10 ms·

Closing schools and so forth was part of the flatten-the-curve effort. Really though, the CDC has been driven by the available science and by the reality of th

Closing schools and so forth was part of the flatten-the-curve effort. Really though, the CDC has been driven by the available science and by the reality of the pandemic, and when the CDC's guidance has changed it has invariably been in response to new data on COVID or to changing conditions (e.g. community spread, N95 mask availability, new variants). It is overly generous to speak of "one side" as if there is another equally valid side to compare with. The CDC is not a political institution and they always cite published research in their guidance and public statements about COVID-19. The anti-mask/anti-vax crowd are going around spreading one fantasy after another, coming up with new and ever more outrageous conspiracy theories and excuses for refusing to cooperate; none of their claims have ever been based in reality, and that is why the story changes on a daily basis and why there are so many contradictory claims being made. To put this in perspective, the high-level direction of the CDC's guidance has, since the very beginning of the pandemic, been to reduce the rate at which COVID spreads; the changes in their guidance have been about the details. The anti-mask/anti-vax crowd has gone from denying that there is a virus to saying that the virus is no worse than the flu to claiming that masks would suffocate them to whining about how mask mandates violate to their freedom and that they would rather die of COVID than comply with a mask mandate. They went from heaping praise on the last President simply because he was in office when the vaccines were first becoming available to complaining that the current President was being given too much credit for the vaccination effort to claiming that the vaccine is made from aborted fetuses, that the vaccine alters DNA, that Bill Gates inserted microchips into the vaccine, that the vaccine causes people to become magnetized, and that vaccine mandates are proof that the vaccine is the "mark of the beast."

angelzen 5y ago
Frankly, I am getting tired of labels. I one side of the debate is anti-mask / anti-vax crowd, then the other side is anti-living-life / pro-cower-in-the-basement-forever crowd.
- crooked-v 5y ago
  No "cowering" would be necessary if people would just get vaccinated.
  - angelzen 5y ago
    You have no right to tell other people what to do with their bodies.
    - actually_a_dog 5y ago
      You have no right to spread disease and exacerbate a public health emergency.
      - angelzen 5y ago
        Permanent public health emergency. What is the long term plan? Our current vaxxing target (or boosting, I lost track) is at 98% of the population. Soon we'll be at 105% and beyond. Then what? Edit: Reformulated for clarity (hopefully), quoting recent remarks by the President. Now that I read the transcript, the content is a bit muddy, but clearly he thinks 75% vaccination rate target is too small and 96/97/98 vaccination rate is laudable. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/09/27/remarks-by-president-biden-while-receiving-a-covid-19-booster-shot https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/20... Q How many — how many Americans need to be vaccinated for us to go back to normal? Like what is the percentage of total vaccinations that have to be deployed? THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think — look, I think we get the vast majority — like is going on in so many — some industries and some schools — 96, 97, 98 percent. I think we’re getting awful close. But I’m not the scientist. I think — but one thing for certain: A quarter of the country can’t go unvaccinated and us not continue to have a problem.
        caslon 5y ago
        It's actually only around 60% of the nation that's got a single dose or more. We aren't anywhere close to 98%.
eric_b 5y ago
How can you write so many words defending the CDC? Their "guidance" is based on cherry picked science at best, and gut feelings and political narratives at worst. There are plenty of studies that suggest lockdowns, closed schools and other "mitigation" efforts are ineffective or net harmful, but eh, just ignore those right? Look at the most recent issue of vaccine boosters. The FDA panel of experts (whom we're supposed to trust now, right?) said boosters are not necessary. CDC comes in and says the FDA is wrong, boosters are good jk lol. What a joke. Can you point me to a well done study on cloth masks and their efficacy? 19 months in and I have yet to see one. But people "feel" that masks must work, so CDC guidance says wear them. Surely at this point we should have so much compelling data about masks if they are effective...
- Permit 5y ago
  > Can you point me to a well done study on cloth masks and their efficacy? I'm guessing you've hidden away a lot of meaning in the words "well done" but here's one: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v4 https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v4 These also: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4pt4oFDBhsC_jpblXpNtQ/edit#heading=h.9yzpxufkt5ow https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4p... If you don't think these are "well done", can you at least clarify what such a study would look like and point us to an example?
  - eth0up 5y ago
    Slipping in here with a question that will probably seem obnoxious, but isn't intended so. If cloth masks are effective (I'm not arguing either way) and those who wear them felt endangered by those who don't, could they simply double their mask? Particulates passing in or out, in either direction, would be subject to the same amount of material as if both were wearing a single mask. guy with mask + guy with mask = two masks guy with 2 masks + guy with 0 masks = two masks. I'm not suggesting that anyone should have to bear the responsibility of another, but the effect should be the same for the wearer if non airborne contaminated surfaces are of low risk. Unless it's a matter of directionality. Could it be tested to observe a controlled situation where group A) exhales only through cotton while inhaling without, while a seperated group B) does the opposite, exhaling without and inhaling with? Is this absurd to consider? I'm not feeling well and might actually be absurd right now.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jacobolus 5y ago
> CDC has been driven by the available science and by the reality of the pandemic The Trump-appointed CDC directer Redfield exerted a ton of pressure in CDC to hide or manipulate data, overrode career civil servants’ decisions, fired or marginalized CDC scientists for doing their jobs, publicly spouted nonsense on Trump’s behalf including promoting conspiracy theories about China, etc. People inside CDC were (for better or worse) not willing to stick their necks out to resist. CDC screwed up a ton in the first 6–12 months of the pandemic; 2020 was pretty much the worst year ever for the CDC. Federal agencies are sadly not fully functional without effective good-faith leadership and support from the top. https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-the-fall-of-the-cdc https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-the-fall-of-the-cd...

