Would you wear a mask every time you were outside your cabin?

[clo]

11 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

It isn't evident that we can shut down and revive an economy at will.  

Are we shutting down anything, rather than restarting, by requiring masks (the OP) and requiring social distancing?

[ilikeanswers]

4 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Perhaps but you shouldn't ignore the consequences these protocols have had on people.  It isn't evident that we can shut down and revive an economy at will.  

 

No one is ignoring the consequences, the reality is there is no perfect response. You could throw caution to the wind like Brazil and Sweden but economically they are not doing any better as a result and instead we may have lost people who could have been saved. The world is being divided up into green, yellow and red zones. Economically you want to avoid being red zoned and yellow zoned will have many restrictions that will effect people's business especially the tourism industry which is already the hardest hit. 

[RocketMan275]

2 minutes ago, clo said:

Are we shutting down anything, rather than restarting, by requiring masks (the OP) and requiring social distancing?

Only allowing restaurants to 'reopen' at fifty percent (or less) capacity isn't workable.  Very few restaurants can make a profit under those restrictions.

[clo]

2 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Only allowing restaurants to 'reopen' at fifty percent (or less) capacity isn't workable.  Very few restaurants can make a profit under those restrictions.

Sorry, I missed that we were talking about that. That's a very separate issue.

[RocketMan275]

1 minute ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

No one is ignoring the consequences, the reality is there is no perfect response. You could throw caution to the wind like Brazil and Sweden but economically they are not doing any better as a result and instead we may have lost people who could have been saved. The world is being divided up into green, yellow and red zones. Economically you want to avoid being red zoned and yellow zoned will have many restrictions that will effect people's business especially the tourism industry which is already the hardest hit. 

There are many examples where we could save people.  For, example, we could lower speed limits.  We could forbid certain sports where fatal injuries occur.  We could outlaw passenger flights, boats, etc.  We could outlaw meat that isn't cooked to well done.  We don't do those things because we are willing to make tradeoffs.   

[clo]

1 minute ago, RocketMan275 said:

There are many examples where we could save people.  For, example, we could lower speed limits.  We could forbid certain sports where fatal injuries occur.  We could outlaw passenger flights, boats, etc.  We could outlaw meat that isn't cooked to well done.  We don't do those things because we are willing to make tradeoffs.   

But we have speed limits, seat belts, cross walks :), you name it. For some reason, you and others have gotten crazy riled about friggin' face masks.

[RocketMan275]

2 minutes ago, clo said:

Sorry, I missed that we were talking about that. That's a very separate issue.

Not at all.  It's the same issue.   

[RocketMan275]

Just now, clo said:

But we have speed limits, seat belts, cross walks :), you name it. For some reason, you and others have gotten crazy riled about friggin' face masks.

I wouldn't be 'crazy riled' if I thought they were effective and not just some symbolic gesture.

[clo]

17 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

I wouldn't be 'crazy riled' if I thought they were effective and not just some symbolic gesture.

But that's your never humble opinion. I'll take Dr. Fauci's side over yours any day.

 

Here's something I just saw that I have no doubt has relevance here.

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/arnold-schwarzenegger-coronavirus-masks_n_5eec7f63c5b69d4e08765402?utm_medium=facebook&ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063&section=politics&utm_source=main_fb&utm_campaign=hp_fb_pages&fbclid=IwAR3DQ5RRI7w6JerChdfGDQhbSq8tA6sHu0B6aWuipLQajkezXoBAYxaYz-A

[slidergirl]

17 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

I wouldn't be 'crazy riled' if I thought they were effective and not just some symbolic gesture.

Saying the cloth masks and bandanas "useless" and "symbolic gestures" is just a canard.  Unless you think the CDC, the Surgeon General (who heads the US Public Health Service), Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci are members of the Deep State, they recommend those masks and bandanas.  The "they are ineffective" and "they aren't work properly" is from back in the beginning of March.  Enough studies have been done to show that the double cloth masks and doubled up bandanas do indeed help. There are varying levels of effectiveness, but N95s are not the holy grail be-all-end-all of masks.    Even here in town, when I see my health care providers at the market, they've changed from their "work" masks to decorative cloth masks.    If you want to roll the dice with going bare face, fine.  But, don't attempt to shame those who are wearing masks.  OK?

