CDC finally begins moderating pandemic guidance

wiscoaster

Well-known member
The CDC released new guidelines for people who've been vaccinated, which includes removing the indoor mask recommendation for them:

You can gather indoors with fully vaccinated people without wearing a mask.

from: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html

Their next step should be to acknowledge that persons with natural aquired immunity - ie either have been infected and have recovered, or have tested positive for antibodies - also can safely gather without need for masks.
 
Last edited:

WrongHanded

Well-known member
Their next step should be to acknowledge that persons with natural aquired immunity - ie either have been infected and have recovered, or have tested positive for antibodies - also can safely gather without need for masks.
That's what their next step should be, huh? So how long does natural immunity last? I'd like to know how long mine will last, and from which strains of the virus I an immune, please.
 

roscoe

Active member
The CDC released new guidelines for people who've been vaccinated, which includes removing the indoor mask recommendation for them:



from: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html

Their next step should be to acknowledge that persons with natural aquired immunity - ie either have been infected and have recovered, or have tested positive for antibodies - also can safely gather without need for masks.

Falsifying the right-wing conspiracy that .gov wants to control you through mask wearing.
 

WrongHanded

Well-known member
A variable degree of immunity to all of them for an undetermined length of time. As is usual for any virus.
So I may or may not have immunity to certain strains and you don't know how long that immunity may last. How about being a vector? Can I be a vector with my variable immunity?

It wouldn't be logical to tell those who have contracted the virus and recovered that they are no longer at risk from its various strains and can't become reinfected and pass it on. Not without compelling evidence to back up such a claim. So why should the CDC do that next?

It seems like many Trump supporters claim to be using logic, whilst accusing others of making fear-based decisions based on nothing but emotion. Only I see it the other way around. Trump supporters ignoring inconvenient facts and using pseudo-logic and mental gymnastics, whilst projecting emotion-based thinking on those who trust science, data, and actual (rather than "alternative") facts.
 

theotherwaldo

Well-known member
So how long are you going to wear a mask against all of the rest of those deadly viruses?
You know, SARS, MARS, Influenza and all of the rest?
Or rather, why didn't you wear a mask?
You wanted to kill Grandma?
 

WrongHanded

Well-known member
So how long are you going to wear a mask against all of the rest of those deadly viruses?
You know, SARS, MARS, Influenza and all of the rest?
Or rather, why didn't you wear a mask?
You wanted to kill Grandma?
Is this directed at me?

If so, I wasn't ever asked by the government to wear a mask to help mitigate the spread of any of those viruses. So I can only assume that the experts in virology and epidemiology at that time didn't think I (breathing in and out at the time and place I happened to be) constituted a significant factor to the spread of those viruses.

It's pretty simple really. When certified experts state their professional opinion - which they have come to based on scientific evidence - I don't take a quick look at the web using confirmation bias and decide I know better than them. I take note of what they say and then try to learn more on my own. Or in the case of wearing a mask in public, I just do it because it's very easy and really doesn't threaten my overly sensitive feelings.
 
That's what their next step should be, huh? So how long does natural immunity last? I'd like to know how long mine will last, and from which strains of the virus I an immune, please.
If you were worried enough to wear a mask and disrupt your life last year, I see no reason you should stop masking or disrupting this year. There's no reason to expect that your risk of dying of the flu, or anything else, will be dramatically lower in 2021, or 2022, than it was in 2020.

Continue to shelter in place!
 
Last edited:

wiscoaster

Well-known member
...How about being a vector? ....
Every organism on earth is a vector for something that puts some other organism at risk. Get on with life ... it usually survives anyway.

My own approach, and I think the most reasonable, practical, scientific and effective approach is: people who have aquired some degree of immunity through vaccination, disease recovery, or exposure without disease, have no need to take any extra precautions either for themselves or for others. Others are no threat to their health, and as they are no longer contagious they are no threat to others. People who have no immunity, compromised immunity, or morbidity factors should take precautions to protect themselves until such time as herd immunity is achieved.
 

WrongHanded

Well-known member
You're mischaracterizing the response of a normal immune system as a black-and-white all or nothing thing.
And my point is that you don't know and can't say. So why speak on what the CDC should or should not do next when you don't have any facts to back up your opinion?

Every organism on earth is a vector for something that puts some other organism at risk. Get on with life ... it usually survives anyway.

My own approach, and I think the most reasonable, practical, scientific and effective approach is: people who have aquired some degree of immunity through vaccination, disease recovery, or exposure without disease, have no need to take any extra precautions either for themselves or for others. Others are no threat to their health, and as they are no longer contagious they are no threat to others. People who have no immunity, compromised immunity, or morbidity factors should take precautions to protect themselves until such time as herd immunity is achieved.

You can make your own decisions on the level of risk you are willing to accept. But when it comes putting others at risk, things become more complicated. And again, without and actual evidence of how much natural immunity some has to what strains of the virus or for how long that may or may not last, what you're suggesting in not logic or reason based. You're making assumptions, and asserting that actions should be taken without consideration to the potential negative effects that may result.

Unless you're actually a medical doctor who specializes in these fields of study, you should probably just accept that those at the CDC know far more than you do about the subject.
 

