No more masks?? (What are your thoughts?)

[apl68]

Re: Immunocompromised

What should we be doing for them? We knew the mask mandate would end sooner or later while the pandemic was still around (Biden telegraphed it with 100 days of masking).

Re: Masks in retail stores

Went to Sam's Club today and noticed most of the workers were still masked up despite company rules saying vaccinated employees can ditch the mask. Vaccine-hesitant or cautious?

Well, like I said, when I'm in contact with the public on the other side of the desk (out from behind the sneeze guards) I wear a mask just to try to encourage patrons to wear theirs.  Not too many seem to be paying attention, but I'll keep doing so for the time being.  When I'm not in front of the public I no longer bother wearing one much.  Vaccination rates are fairly high among the people that I interact with regularly.  Although we still have some staff members that I wish I could persuade.

[DrSomebody]

The governor of Texas just mandated that no government entity is allowed to require face masks. Texas A&M friends just posted that their bosses sent an announcement that pursuant to the governor's actions, face masks are no longer required on campus, for example.

This should be interesting.

Or something.

[Vkw10]

The governor of Texas just mandated that no government entity is allowed to require face masks. Texas A&M friends just posted that their bosses sent an announcement that pursuant to the governor's actions, face masks are no longer required on campus, for example.

This should be interesting.

Or something.

Our campus president sent an email this morning. I'd estimate that 80% of people on campus were maskless within 15 minutes.

[Antiphon1]

The governor of Texas just mandated that no government entity is allowed to require face masks. Texas A&M friends just posted that their bosses sent an announcement that pursuant to the governor's actions, face masks are no longer required on campus, for example.

This should be interesting.

Or something.

Our campus president sent an email this morning. I'd estimate that 80% of people on campus were maskless within 15 minutes.

Our campus has been for all practical purposes maskless and socially intimate since March when Abbott rolled back all state covid 19 mandates.  The man's ambition appears to be becoming the conservative FDR.  He's running for president. 

[Caracal]

The governor of Texas just mandated that no government entity is allowed to require face masks. Texas A&M friends just posted that their bosses sent an announcement that pursuant to the governor's actions, face masks are no longer required on campus, for example.

This should be interesting.

Or something.

Our campus president sent an email this morning. I'd estimate that 80% of people on campus were maskless within 15 minutes.

In the case of a college campus, I'd assume that's about the percentage of people who are fully vaccinated now? I have a social circle filled with academics, and just about all of them are protected at this point.

[ciao_yall]

I heard there is a crowd of people who are anti-vaxxers and afraid of the people who are vaccinated because of their warped DNA due to being injected with GMO COVID. So now they are wearing masks to protect themselves from the vaccinated people.

Okay there, then.

[Descartes]

It should have never been political to begin with, but, like everything in this country it became political.

I wore masks when required and when the advice was that it was helpful, but I never liked them. 

I don't want to contribute to being political about them, but I can't help it; for a year we were screamed at "WEAR MASKS, BELIEVE SCIENCE, SCIENCE IS REAL, I WILL LISTEN TO THE EXPERTS!!!"   

Well all of that isn't aging well with some people.  It kind of makes me want to go up to masked people at Target and yell "Someone doesn't believe in SCIENCE," though of course I won't do anything like that.

There's a difference between failing to follow minimum standards designed to keep everyone safe and being more risk adverse than is absolutely necessary. I sometimes see people out walking in my neighborhood wearing those reflective vests. It always seems a little unnecessary to me, since traffic isn't really that heavy and there are plenty of sidewalks, but who cares? Maybe the person takes a route where they have to walk on a more dangerous road than I do. Maybe, they know someone who was hit by a car while walking or they were hit themselves and are particularly attuned to this particular danger. It probably does reduce their risk a little bit and just because it isn't a precaution I'm interested in taking doesn't mean the person is crazy. Besides, it doesn't harm me in the slightest.

