING when not only what I've said to date has been TRUTHFUL, but every 'warning' I've stated has been SPOT-ON.

Like the efficacy of mRNA vaccines dropping off at 4 months, so you'll need boosters every 6 months, or only be protected over the winter (if you get it in the fall).

Same with SPREADING. I've been right again and again and again because I'm NOT listening to the 'feel good, assume good' BS of the Media or CDC.

I'm actually reading the EMA, FDA, and countless journals. They are AT ODDS with the BS coming out of the mainstream.

NAME ONE THING I'VE BEEN WRONG ABOUT.

 

[UCFBS]

Imagine running into someone that is wearing a mask because they are afraid of catching the measles after getting the MMR vax.

But Coronaviruses are utterly different than Morbilliviruses!

 

[UCFBS]

Which is why I HAVE BEEN 'PREDICTING' what you guys are LATER SCHOCKED BY!

But it's no 'prediction.' What you all call 'BS' ends up being true from me time and time again.

Deaths are going down.
Asymptomatic people are going up.
But it's going to keep spreading.

Welcome to the 21st centuries Common Cold.
Just like HCoV-OC43 became.
Only the genetically suspetible aren't dying off as fast this time.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

Which is why I HAVE BEEN 'PREDICTING' what you guys are LATER SCHOCKED BY!

But it's no 'prediction.' What you all call 'BS' ends up being true from me time and time again.

Deaths are going down.
Asymptomatic people are going up.
But it's going to keep spreading.

Welcome to the 21st centuries Common Cold.
Just like HCoV-OC43 became.
Only the genetically suspetible aren't dying off as fast this time.

 

[Ucfmikes]

Ummm, where do you get your info?
You act like no comment means something.

Kids spread coronaviruses, so shouldn't we juts vaccinate all of them? Problem solved, right?

How about pets too? Seriously.

Heck, the US CDC just verified one of my earliest comments. That's 6' is *not* far enough.

I said 6m (20') from the get-go. Why? It's beyond how far the aerosol travels when people speak. 6' is within that distance.

Sigh... education of everything from coronaviruses to social distancing, even allowing people outside (as it's far better for various health and sanitation reasons)... is severely lacking in the US.

The US Media makes us dumb.

And people think all diseases and all vaccines are the same too. Sigh... assumptions, assumptions, assumptions.

This is why we Libertarians are utterly tired of both the left and right. They want to beat each other down with government, all while we Libertarians see the obviousness of the truth.

We, individually, are responsible for ourselves, not anyone else. Grandma dies because of what grandma does and who grandma is around.

Or if grandma has a caretaker, it's that caretaker that is responsible. No one else.

 

[Crazyhole]

That's a weird looking cat.

 

[Ucfmikes]

That's a weird looking cat.

Running out of nut job GIFs

 

[sk8knight]

Ummm, where do you get your info?
You act like no comment means something.

Kids spread coronaviruses, so shouldn't we juts vaccinate all of them? Problem solved, right?

How about pets too? Seriously.

Heck, the US CDC just verified one of my earliest comments. That's 6' is *not* far enough.

I said 6m (20') from the get-go. Why? It's beyond how far the aerosol travels when people speak. 6' is within that distance.

Sigh... education of everything from coronaviruses to social distancing, even allowing people outside (as it's far better for various health and sanitation reasons)... is severely lacking in the US.

The US Media makes us dumb.

And people think all diseases and all vaccines are the same too. Sigh... assumptions, assumptions, assumptions.

This is why we Libertarians are utterly tired of both the left and right. They want to beat each other down with government, all while we Libertarians see the obviousness of the truth.

We, individually, are responsible for ourselves, not anyone else. Grandma dies because of what grandma does and who grandma is around.

Or if grandma has a caretaker, it's that caretaker that is responsible. No one else.

The MIT study showed that 3 feet or 60 feet doesn’t matter for indoor social distancing with masks. The aerosols from exhalation go up and merge into the background. People are infected from extended time in a room with a significant viral load in the background. That MIT study squares with everything we knew from testing biodefense systems and from trends of infection around America.

The CDC has been all over the place because they are both a scientific research organization and a policy organization. These can be severely at odds. More so when you have weak leadership steering the policy messaging and a public counter narrative that just wants to assign blame to one person and cares not for veracity and efficacy.

