This has been around for at least a year, but I’ve been seeing some pretty stupid anti-mask rants from a once intelligent guy lately so we still need it.
Right, but you’re not suggesting that this still applies to vaccinated people, are you? Because that same CDC has made it very clear that vaccinated people don’t need to be wearing masks.
There are some exceptions to the “vaccinated people don’t need to be wearing masks” bit, one of which is on public transportation. I put my mask on when the bus hove into view yesterday, and didn’t take it off until I got off; same process on the return leg. Everybody on the bus wore a mask. It’s just simpler – nobody knows who is vaxxed and who isn’t, and the drivers are captive, so it’s just simpler if the rule stays in place for now. I think we owe the drivers that.
P.S. By exceptions I mean in the CDC advice itself. I think there were three and I forget what the other two are (no doubt because not applicable to me me me) but the other is public transport.
The CDC web site is not the best organized I’ve seen. This page says:
Therefore, fully vaccinated people can resume activities without wearing a mask or physically distancing, except where required by federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial laws, rules, and regulations, including local business and workplace guidance. Fully vaccinated people should also continue to wear a well-fitted mask in correctional facilities and homeless shelters.
Then the next section states:
All travelers are required to wear a mask on all planes, buses, trains, and other forms of public transportation traveling into, within, or out of the United States and in U.S. transportation hubs such as airports and stations.
It’s unclear to me whether this is actually a health-based recommendation, or simply an example of the “obey applicable regulations” provision in the first quote, though I strongly suspect the latter. It’s noted elsewhere that there are separate guidelines for healthcare situations. So I don’t know if that makes for four exceptions now (public transport, correctional facilities, homeless shelters, healthcare settings), or five if you want to count “anywhere the rules require it.”
The problem with the “we owe the drivers that” argument is that it assumes that either some drivers are not vaccinated, or that there is a nontrivial risk of vaccinated drivers getting a serious infection, and the CDC has been pretty clear that the second one is false. As to the first part, I don’t know that we owe anything to any driver who is choosing not to get vaccinated.
But of course, obey the rules. There’s no value in being a jerk about wearing a mask. I put mine on to go in to grocery stores, etc. I’m just saying that I won’t be surprised if in the next weeks/months, the advice gets revised again to drop the requirement on public transport. Which is perfectly fine — science is supposed to update as more data comes in. I’m just noting the irony of some people (not you) who spent the last year saying “follow the science!” and now are shocked and angry and skeptical of the new guidance.
The problem with the “we owe the drivers that” argument is that it assumes that either some drivers are not vaccinated, or that there is a nontrivial risk of vaccinated drivers getting a serious infection
…or that some drivers couldn’t be vaccinated yet for some practical reason, or that in some drivers vaccination is not effective due to some underlying medical condition or medical treatment, or that their individual vaccination wasn’t long enough ago to be maximally effective, or that a vaccinated driver could still transmit the virus to others who can’t be effectively vaccinated, or that while vaccination prevents serious illness or hospitalization (even still, not 100%) it is not as effective against becoming symptomatic enough to require taking time off work.
I’m just noting the irony of some people (not you) who spent the last year saying “follow the science!” and now are shocked and angry and skeptical of the new guidance.
There’s also the irony of people who’ve spent the last year ignoring the science, suddenly all sciencey, now that they think don’t have to do anything at all. I wonder how many who will never get vaccinated, and who never wore masks will now think they’re on the cutting edge?
Some of those “reasons” are implausible, and/or can be better addressed through policies other than mask mandates. Vaccines have been available to all adults for quite some time now, and there’s not even an issue with getting an appointment in any U.S. state that I’m aware of — we’re at the “please, show up at this walk-in clinic, and we’ll give you free stuff or a lottery ticket” stage. Transit workers were given priority in many jurisdictions.
The risk of vaccinated people transmitting is negligible. Is it zero? No, but nothing is.
What’s your preference? That we all continue to wear masks forever? Because there will always be immunocompromised people who cannot be vaccinated. And the chances of totally eradicating COVID-19 are vanishingly small, especially given the number of antivaxxers out there. So there will always be some risk, If your position is that any risk whatsoever is too great, then you’re also going to have to explain to me why we haven’t been wearing masks for decades to protect against the flu.
The “COVID is just like the flu” argument was a bad one a year ago, because the relative risks weren’t really comparable. But once you start talking about these remote “but it’s not 100%!” arguments, that’s where you headed.
Yeah, some people are no doubt patting themselves on the back for being free riders — they’re explicitly intending to benefit from vaccinations without getting vaxxed themselves. That sucks, but I’m not sure there’s anything that can be done about it. I remain skeptical that “vaccine passports” are going to become a thing aside from a few specialized contexts (international travel, perhaps indoor concerts and conventions); they might have been a good idea but the infrastructure would have had to be in place months ago.