[clo]

2 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

But, don't attempt to shame those who are wearing masks.  OK?

I suspect s/he has an agenda. Political perhaps 🙂 

[DaveSJ711]

28 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

I wouldn't be 'crazy riled' if I thought they were effective and not just some symbolic gesture.

 

Some people in Alabama believe in masks.  Good for them.

 

https://www.alabamanews.net/2020/06/17/montgomery-mayor-steven-reed-issues-executive-order-requiring-face-masks-to-be-worn-in-public/

[clo]

2 minutes ago, DaveSJ711 said:

 

Some people in Alabama believe in masks.  Good for them.

 

https://www.alabamanews.net/2020/06/17/montgomery-mayor-steven-reed-issues-executive-order-requiring-face-masks-to-be-worn-in-public/

I've been very impressed with him.

[ilikeanswers]

47 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

There are many examples where we could save people.  For, example, we could lower speed limits.  We could forbid certain sports where fatal injuries occur.  We could outlaw passenger flights, boats, etc.  We could outlaw meat that isn't cooked to well done.  We don't do those things because we are willing to make tradeoffs.   

 

My point about Sweden and Brazil was that the trade off was not worth it. The economies are still tanking and people died who could otherwise have been saved and on top of that Brazil is now red zoned. So in the end keeping the economy open was pointless. People who argue about saving the economy forget that there is an economic impact to having a pandemic and ignoring the disease is not going to stop the adverse economic impacts. 

Edited June 20, 2020 by ilikeanswers

[cruisemom42]

50 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

I was raised that only myself was responsible for my well being.  

 

Is that truly the case?  Were you not raised to look out for your neighbors, or close friends, or family? Do we not bring food to sick neighbors or run errands for the elderly?  Haven't many of us tried to get a family member or friend to give up smoking?  Or wear a seatbelt?

 

If your statement is true, then why do we bother doing things like banning carcinogens or mandating seatbealts? We bother not just because we are protecting our own well being but also protecting the well-being, perhaps, of the mother who dies in a car crash leaving young children behind, or a father dying of lung cancer well before his time.

 

Society as a whole benefits, I don't have to personally benefit to see the worth in it.

 

 

 

 

[clo]

1 minute ago, cruisemom42 said:

Society as a whole benefits, I don't have to personally benefit to see the worth in it.

 

As usual you're quite cogent and eloquent here. Thanks as always.

[2wheelin]

2 hours ago, chipmaster said:

 

Yup sad most that dying are somebodies mom/dad grandma/grandpa, lived a long life and gone earlier than expected.   

 

The young and carefree get out spread and recovery.

 

But there is a silver lining the social security liability and care for seniors is considerably reduced.  China had a ticking time bomb as does most developing countries with the burden of caring for the elder, fixed.  

We probably should arrange for a pandemic every ten years to really cure that “problem”.

[RonOhio]

2 hours ago, RocketMan275 said:

I was raised that only myself was responsible for my well being.  If I were truly as afraid of catching this virus as some appear to be, then I would take charge of my own health.  I would get myself some of those N95 masks, the ones that are truly effective at preventing infections.  I would not go out except for emergencies.  My groceries would be delivered.  My restaurant meals would be delivered.  I certainly would not be going out to eat.  I simply would not allow myself to be in a place where I was dependent on others for my protection.   

I agree R-man. The stated reason for quarantine was "flattening the curve". Well, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED, I have not heard of a single person in the US that was denied a ventilator or an ICU bed because they were overcapacity (turned out that ventilators weren't as necessary as originally predicted). At this point, put on your big boy pants and self-isolate if at risk, someone in your household is at risk or you're simply cautious. If you've got a bit higher risk tolerance, wear a mask/shield and frequent organizations with social distance, if you don't give a damn, take no precautions. 