IOW, we have access to too much information and it’s almost impossible to trust people that are still working in the old command and control paradigm.

 

[hemightbejeremy]

SCHOCKED

 

[UCFBS]

Deflecting again.

You make fun of the alleged village idiot that is REPEATEDLY CORRECT.
Good job!

You guys are continually wrong, and I'm continually correct.

 

[UCFBS]

The MIT study showed that 3 feet or 60 feet doesn’t matter for indoor social distancing with masks. The aerosols from exhalation go up and merge into the background. People are infected from extended time in a room with a significant viral load in the background. That MIT study squares with everything we knew from testing biodefense systems and from trends of infection around America.

The CDC has been all over the place because they are both a scientific research organization and a policy organization. These can be severely at odds. More so when you have weak leadership steering the policy messaging and a public counter narrative that just wants to assign blame to one person and cares not for veracity and efficacy.

IOW, we have access to too much information and it’s almost impossible to trust people that are still working in the old command and control paradigm.

100% agree.

6 meters (20') does drastically reduce, but doesn't eliminate. And it's way better than 6', as I said from the get-go.

And yes, the more indoors and worse ventilation, the worse it gets. Which is why the lockdowns in high density areas like New York City, and preventing people from traveling out of urban centers like Michigan, were chronically stupid and self-defeating.

This was always about control.

Also, if you look at the 1957-1958 Asian flu outbreak, of which 34% of those killed were young people compared to only 0.2% of those under 25 with the COVID-19 outbreak (99% over 45, 93% over 55, 85% over 65), we've had orders of magnitude less death of young people.

This has been the absolute worst non-sense in leadership of all-time, yet people are defending it.

We all take a risk in living, and we are still far more likely to die from other elements and realities, than SARS-CoV-2 ... especially people under 45 (~1% of total deaths), let alone 25 (under 0.2% of total deaths). That was quite unlike the 1957-1958 Asian flu which had no lockdowns, and schools were open.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

Deflecting again.

You make fun of the alleged village idiot that is REPEATEDLY CORRECT.
Good job!

You guys are continually wrong, and I'm continually correct.

It's not deflecting, you dummy. It's called ignoring people like you who do not know what the hell they are talking about. I typically do this to people like you who are continually wrong and intellectually inferior to me. That would be you, if you are (unfortunately) confused.

Say hello to your therapist for me.

 

[Boosted87]

The MIT study showed that 3 feet or 60 feet doesn’t matter for indoor social distancing with masks. The aerosols from exhalation go up and merge into the background. People are infected from extended time in a room with a significant viral load in the background. That MIT study squares with everything we knew from testing biodefense systems and from trends of infection around America.

The CDC has been all over the place because they are both a scientific research organization and a policy organization. These can be severely at odds. More so when you have weak leadership steering the policy messaging and a public counter narrative that just wants to assign blame to one person and cares not for veracity and efficacy.

IOW, we have access to too much information and it’s almost impossible to trust people that are still working in the old command and control paradigm.

Masks reduce the viral load exhaled/inhaled over time, lengthening the exposure time required for infection. Distancing reduces the density in a space, reducing the number of people exposed. The spacing itself does very little to limit your risk of infection if exposed - but if the space you're in has 25% of the people it would have absent the spacing rules, then you've decreased the risk of exposure by 75%. If there is an exposure event, the community has 25% the number of infections to deal with.

So while arbitrary, the 6' rule communicated clear/concise guidelines for businesses and public places that helped to reduce density. For individuals, it gave risk-averse people a cue on what spaces were OK and what should be avoided. That means dense indoor gatherings were less-dense than they would have been if people believed masking on it's own kept them safe.

Plenty to bag on the CDC over but I think the 6' rule isn't one of them. It was communicated early and has remained consistent throughout.

 

[sk8knight]

Masks reduce the viral load exhaled/inhaled over time, lengthening the exposure time required for infection. Distancing reduces the density in a space, reducing the number of people exposed. The spacing itself does very little to limit your risk of infection if exposed - but if the space you're in has 25% of the people it would have absent the spacing rules, then you've decreased the risk of exposure by 75%. If there is an exposure event, the community has 25% the number of infections to deal with.