As to masking, I would hope we can all agree that the necessity for mask mandates is contingent on risk levels. Masks were a good idea in 2020. At some point, they’re just not going to be, whether that’s now or in six weeks or six months or 2022. The fact that the fervent anti-maskers might claim that this means they were Right All Along is annoying but can’t influence policy.
And again, I’m happy to let the CDC and other authorities make that assessment. They’re certainly more qualified than me to do so. I’m not demanding that they repeal the rule about masks on public transportation. I am simply predicting that they will do so in the very near future, for the reasons I’ve stated previously. The CDC moves cautiously and conservatively (in the non-political sense), which is probably appropriate given their mandate.
Sure, if the guidance changes I’ll follow that. I didn’t get the three things from the CDC website…I don’t remember exactly where I did get it, but probably a news summary somewhere, or maybe a summary from someone reasonable on Facebook. My “explanation” of the rule @ 2 wasn’t really an explanation, more a how I see it. I saw somewhere that the “on buses” rule is still in place so I’ll heed that because no problem and I REALLY don’t want to seem to disregard the driver. I’ve been worrying about them for the past 14 months. Unsung heroes kind of thing.
Sure, and I’d add that nobody should be putting a bus driver (or grocery store employee, or whoever) in the position of having to remind you to follow the rule. And I have no patience for people who want to engage some employee in a “debate” about the wisdom of a rule that the employee had no say in making but is obliged to enforce. Make your complaints in a blog comments section like a decent person!
What’s your preference? That we all continue to wear masks forever?
In enclosed public spaces where people don’t seem to be able to respect personal space? You betcha. I don’t want to catch any communicable disease from some stranger if it can be easily prevented.
Note that I’m not saying people should be required to wear masks. But yeah, I’d appreciate it if people who could, would make an effort to keep their germs to themselves thanks.
As for the Anti-Vaxxer cult followers, the San Francisco Comical published yet another Cletus Safari in which the reporters visit Old Plantation Hell Hole, Mississippi and talk with Cletus and his buds. “Waylll, I don’t think I will be getting that thar vaccine. I don’t think they tested it long ’nuff. Who nowz what the long term effects might be!”
So…where was this illuminating interview accomplished? At a LIQUOR STORE where Cletus was buying cigarettes!
I also question the Cletii’s ability to adequately evaluate medical evidence. Heck, none of us here who are not researchers lack such ability. Which is why I trust the evil gubmint and the flawed CDC more than “Reverend Billy Bob at First Independent Pentecostal Baptist Church who told us during the last Sunday’s sermon that it is a SIN to get vaccinated because Jesus will protect the elect!
Right, but you’re not suggesting that this still applies to vaccinated people, are you? Because that same CDC has made it very clear that vaccinated people don’t need to be wearing masks.
No. The point is the CDC part.
There are some exceptions to the “vaccinated people don’t need to be wearing masks” bit, one of which is on public transportation. I put my mask on when the bus hove into view yesterday, and didn’t take it off until I got off; same process on the return leg. Everybody on the bus wore a mask. It’s just simpler – nobody knows who is vaxxed and who isn’t, and the drivers are captive, so it’s just simpler if the rule stays in place for now. I think we owe the drivers that.
P.S. By exceptions I mean in the CDC advice itself. I think there were three and I forget what the other two are (no doubt because not applicable to me me me) but the other is public transport.
The CDC web site is not the best organized I’ve seen. This page says:
Then the next section states:
It’s unclear to me whether this is actually a health-based recommendation, or simply an example of the “obey applicable regulations” provision in the first quote, though I strongly suspect the latter. It’s noted elsewhere that there are separate guidelines for healthcare situations. So I don’t know if that makes for four exceptions now (public transport, correctional facilities, homeless shelters, healthcare settings), or five if you want to count “anywhere the rules require it.”
The problem with the “we owe the drivers that” argument is that it assumes that either some drivers are not vaccinated, or that there is a nontrivial risk of vaccinated drivers getting a serious infection, and the CDC has been pretty clear that the second one is false. As to the first part, I don’t know that we owe anything to any driver who is choosing not to get vaccinated.
But of course, obey the rules. There’s no value in being a jerk about wearing a mask. I put mine on to go in to grocery stores, etc. I’m just saying that I won’t be surprised if in the next weeks/months, the advice gets revised again to drop the requirement on public transport. Which is perfectly fine — science is supposed to update as more data comes in. I’m just noting the irony of some people (not you) who spent the last year saying “follow the science!” and now are shocked and angry and skeptical of the new guidance.
