Quiet. The grownups are discussing pregnancy prevention.
1 Like
That is the problem as it is not following the data. It is not making an adequate risk reward calculation. Public policy depends on those things being adequately weighed.
The consequences from democratic policies surrounding covid are horrendous. Don’t pretend there’s no consequence to these statements and actions like “we won’t go back to normal even if vaccinated”
You are claiming there isn’t enough data, yet I provide at least some data which goes against this assumption and you have the audacity to say he’s following the data. I am maybe biased because I don’t like regulation but you are just as biased or even more so in the other direction.
Actually it’s 100% following the data. As we’ve already shown.
It is when the risks are ridiculously easy things like wearing a mask at the gas station, supermarket, or being mindful to avoid large crowds until more people are vaccinated and we know the likelihood of spread from vaccinated people.
The stuff we are talking about doing is easy and has always been easy. Sometimes I can’t even believe I’m on a site dedicated to training listening to some talk about it. The “risk” is doing stuff 4 year olds I work with don’t struggle with. The “reward” is not adding to the death count now that we finally have some hope on the horizon with a vaccine.
Yes. Which the actual article you linked said twice. As has the vast majority of the medical community. Which is why I said you shouldn’t toss out terms like we know this. It’s likely and obviously what everyone hopes is the outcome. But we don’t know and probably won’t for a while.
…He is following the data. The data says we don’t know enough to say for sure what the effects are. So be careful while more get vaccinated and as we learn more.
It’s not that complicated and it’s not that difficult. Get vaccinated. Take mitigation steps (you know the incredibly easy ones) while more and
more people get vaccinated to stay safe.
That’s my plan…
But then I’m not young lol.
No shit.
You say it here yourself.
He is being extra cautious because you say and he says that there’s not enough data. That is very different from following data which shows it makes sense. No there is no absolutely none that shows it makes sense. There is data to the contrary, albeit not conclusive. He is not following the data. He is going against the limited existing data and being over cautious.
I wouldn’t even have a problem with that if he wouldn’t use an ending pandemic to push through his monstrous bills whilst spreading hysteria more than the actual virus is spreading.
Do you get my point? He’s hiding behind covid. He’s hiding behind a not necessary mask. He’s sitting there, stumbling over his own words, doesn’t even know where or who he is and his party completely changes the dynamic between government and citizen as well as taking on a financial burden nobody has ever seen for literally nothing. The last relief bill was a giant piece of shit which did nothing to help people and wasn’t even directed at “covid victims”.
Yes, I wear a mask when I’m in the supermarket. Would I wear a mask in my office where 4 healthy people under 40 not living with their parents sit? No I fucking wouldn’t, why would anybody? To be over cautious because you are scared of something that is so overblown that you don’t even know it at the utmost likeliness won’t hurt or kill you.
Yes. Which makes sense. You’re saying we don’t have enough data so don’t be cautious. How does that make any sense?
Well maybe you can forgive him and the other scientists for being cautious when we don’t even have a quarter of the population vaccinated.
The most important data is over 30 million and over 550,000 deaths and counting. That right there says it makes more sense to be cautious until we know more and get more people vaccinated. Vastly more so than an article that has a non peer reviewed study which says we need to do more studies.
The vast majority of the medical community would advise you to do so. Because they understand how the virus is transmitted. But I think you’ve shown your disdain for them so not sure what to say to that.
I’m out of here. Don’t have time for this any longer. I made my points. If one doesn’t get the difference between following hard data and not knowing enough, then I can’t help.
One last thing. There’s not “the medical community”. Where I work the highest ups don’t really think covid is that bad but their workers think it really is. All of these people at least have a PhD, studied medicine or biology, pharmacy and research covid and other diseases. The opinions differ as hard as ours do and nobody is following “the data”. People who loved freedom do so even now, people who are safety based are so now. The medical community is not of one opinion on covid if you read recommendations. Hell, even guys like Faucci changed their opinions multiple times and that’s just one man. I don’t trust any institutions. I look at statistics and make up my own mind. I wear masks often, I would sometimes not if I didn’t have to. Other people in the “medical community” range from listening to institutions to doing the same.