WrongHanded

Well-known member
If you were worried enough to wear a mask and disrupt your life last year, I see no reason you should stop masking or disrupting this year. There's no reason to expect that your risk of dying of the flu, or anything else, will be dramatically lower in 2021, or 2022, than it was in 2020.

Continue to shelter in place!
Whilst you may not realize it, by making me and my personal safety the subject of your post, you're saying something else. That is, you're making it all about the self. My self, or more particularly, your self. A pandemic is not about an individual. It's about society as a whole. I don't wear a mask for me, I wear it to protect society from a potentially deadly virus that I may be carrying. I do it to reduce the chances of infecting others and further spreading the disease.

If all those who are so selfish and self involved would follow the measures put in place for the good of everyone, we'd have much better control over this thing. But many truly are too selfish to protect other people by following some simple guidelines.
 

roscoe

Active member
Whilst you may not realize it, by making me and my personal safety the subject of your post, you're saying something else. That is, you're making it all about the self. My self, or more particularly, your self. A pandemic is not about an individual. It's about society as a whole. I don't wear a mask for me, I wear it to protect society from a potentially deadly virus that I may be carrying. I do it to reduce the chances of infecting others and further spreading the disease.

If all those who are so selfish and self involved would follow the measures put in place for the good of everyone, we'd have much better control over this thing. But many truly are too selfish to protect other people by following some simple guidelines.

The very essence of current right-wing thought is ill-informed short-term self-interest, so you can't be surprised by their reaction.
 

wiscoaster

Well-known member
.... you should probably just accept that those at the CDC know far more than you do about the subject.
Maybe they do, but when they've got a track record of withholding facts they know, and worse yet, lying about it, I don't put much cred into what they have to say about the subject. I'd rather pay attention to non-government experts who have no political or self interest in the subject. Of whom there have been a sufficient number to accord a reputable consensus about the genuine facts, but have been mostly suppressed and censored because they disagree with the politically acceptable "official" facts.
 

WrongHanded

Well-known member
...and on the flip side of the same token, if the CDC is now saying it's OK for vaccinated persons to go maskless, why aren't YOU accepting it?
If they say it's okay for vaccinated people to go maskless, I'm fine with it. When a person is vaccinated, they know they've been vaccinated. And they can prove they've been vaccinated. More to the point, if they can't prove it, they very likely haven't been.

On the flip side of THAT token: People may think they're immune because they think they've been exposed and recovered, yet were never actually tested. They may think they are immune because they were exposed and didn't get sick. They may have had a false positive. They may have had the virus early and no longer have immunity. They may not have immunity to certain strains. Or they may just decide to lie about being immune because they don't want to wear a mask.

This still is not about the individual. It's about the population; it's about American Citizens. You are still not an expert. And I am still more willing to believe those who choose to work at the CDC and serve the people, than some other scientists or doctors working privately for what is likely to be far more money.

I'd rather pay attention to non-government experts who have no political or self interest in the subject.
That's a bold statement to make. You know everyone likes money right? You think non-government experts can't be bought? Interesting that you're unwilling to believe the CDC under the assumption that they're politically motivated (but weren't motivated by Trump right? Just the Democrats?). Yet you seem unwilling to consider that someone else who works for profit is not totally trustworthy....because what they're saying fits your narrative? What about non-government experts who agree with the CDC assessment? Would you consider their professional opinions, or are they part of the conspiracy too?
 

wiscoaster

Well-known member
@WrongHanded - I think the basic "wrongness" of your points of view on pretty much every topic discussed here is that you automatically ascribe only selfish motivations to anyone and everyone who disagrees with your points of view and with the politically correct or majority narratives. You don't appreciate that others with conflicting points of view may actually be acting from entirely altruistic motives because they believe their differing points of view are in the best interests of their country, the public, and yes, humanity as a whole.
 

WrongHanded

Well-known member
@WrongHanded - I think the basic "wrongness" of your points of view on pretty much every topic discussed here is that you automatically ascribe only selfish motivations to anyone and everyone who disagrees with your points of view and with the politically correct or majority narratives. You don't appreciate that others with conflicting points of view may actually be acting from entirely altruistic motives because they believe their differing points of view are in the best interests of their country, the public, and yes, humanity as a whole.
When people voice their opposition to an issue basing it on a lack of evidence, or in blatant contradiction of the evidence presented; when people begin with a vague concept reeking of conspiracy theory; when people ignore the vast majority of experts in favor of a tiny minority telling them what they want to hear; when people fail to provide evidence to substantiate their claims; when people call the long established free media liars and instead adopt alternatives with no proven track record of being correct or providing the truth; when people ignore what is a plausible and likely truth in favor of a narrative that contradicts the evidence, facts and vast majority of experts because it can lead them to the conclusion they want so badly to be true..... I consider those people emotionally reactive and wrong. And usually there are only a few driving motivators for such a reaction. One of them is certainly selfishness. Another could be described as some kind of brain washing. Any yet another could easily be described as narcissism.

But please, continue to tell us how wiscoaster knows best what the CDC should do next.
 
Top