angelzen 5y ago

Frankly, I am getting tired of labels. I one side of the debate is anti-mask / anti-vax crowd, then the other side is anti-living-life / pro-cower-in-the-basement-forever crowd.

crooked-v 5y ago
No "cowering" would be necessary if people would just get vaccinated.
- angelzen 5y ago
  You have no right to tell other people what to do with their bodies.
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    You have no right to spread disease and exacerbate a public health emergency.
    - angelzen 5y ago
      Permanent public health emergency. What is the long term plan? Our current vaxxing target (or boosting, I lost track) is at 98% of the population. Soon we'll be at 105% and beyond. Then what? Edit: Reformulated for clarity (hopefully), quoting recent remarks by the President. Now that I read the transcript, the content is a bit muddy, but clearly he thinks 75% vaccination rate target is too small and 96/97/98 vaccination rate is laudable. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/09/27/remarks-by-president-biden-while-receiving-a-covid-19-booster-shot https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/20... Q How many — how many Americans need to be vaccinated for us to go back to normal? Like what is the percentage of total vaccinations that have to be deployed? THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think — look, I think we get the vast majority — like is going on in so many — some industries and some schools — 96, 97, 98 percent. I think we’re getting awful close. But I’m not the scientist. I think — but one thing for certain: A quarter of the country can’t go unvaccinated and us not continue to have a problem.
      - caslon 5y ago
        It's actually only around 60% of the nation that's got a single dose or more. We aren't anywhere close to 98%.

eric_b 5y ago

How can you write so many words defending the CDC? Their "guidance" is based on cherry picked science at best, and gut feelings and political narratives at worst. There are plenty of studies that suggest lockdowns, closed schools and other "mitigation" efforts are ineffective or net harmful, but eh, just ignore those right? Look at the most recent issue of vaccine boosters. The FDA panel of experts (whom we're supposed to trust now, right?) said boosters are not necessary. CDC comes in and says the FDA is wrong, boosters are good jk lol. What a joke. Can you point me to a well done study on cloth masks and their efficacy? 19 months in and I have yet to see one. But people "feel" that masks must work, so CDC guidance says wear them. Surely at this point we should have so much compelling data about masks if they are effective...

Permit 5y ago
> Can you point me to a well done study on cloth masks and their efficacy? I'm guessing you've hidden away a lot of meaning in the words "well done" but here's one: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v4 https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v4 These also: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4pt4oFDBhsC_jpblXpNtQ/edit#heading=h.9yzpxufkt5ow https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4p... If you don't think these are "well done", can you at least clarify what such a study would look like and point us to an example?
- eth0up 5y ago
  Slipping in here with a question that will probably seem obnoxious, but isn't intended so. If cloth masks are effective (I'm not arguing either way) and those who wear them felt endangered by those who don't, could they simply double their mask? Particulates passing in or out, in either direction, would be subject to the same amount of material as if both were wearing a single mask. guy with mask + guy with mask = two masks guy with 2 masks + guy with 0 masks = two masks. I'm not suggesting that anyone should have to bear the responsibility of another, but the effect should be the same for the wearer if non airborne contaminated surfaces are of low risk. Unless it's a matter of directionality. Could it be tested to observe a controlled situation where group A) exhales only through cotton while inhaling without, while a seperated group B) does the opposite, exhaling without and inhaling with? Is this absurd to consider? I'm not feeling well and might actually be absurd right now.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

jacobolus 5y ago

> CDC has been driven by the available science and by the reality of the pandemic The Trump-appointed CDC directer Redfield exerted a ton of pressure in CDC to hide or manipulate data, overrode career civil servants’ decisions, fired or marginalized CDC scientists for doing their jobs, publicly spouted nonsense on Trump’s behalf including promoting conspiracy theories about China, etc. People inside CDC were (for better or worse) not willing to stick their necks out to resist. CDC screwed up a ton in the first 6–12 months of the pandemic; 2020 was pretty much the worst year ever for the CDC. Federal agencies are sadly not fully functional without effective good-faith leadership and support from the top. https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-the-fall-of-the-cdc https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-the-fall-of-the-cd...