I think it’s difficult to trust any institution especially the not so long ago loved WHO or the seemingly cherished CDC which are more political than they should be. An institution that changes guidelines based on politicians coming in and saying they should do so, aren’t trustworthy.
I’m using the vast majority on purpose. The overwhelming consensus throughout this by most medical professionals has been to follow guidelines even as they change (which of course they would it’s an unknown).
And if one thinks that a small study which hasn’t been peer reviewed is the reason to stop being cautious with something that has killed over 550,000 Americans in a year then I can’t help either.
These aren’t mutually exclusive. You can love freedom and also be safe. I don’t feel controlled when I put my kid in a car seat or slow down in a school zone. It’s a shame that so many have viewed something incredible simple like a mask as the pinnacle of tyranny. That act for whatever reason quickly got politicized by the right. Next thing you know you’ve got the Vice President of the United States in the fucking Mayo Clinic during a pandemic violating their protocol.
Fine line
On some things. But for the most part a lot of us want freedom but we also want safety. And they don’t have to be at odds.
And those people who preach the loudest about freedom on everything are the first to bitch when comfort goes away (at least in my experience).
That’s odd. Especially since we are on a lifting forum. You said that above. People here should be fine with uncomfortable things, as going to the gym no matter what trains one to not always have comfort. I personally am not so much after comfort but I hate it as a grown up to not be able to make my own decisions, even something as little as wearing a mask is mandated.
I would really be interested in a social experiment where I am, if people also wear the masks without the mandate. My guess is most would, some wouldn’t. Also it would be interesting if there’s a correlation with social pressure. City where nobody knows you or small town where most people know each other. Is there any data out of say Florida regarding this?
In my experience until now, I met more people who want the highest safety measures, like wearing an FFP2 without a mandate all the time, than people not wearing any mask. I’m very much in the middle between the two.
1 Like
Yes, they’re one of the worst state regarding death/infection rates. They have very low restriction compliance to boot
Why are we arguing about this
I NEVER… take off my condom. Don’t want to trip on the sidewalk and end up with an unwanted pregnancy
Edit: referring to contraceptives, not facemasks #permacondom
1 Like
As far as I know they are not even top 20 in mortality while having the second oldest population in the country?
Also that was not my question, not interested in further discussion of this.
I meant my experiences in real life not t-nation.
Location based I’m sure as well as education. My area? Very small amount. Areas not too far from me? Much higher. I’m guessing the US has lower rates of usage than many other developed countries but I’m not sure of that. Just a hunch.
I think there’s good studies on this. I’ll look if I can find them.
But I don’t know if there’s studies comparing rural and dense population. As I stated in the very beginning above, it seems to me many problems and many dividing points can be traced back to population density.
I dont know if that’s right. Less educated people are on mount stupid more often but they also are easier to be swayed by hysteria and news in both directions. I’m very sure in Germany the people being less educated wear the masks very diligent. At least when covid started and I was at a pharmacy, the people who were lowest in the sociocultural hierarchy were wearing their masks like champs. At least that’s my experience from here, this obviously differs if you have a country were 2 completely different sets of values are held by the population.
It’s like that here as well.
Higher educated people went for Biden in significant numbers and a lot of the anti mask people in the Us are Trump supporters
Based on discussions here it seems the US might be different than Germany. In the US, it seems that education level is correlated to political affiliation. More educated voters tend to vote more DEM, and less educated voters tend to vote GoP. Mask adherence also seems linked to political affiliation where DEMs are more likely to wear a mask.
Now there are a few concerns I have with generalizations like I just made. Perhaps it is a location thing. More educated people tend to live in cities which also seem to vote for DEMS at a higher level. Is it because of education level or because they are in the city, as less educated urban voters also seem to vote in higher percentage for DEMs. Do more educated rural voters vote more DEM than less educated rural voters? Do more educated urban voters vote more DEM than less educated urban voters?
1 Like
Safe for whom?