CDC suspends social distancing and masks if fully vaccinated

[Billy Hoyle]

There is nothing discourteous about not wearing a mask when it isn’t required of me.

this.

I still always keep a mask with me. If a person wants me to wear a mask in their business or home then that is their decision and I abide by it. If a person demands I wear a mask when I'm out running, biking, or walking on the sidewalk, then they need to get over themselves.

My building had a rooftop gathering on Sunday, No masks and the couple in our building who has not been vaccinated yet did not attend. They told us this ahead of time and did not demand we wear masks to accommodate them.

[GB Warrior]

I'm sorry you can't explain it.

Way I see it is this:

1) Your mask protects me, my mask protects you. This has been the foundation of mask wearing since the beginning.

2a) The CDC's new guidance is ham-handed, and while the science points to unmasking as shifting the risk/burden to the unvaccinated (as it should be), in practice it still results in an 'honor system'. In theory, this only hurts the unvaccinated.

2b) However, we know in reality that many of our societal benefits elude and societal burdens compound in minority or lower socioeconomic parts of our society. This includes higher percentages of comorbidities, multi-generational homes (Inc those where immune systems may be weakest/vaccine efficacy lowest). Also, children who are unvaccinated, and that honor system threatens children of all socioeconomic classes EVEN if mortality rates are low. Low risk does not equal no risk, and I think you'll find parents' risk tolerance is lower for their children than themselves.

2c) Those communities also have received lower allotments of vaccines and have a history of vaccine hesitancy because of government and corporate misdeeds of the past.

2d) Those individuals represent a disproportionate percentage of workers in retail, groceries, or other service jobs. While the tide has shifted and labor markets have tightened a bit because workers have a bit more power, IN GENERAL these workers do not have real economic power and cannot just refuse to work or push for more airtight protections.

*** sidebar:
This is what the states stripping additional unemployment rights are trying to undo - stripping away the most tangible power and upward wage pressure your average non-union worker has held in decades.
***

3. Given those workers don't have power to control their working conditions or the luxury of refusing to work, and given there are real macro issues in our welfare, Healthcare, et all systems that put many of those individuals (or their families, unvaccinated children, etc) at disproportionate risk, I can imagine that me advertising that I am considerate of their circumstances - if any, or whatever they might be - might put them at ease. This would be just as true if I chose not to be vaccinated.

Addendum: it's a goddamn piece of cloth; why is this so hard for us?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Way I see it is this:

1) Your mask protects me, my mask protects you. This has been the foundation of mask wearing since the beginning.

2a) The CDC's new guidance is ham-handed, and while the science points to unmasking as shifting the risk/burden to the unvaccinated (as it should be), in practice it still results in an 'honor system'. In theory, this only hurts the unvaccinated.

2b) However, we know in reality that many of our societal benefits elude and societal burdens compound in minority or lower socioeconomic parts of our society. This includes higher percentages of comorbidities, multi-generational homes (Inc those where immune systems may be weakest/vaccine efficacy lowest). Also, children who are unvaccinated, and that honor system threatens children of all socioeconomic classes EVEN if mortality rates are low. Low risk does not equal no risk, and I think you'll find parents' risk tolerance is lower for their children than themselves.

2c) Those communities also have received lower allotments of vaccines and have a history of vaccine hesitancy because of government and corporate misdeeds of the past.

2d) Those individuals represent a disproportionate percentage of workers in retail, groceries, or other service jobs. While the tide has shifted and labor markets have tightened a bit because workers have a bit more power, IN GENERAL these workers do not have real economic power and cannot just refuse to work or push for more airtight protections.

*** sidebar:
This is what the states stripping additional unemployment rights are trying to undo - stripping away the most tangible power and upward wage pressure your average non-union worker has held in decades.
***

3. Given those workers don't have power to control their working conditions or the luxury of refusing to work, and given there are real macro issues in our welfare, Healthcare, et all systems that put many of those individuals (or their families, unvaccinated children, etc) at disproportionate risk, I can imagine that me advertising that I am considerate of their circumstances - if any, or whatever they might be - might put them at ease. This would be just as true if I chose not to be vaccinated.

Addendum: it's a goddamn piece of cloth; why is this so hard for us?

But I am fully vaccinated so the possibility of me getting anyone sick in a store situation is almost zero. 

I just don't understand why the "follow the science" crowd is no longer following the science. 

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I don't think he's suggesting that not wearing a mask is discourteous. He just considers is a courtesy to others who may feel anxiety around those who are maskless. You're free to choose differently.
FWIW, defining what is and isn't courteous by "what is required" is odd. You're not required to hold the door open for others, or say "please" and "thank you," either. It's still courteous, though.

Well I agree with your second point.  I have no idea why mask wearing is even in the same discussion though.