…or that some drivers couldn’t be vaccinated yet for some practical reason, or that in some drivers vaccination is not effective due to some underlying medical condition or medical treatment, or that their individual vaccination wasn’t long enough ago to be maximally effective, or that a vaccinated driver could still transmit the virus to others who can’t be effectively vaccinated, or that while vaccination prevents serious illness or hospitalization (even still, not 100%) it is not as effective against becoming symptomatic enough to require taking time off work.
There’s also the irony of people who’ve spent the last year ignoring the science, suddenly all sciencey, now that they think don’t have to do anything at all. I wonder how many who will never get vaccinated, and who never wore masks will now think they’re on the cutting edge?
ibbica,
Some of those “reasons” are implausible, and/or can be better addressed through policies other than mask mandates. Vaccines have been available to all adults for quite some time now, and there’s not even an issue with getting an appointment in any U.S. state that I’m aware of — we’re at the “please, show up at this walk-in clinic, and we’ll give you free stuff or a lottery ticket” stage. Transit workers were given priority in many jurisdictions.
The risk of vaccinated people transmitting is negligible. Is it zero? No, but nothing is.
What’s your preference? That we all continue to wear masks forever? Because there will always be immunocompromised people who cannot be vaccinated. And the chances of totally eradicating COVID-19 are vanishingly small, especially given the number of antivaxxers out there. So there will always be some risk, If your position is that any risk whatsoever is too great, then you’re also going to have to explain to me why we haven’t been wearing masks for decades to protect against the flu.
The “COVID is just like the flu” argument was a bad one a year ago, because the relative risks weren’t really comparable. But once you start talking about these remote “but it’s not 100%!” arguments, that’s where you headed.
YNNB,
Yeah, some people are no doubt patting themselves on the back for being free riders — they’re explicitly intending to benefit from vaccinations without getting vaxxed themselves. That sucks, but I’m not sure there’s anything that can be done about it. I remain skeptical that “vaccine passports” are going to become a thing aside from a few specialized contexts (international travel, perhaps indoor concerts and conventions); they might have been a good idea but the infrastructure would have had to be in place months ago.
As to masking, I would hope we can all agree that the necessity for mask mandates is contingent on risk levels. Masks were a good idea in 2020. At some point, they’re just not going to be, whether that’s now or in six weeks or six months or 2022. The fact that the fervent anti-maskers might claim that this means they were Right All Along is annoying but can’t influence policy.
And again, I’m happy to let the CDC and other authorities make that assessment. They’re certainly more qualified than me to do so. I’m not demanding that they repeal the rule about masks on public transportation. I am simply predicting that they will do so in the very near future, for the reasons I’ve stated previously. The CDC moves cautiously and conservatively (in the non-political sense), which is probably appropriate given their mandate.
Sure, if the guidance changes I’ll follow that. I didn’t get the three things from the CDC website…I don’t remember exactly where I did get it, but probably a news summary somewhere, or maybe a summary from someone reasonable on Facebook. My “explanation” of the rule @ 2 wasn’t really an explanation, more a how I see it. I saw somewhere that the “on buses” rule is still in place so I’ll heed that because no problem and I REALLY don’t want to seem to disregard the driver. I’ve been worrying about them for the past 14 months. Unsung heroes kind of thing.
Sure, and I’d add that nobody should be putting a bus driver (or grocery store employee, or whoever) in the position of having to remind you to follow the rule. And I have no patience for people who want to engage some employee in a “debate” about the wisdom of a rule that the employee had no say in making but is obliged to enforce. Make your complaints in a blog comments section like a decent person!
In enclosed public spaces where people don’t seem to be able to respect personal space? You betcha. I don’t want to catch any communicable disease from some stranger if it can be easily prevented.
Note that I’m not saying people should be required to wear masks. But yeah, I’d appreciate it if people who could, would make an effort to keep their germs to themselves thanks.
As for the Anti-Vaxxer cult followers, the San Francisco Comical published yet another Cletus Safari in which the reporters visit Old Plantation Hell Hole, Mississippi and talk with Cletus and his buds. “Waylll, I don’t think I will be getting that thar vaccine. I don’t think they tested it long ’nuff. Who nowz what the long term effects might be!”
So…where was this illuminating interview accomplished? At a LIQUOR STORE where Cletus was buying cigarettes!
I also question the Cletii’s ability to adequately evaluate medical evidence. Heck, none of us here who are not researchers lack such ability. Which is why I trust the evil gubmint and the flawed CDC more than “Reverend Billy Bob at First Independent Pentecostal Baptist Church who told us during the last Sunday’s sermon that it is a SIN to get vaccinated because Jesus will protect the elect!