So while arbitrary, the 6' rule communicated clear/concise guidelines for businesses and public places that helped to reduce density. For individuals, it gave risk-averse people a cue on what spaces were OK and what should be avoided. That means dense indoor gatherings were less-dense than they would have been if people believed masking on it's own kept them safe.

Plenty to bag on the CDC over but I think the 6' rule isn't one of them. It was communicated early and has remained consistent throughout.

Yes and no. Clean masks that have an actual seal certainly reduce large respiratory droplets and the forward velocity and quantity of smaller particles and may catch some small amount of virus inhaled. The problem is almost no one is wearing a clean mask with a good seal. Thus particles are both going up into the air where they are circulated ambiently and also inhaling from an ever-increasingly saturated mask.

The 6' was an arbitrary number thought initially to be the distance at which the large respiratory droplets, that they thought were the primary vector of transmission, would not reach. That was disproven fairly early in the process but nothing changed. They effect of the 6' was indeed density in indoor situations but that was not the initial reason they came up with 6', just a side effect. There was never a scientific reason for 6' outdoors other than large droplet transmission which is entirely eliminated with any type of significant covering of the face and mouth.

I'm all for safe-sided procedural steps; in the military world they MOPP up the entire area on the first hint of an agent and then characterize and assess. The problem is that you've said 6' consistently even when it has been proven to be arbitrary and wrong in some cases and that is one more thing that is going to turn people off to your messaging. At some point you either need to come out with what you just said or you've got to explain it in a way that people will internalize and that just isn't happening. Which is the entire problem with the CDC and Fauci; they are simply not able to provide clear, consistent, and understandable direction supported by good science and explained in a way that people buy into their messaging. Even in their most consistent direction, the 6' rule, they have failed in to reinforce the necessity of that measure in the face of contradictory evidence. Now they've lost the cover of everyone blaming the Trump Admin for the lack of effective leadership from CDC and Fauci and it's all falling apart.

The good news is that it doesn't look like there's going to be a significant Fourth Wave and our economy is rebounding faster than similar economies in Europe so we obviously did some things right along the way.

 

[Boosted87]

Yes and no. Clean masks that have an actual seal certainly reduce large respiratory droplets and the forward velocity and quantity of smaller particles and may catch some small amount of virus inhaled. The problem is almost no one is wearing a clean mask with a good seal. Thus particles are both going up into the air where they are circulated ambiently and also inhaling from an ever-increasingly saturated mask.

The 6' was an arbitrary number thought initially to be the distance at which the large respiratory droplets, that they thought were the primary vector of transmission, would not reach. That was disproven fairly early in the process but nothing changed. They effect of the 6' was indeed density in indoor situations but that was not the initial reason they came up with 6', just a side effect. There was never a scientific reason for 6' outdoors other than large droplet transmission which is entirely eliminated with any type of significant covering of the face and mouth.

I'm all for safe-sided procedural steps; in the military world they MOPP up the entire area on the first hint of an agent and then characterize and assess. The problem is that you've said 6' consistently even when it has been proven to be arbitrary and wrong in some cases and that is one more thing that is going to turn people off to your messaging. At some point you either need to come out with what you just said or you've got to explain it in a way that people will internalize and that just isn't happening. Which is the entire problem with the CDC and Fauci; they are simply not able to provide clear, consistent, and understandable direction supported by good science and explained in a way that people buy into their messaging. Even in their most consistent direction, the 6' rule, they have failed in to reinforce the necessity of that measure in the face of contradictory evidence. Now they've lost the cover of everyone blaming the Trump Admin for the lack of effective leadership from CDC and Fauci and it's all falling apart.

The good news is that it doesn't look like there's going to be a significant Fourth Wave and our economy is rebounding faster than similar economies in Europe so we obviously did some things right along the way.

There's plenty of physical test data that shows crappy home-made grade masks reduce viral load inhaled/exhaled into the environment at non trivial rates. Even if you have a normal distribution from crappy to excellent in mask quality and fit in the population, the net effect will still be to reduce transmission. Concerning yourself with mask cleanliness, quality, and fit is making perfect the enemy of good.

I don't think the reduced density via 6' was just luck. It was an obvious benefit to the policy. You didn't need to create guidance on indoor density because you got it for free via the 6' rule. It's far from perfect and really has no scientific basis for indoor aerosols, but it's uniform and consistent and easy to understand and results in reduced density.