[Jockey]

GB Warrior, I’m going to disagree a bit. The vaccine is available to virtually all who want it.

The vast majority of those who are not vaccinated have made the choice to not get the shots. The reason is simple - politics.

Look at a state-by-state vaccination rate and this is glaringly obvious. Blue states are at the top of the list; red states are at the bottom. Just a simple fact.

[Pakuni]

I just don't understand why the "follow the science" crowd is no longer following the science.

I don't think they're saying that they continue to wear a mask because they're concerned with spreading the virus, post-vaccination. They're wearing it to reduce potential anxiety in others, who have no idea whether they're vaccinated or not.
And I don't think they're suggesting everyone must follow suit or are critical of those who don't. It's a personal choice they're making to reduce potential discomfort in others.

[Pakuni]

GB Warrior, I’m going to disagree a bit. The vaccine is available to virtually all who want it.

The vast majority of those who are not vaccinated have made the choice to not get the shots. The reason is simple - politics.

Look at a state-by-state vaccination rate and this is glaringly obvious. Blue states are at the top of the list; red states are at the bottom. Just a simple fact.

There are a lot of people with political motivations to be sure, but there are plenty of anti-vaxxers out there whose reasoning isn't political.
Even before COVID, 11% of Americans said vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases they prevent.
https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-01-14/survey-fewer-people-now-support-vaccinating-their-kids-than-in-2001

[tower912]

But I am fully vaccinated so the possibility of me getting anyone sick in a store situation is almost zero. 

I just don't understand why the "follow the science" crowd is no longer following the science.

Because employees are still going to have to wear masks in some places.  Because my 14 year old only has one shot on board.   Because I don't want to be the .1% who might pass it along even though I have had it and had two shots.    I have already infected one family member, it costs me nothing to take appropriate steps for a few more weeks to avoid doing it again.   My personal need to mask will end in my mind on June 23, when my 14 year old is 14 days past his second shot.   

 But honestly, I have never felt it to be a burden.    And I am probably going to be one of those employees required to wear a mask whenever we go on an alarm through the end of the year.     So, to me, it is being courteous to others to wear the mask until all are able to cast it aside.   

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Because employees are still going to have to wear masks in some places.  Because my 14 year old only has one shot on board.   Because I don't want to be the .1% who might pass it along even though I have had it and had two shots.    I have already infected one family member, it costs me nothing to take appropriate steps for a few more weeks to avoid doing it again.   My personal need to mask will end in my mind on June 23, when my 14 year old is 14 days past his second shot.   

 But honestly, I have never felt it to be a burden.    And I am probably going to be one of those employees required to wear a mask whenever we go on an alarm through the end of the year.     So, to me, it is being courteous to others to wear the mask until all are able to cast it aside.   

Cool.  So it's your choice.  It's not "common courtesy."

[jsglow]

I fully respect someone's right to wear a mask. I also expect them to respect my right not to as a fully vaccinated person in full compliance with CDC guidelines. That pretty much ends it for me. Life is better when it's simple.

Now how 'bout dem Warriors?!

[Pakuni]

Now how 'bout dem Warriors?!

Tough loss to the Grizz.

[jsglow]

Tough loss to the Grizz.

 

[Jockey]

There are a lot of people with political motivations to be sure, but there are plenty of anti-vaxxers out there whose reasoning isn't political.
Even before COVID, 11% of Americans said vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases they prevent.
https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-01-14/survey-fewer-people-now-support-vaccinating-their-kids-than-in-2001

Of course. But the majority of refusers are for political reasons.

I don’t think we’re disagreeing, but just looking at 2 different reasons.

[Billy Hoyle]

Cool.  So it's your choice.  It's not "common courtesy."

it's a choice, but the wrong one if you run into any individual who disagrees with you, then you are expected to adhere to "common courtesy" as that person defines it.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

it's a choice, but the wrong one if you run into any individual who disagrees with you, then you are expected to adhere to "common courtesy" as that person defines it.

Right. “Common courtesy” implies a societal norm. But this is most definitely not that.

[jesmu84]

Of course. But the majority of refusers are for political reasons.

I don’t think we’re disagreeing, but just looking at 2 different reasons.

Interestingly, the biggest current difference is socioeconomic class which occurs across every other demographic.

https://twitter.com/DLeonhardt/status/1396808622349324290?s=19

[Jockey]

Interestingly, the biggest current difference is socioeconomic class which occurs across every other demographic.

https://twitter.com/DLeonhardt/status/1396808622349324290?s=19

You just added a 3rd reason.