After all, you can drive a safe SUV, drive defensively and obey the traffic laws, you can blast around in a little sports car ignoring the traffic laws or you can off road on a dirt bike like your hair is on fire. In America, most of us prefer a government that lets you choose based on your risk tolerance and how much you're willing to pay in fines and insurance. 

[RocketMan275]

7 hours ago, slidergirl said:

Saying the cloth masks and bandanas "useless" and "symbolic gestures" is just a canard.  Unless you think the CDC, the Surgeon General (who heads the US Public Health Service), Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci are members of the Deep State, they recommend those masks and bandanas.  The "they are ineffective" and "they aren't work properly" is from back in the beginning of March.  Enough studies have been done to show that the double cloth masks and doubled up bandanas do indeed help. There are varying levels of effectiveness, but N95s are not the holy grail be-all-end-all of masks.    Even here in town, when I see my health care providers at the market, they've changed from their "work" masks to decorative cloth masks.    If you want to roll the dice with going bare face, fine.  But, don't attempt to shame those who are wearing masks.  OK?

But, it's OK for to attempt to shame those who do not wear masks?  You know those who say: "If you love others, you'll wear a mask."?

[RocketMan275]

7 hours ago, DaveSJ711 said:

 

Some people in Alabama believe in masks.  Good for them.

 

https://www.alabamanews.net/2020/06/17/montgomery-mayor-steven-reed-issues-executive-order-requiring-face-masks-to-be-worn-in-public/

The fact that some insist on symbolic gestures doesn't mean those gestures are effective.  After all, most politicians like to be seen as 'doing something'.

[RocketMan275]

7 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

Is that truly the case?  Were you not raised to look out for your neighbors, or close friends, or family? Do we not bring food to sick neighbors or run errands for the elderly?  Haven't many of us tried to get a family member or friend to give up smoking?  Or wear a seatbelt?

I was taught to apply my own seatbelt, not rely upon someone else to do it for me.  

Yes, we do take food to sick neighbors but that doesn't mean we should require our neighbors to run errands for the elderly.  

 

The precautions one takes against the virus will be far more effective than relying upon others to take precautions for you.  If you want to wear a mask, then do so.  But, wear a mask that is effective in protecting you.  Don't rely upon someone else wearing one of those flimsy ones made out of a t-shirt.

Edited June 20, 2020 by RocketMan275

[Ride-The-Waves]

2 hours ago, RocketMan275 said:

I was taught to apply my own seatbelt, not rely upon someone else to do it for me.  

Yes, we do take food to sick neighbors but that doesn't mean we should require our neighbors to run errands for the elderly.  

 

The precautions one takes against the virus will be far more effective than relying upon others to take precautions for you.  If you want to wear a mask, then do so.  But, wear a mask that is effective in protecting you.  Don't rely upon someone else wearing one of those flimsy ones made out of a t-shirt.

Wearing a seat belt is government regulation.  Thank you for wearing one.

 

Face masks protect others from you, not you from them.  They are effective.  Examples: required wearing in a restaurant showed that virus transmission was eliminated while 16 girls and 2 servers not wearing masks at another restaurant caught COVID-19.  Masks work.  In the US it ie incumbent on all Americans, an obligation and duty, to wear a mask in public places, inside stores and restaurants.

[RocketMan275]

9 minutes ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

Wearing a seat belt is government regulation.  Thank you for wearing one.

 

Face masks protect others from you, not you from them.  They are effective.  Examples: required wearing in a restaurant showed that virus transmission was eliminated while 16 girls and 2 servers not wearing masks at another restaurant caught COVID-19.  Masks work.  In the US it ie incumbent on all Americans, an obligation and duty, to wear a mask in public places, inside stores and restaurants.

Think about that.  If a mask is to protect others, then why is it relevant that those not wearing masks caught the virus?  Making these examples even more irrelevant is the fact that masks are not required at restaurants.  

[clo]

4 hours ago, RocketMan275 said:

But, it's OK for to attempt to shame those who do not wear masks?

Yep.

[clo]

1 hour ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

 

Face masks protect others from you, not you from them.

Do you deliberately not read anything that disagrees with your opinion. That changed weeks if not longer ago.