I'm still disinclined to go eat in a restaurant inside or go to a bar, and when I do go inside in public spaces I'm still wearing a mask. I'm not sure if those decisions are strictly rational at the moment, but I'm not required to submit all of my decisions on risk and comfort level to some scientific panel as long as I'm not doing anything that is more risky to others around me.

Yes you are completely correct, of course.  I just hate the smugness which permeates political virtue signaling on both sides, but which has been especially strong from the liberal side the past year. The whole thing should have been "you do you" from the beginning.  If you're afraid, or know you have reason to be, stay out of restaurants, wear masks, and all the rest of it.  If you take stock and say "I'm 22, healthy, and frankly just am unafraid," then you should be and should have been free to go where you want, mask or not.

Suddenly it became "if you don't wear a mask I'll assume you are a Trumptard" from liberal circles and "Oh you're wearing a mask you must be a mindless cuck" from conservative circles.  I thought both were idiots.

Everyone thinks they know something about someone.  Some conservatives don't agree with global warming mitigation, for instance, not because they are sure it's not real, but because they believe the collateral damage of the mitigation efforts will be worse than actual global warming.  It's not that they don't "believe science is real."  There's just a difference of opinion of what should be done or whether something drastic needs to be done at all.

Same with this pandemic.

[lightning]

I heard there is a crowd of people who are anti-vaxxers and afraid of the people who are vaccinated because of their warped DNA due to being injected with GMO COVID. So now they are wearing masks to protect themselves from the vaccinated people.

Okay there, then.

There were joke conspiracy theories being spread last year that went something along the lines of Obama setting up, in the twilight of his presidency, a secret surveillance program being carried out by the deep state, and that the best way for a true American patriot to defend their constitutional rights against Obama was to wear a mask in order to hide their identity. A couple of my idiot friends from high school actually thought it was true.

If it got them to mask up, I didn't argue with them.

[Puget]

If you take stock and say "I'm 22, healthy, and frankly just am unafraid," then you should be and should have been free to go where you want, mask or not.

No, this is completely non-equivalent! The primary functions of masks are to reduce *transmission* (and yes, there is good evidence they do). Doesn't matter how healthy that person is, they can still spread to others who are at high risk. The point is now if you are *vaccinated* you are unlikely to infect anyone else-- that's why it is ok to not mask.

[Sun_Worshiper]

If you take stock and say "I'm 22, healthy, and frankly just am unafraid," then you should be and should have been free to go where you want, mask or not.

No, this is completely non-equivalent! The primary functions of masks are to reduce *transmission* (and yes, there is good evidence they do). Doesn't matter how healthy that person is, they can still spread to others who are at high risk. The point is now if you are *vaccinated* you are unlikely to infect anyone else-- that's why it is ok to not mask.

Correct take. This "do you" approach doesn't work with a highly contagious airborne disease.

[Descartes]

If you take stock and say "I'm 22, healthy, and frankly just am unafraid," then you should be and should have been free to go where you want, mask or not.

No, this is completely non-equivalent! The primary functions of masks are to reduce *transmission* (and yes, there is good evidence they do). Doesn't matter how healthy that person is, they can still spread to others who are at high risk. The point is now if you are *vaccinated* you are unlikely to infect anyone else-- that's why it is ok to not mask.

OK, but under the "you do you" policy, you would not be leaving your house and thus not coming into contact with any non-masked people, right?  Those who did choose to go out would be accepting the risk of unmasked people.

Also, not sure if you have the expertise to answer this question, but how is it possible that masks only work in one direction?  It never was believable to me that my mask stops the virus from leaving my mouth thus protecting you, but can't stop the virus from getting into my mouth so my mask is no protection to me.  It doesn't seem logical that the fabric works as a one way street.  I've mostly just acted as though that claim is true and accepted it because the experts all said that's how it is, but I've never been able to find a real explanation of how that's possible.

[Caracal]

If you take stock and say "I'm 22, healthy, and frankly just am unafraid," then you should be and should have been free to go where you want, mask or not.