This is the problem with chat boards. Making a point makes it seem like you are discounting other points of view, when, in reality, you are just adding to a discussion - not contradicting it.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I fully respect someone's right to wear a mask. I also expect them to respect my right not to as a fully vaccinated person in full compliance with CDC guidelines. That pretty much ends it for me. Life is better when it's simple.

Now how 'bout dem Warriors?!

Ultimate Warriors

[rocky_warrior]

Right. “Common courtesy” implies a societal norm. But this is most definitely not that.

Right!  But my original post (which your argued against), I was talking about "common courtesy" depending on where I was.  Seems like you just want to either argue, or not follow "common courtesy"

my post:

Because it means people are being respectful of the comfort level of those around them?

I travel quite a bit even after the new guidance, and in some places most people are still wearing masks.  In others not many are (I assume they are vaccinated).  I follow the crowd - it's not that hard for me to mask up - and when in Rome....

your reply:

How is it being "respectful of the comfort level for those around them?"  If the vaccinated who are asymptomatic don't spread the disease, it's just a false sense of comfort.

Sorry but if masks aren't required by the place of business, then I am not wearing them given my vaccination status.  It has nothing to do with disrespecting someone else or making them feel less comfortable.

Listen, I don't care what people do.  I'm not arguing you should do what I do.  You just want to call people out because they don't follow your personal rules.  And that's not very courteous.

[🏀]

Wearing a mask after vaccination is like a male wearing a condom, when with his wife, after a vasectomy, hey?

My 7 and 4 year olds will be wearing masks for the foreseeable future. If they have to, I will continue to be a good example and follow suit.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Listen, I don't care what people do.  I'm not arguing you should do what I do.  You just want to call people out because they don't follow your personal rules. 

False.  I am not arguing you should do what I do either.  I am arguing that tower's initial description of wearing masks when it is not required of me is "common courtesy."  It is not.  It is a personal choice.

[MU82]

Pretty good little synopsis (IMHO) by the NYT's David Leonhardt:

For unvaccinated adults indoors or in close conversation outdoors, the costs of a mask are vastly lower than the risks from Covid. But the trade-offs are different in most outdoor settings, and they are different for children. The Covid risks for children are similar to those from a normal flu.

There does not appear to be much scientific reason that campers and counselors, or most other people, should wear a mask outdoors all summer. Telling them to do so is an example of extreme caution — like staying out of the ocean to avoid sharks — that seems to have a greater cost than benefit.

The C.D.C., as I’ve written before, is an agency full of dedicated people trying their best to keep Americans healthy. Walensky, a widely admired infectious-diseases expert, is one of them. Yet more than once during this pandemic, C.D.C. officials have acted as if extreme caution has no downsides.

Everything has downsides. And it is the job of scientific experts and public-health officials to help the rest of us think clearly about the benefits and costs of our choices.

[naginiF]

False.  I am not arguing you should do what I do either.  I am arguing that tower's initial description of wearing masks when it is not required of me is "common courtesy."  It is not.  It is a personal choice........that is courteous

[Jockey]

Pretty good little synopsis (IMHO) by the NYT's David Leonhardt:

For unvaccinated adults indoors or in close conversation outdoors, the costs of a mask are vastly lower than the risks from Covid. But the trade-offs are different in most outdoor settings, and they are different for children. The Covid risks for children are similar to those from a normal flu.

There does not appear to be much scientific reason that campers and counselors, or most other people, should wear a mask outdoors all summer. Telling them to do so is an example of extreme caution — like staying out of the ocean to avoid sharks — that seems to have a greater cost than benefit.

The C.D.C., as I’ve written before, is an agency full of dedicated people trying their best to keep Americans healthy. Walensky, a widely admired infectious-diseases expert, is one of them. Yet more than once during this pandemic, C.D.C. officials have acted as if extreme caution has no downsides.

Everything has downsides. And it is the job of scientific experts and public-health officials to help the rest of us think clearly about the benefits and costs of our choices.

I agree with you on the CDC. Yes, they are too cautious. No, they aren’t going to think outside the box and take chances for that very reason. They are a gov’t agency. They are beholden to Congress. Like most gov’t agencies, they are risk averse.

They really have no choice. If they take any risk and it doesn’t pan out, there will be people in Congress out for blood to try to make themselves look good.

The CDC is full of very smart people, but they all have to tow the line.

When Trump closed the borders, I would guess they all knew what a futile, useless gesture that was. But they are not in a position to challenge the president. If Glow goes nuts over them, think what Bunker Boy would do.

[jsglow]

What I dislike about any government agency Jockey is when they let their better judgement get unduly swayed by political forces.  I strongly believe that's happened to an extreme over the last 14 months at the CDC, both under the prior and current administrations.  It fosters mistrust among the citizenry, exactly where we are now.  And please let us not get into a back and forth about who's dad can beat the other's up.  Let's agree that's not productive.