No, this is completely non-equivalent! The primary functions of masks are to reduce *transmission* (and yes, there is good evidence they do). Doesn't matter how healthy that person is, they can still spread to others who are at high risk. The point is now if you are *vaccinated* you are unlikely to infect anyone else-- that's why it is ok to not mask.

OK, but under the "you do you" policy, you would not be leaving your house and thus not coming into contact with any non-masked people, right?  Those who did choose to go out would be accepting the risk of unmasked people.

Also, not sure if you have the expertise to answer this question, but how is it possible that masks only work in one direction?  It never was believable to me that my mask stops the virus from leaving my mouth thus protecting you, but can't stop the virus from getting into my mouth so my mask is no protection to me.  It doesn't seem logical that the fabric works as a one way street.  I've mostly just acted as though that claim is true and accepted it because the experts all said that's how it is, but I've never been able to find a real explanation of how that's possible.

That was the initial suspicion, but further studies have suggested that masks actually protect both the wearer and others.

[clean]

Just returned from my first 'post mask mandate update' trip to the grocery store. It rained here yesterday, so there may be some extra crowds in the store, but for a noon time Thursday venture, it was not too, too busy. 

I suppose that on the plus side, I should be happy with all of the folks that are still wearing masks!  Certainly the vast majority are wearing masks.  (But even as the loudspeaker plays the prerecorded 'please wear your mask while shopping, and stay home if you have a fever' message) I counted about 30 people not wearing a mask. That is double the number that I was seeing the last time I went to the store. 

Again, I am glad to see the numbers I am seeing wearing their masks, but disappointed that it has doubled the 'non compliance' numbers. 

Still I saw one pair of maskless people in the store and then saw them getting into their car (with appropriate plates) parked in the handicapped space!  It would seem likely to me that IF you have a handicap, then most likely you have a pre existing condition or are at 'greater risk'.

Are you seeing an explosion of maskless folks in your area?

[Puget]

If you take stock and say "I'm 22, healthy, and frankly just am unafraid," then you should be and should have been free to go where you want, mask or not.

No, this is completely non-equivalent! The primary functions of masks are to reduce *transmission* (and yes, there is good evidence they do). Doesn't matter how healthy that person is, they can still spread to others who are at high risk. The point is now if you are *vaccinated* you are unlikely to infect anyone else-- that's why it is ok to not mask.

OK, but under the "you do you" policy, you would not be leaving your house and thus not coming into contact with any non-masked people, right?  Those who did choose to go out would be accepting the risk of unmasked people.

Also, not sure if you have the expertise to answer this question, but how is it possible that masks only work in one direction?  It never was believable to me that my mask stops the virus from leaving my mouth thus protecting you, but can't stop the virus from getting into my mouth so my mask is no protection to me.  It doesn't seem logical that the fabric works as a one way street.  I've mostly just acted as though that claim is true and accepted it because the experts all said that's how it is, but I've never been able to find a real explanation of how that's possible.

Uh, you do realize many people need to work outside the home right? I mean, I presume you continued to, for example, need food during the pandemic. Who do you think was growing, processing, transporting and selling you that food? Not to mention all the other essential workers. Do you think your right to "do you" supersedes trying to help protect them? (If you do, we have nothing further to say to one another).

Yes, masks also help protect you-- I wasn't commenting on that because if "doing you" means taking risks just for yourself than have at it, I won't interfere (just don't ask me to help pay for your care if you get sick), but it isn't OK to put others at risk.

[dismalist]

Also, not sure if you have the expertise to answer this question, but how is it possible that masks only work in one direction?

This question has bugged me since inception. I don't do non-symmetries. I invented the following out of whole cloth.

Best I can figure is that the pesky little viruses also live in nasal mucous or mouth mucous and the mask stops the liquid on the way out. Thus, little viruses are immobilized.

However, should  a maskless person sneeze at you, the little viruses will have left their mucous carrier, fly through the air, and implant themselves into you.

--I've never come across a professional explanation for the asymmetry.

--I know of no systematic tests that have been done. [Sound familiar?]