Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're a weird one. Most people wouldn't even attempt the somewhat adult-like move of arguing back with science. But almost none of that content is relevant. Some of it is editorial, and all the studies appear to be pre-date Delta (when contagiousness ramped up) and nothing seems to indicate thorough testing of students, employees, and people who live with them. On-campus learning is safe enough for the kids, probably. For teachers and people it possibly spreads outside school to, no. And none of those studies claims it doesn't spread at all. There are so many sources of transmission that it's imperative to plug leaks that can be plugged. Campuses can be made more anti-COVID.
That's a very wrong way to look at it.
The point isn't to punish them (even if they're infected due to careless behavior). It is mostly to protect others (for example, co-workers) from them, who might develop bad symptoms. In fact, many "healthy people free of symptoms" won't be asymptomatic days after testing positive, because of the presymptomatic stage.
Incidences of asymptomatic spread are EXCEEDINGLY rare. Admittedly, this is a forbidden fact: It is a truth which is forbidden from the public square.
Discipline or punishment is what it is. I think it's wrong to look at these measures as merely anodyne "protective" measures, when they are utterly unprecedented, profoundly draconian violations of civil liberties, which often are *NOT* backed in science or data. We've seen one draconian measure after another presented as "Following the science" which was anything but that, and then ultimately justified because it was made "out of an abundance of caution."
You're a weird one. Most people wouldn't even attempt the somewhat adult-like move of arguing back with science. But almost none of that content is relevant. Some of it is editorial, and all the studies appear to be pre-date Delta (when contagiousness ramped up) and nothing seems to indicate thorough testing of students, employees, and people who live with them. On-campus learning is safe enough for the kids, probably. For teachers and people it possibly spreads outside school to, no. And none of those studies claims it doesn't spread at all. There are so many sources of transmission that it's imperative to plug leaks that can be plugged. Campuses can be made more anti-COVID.
Missed on the aspiring communists is the paradox they create with this kind of talk: If kids, who are safe, are interacting with people who are fully vaccinated, and those people really aren't safe, then what is being said is that the vaccines are useless. It says that, even with full vaccination, people aren't safe to interact with others in public. This amounts to severe misinformation, of course. But, you can't credibly have it both ways. You can't, on the one hand, claim the vaccines are essential and that everyone should get them, and then on the other hand come back and claim that fully vaccinated people aren't safe. Mind you, you CAN do both of these things simultaneously- you are, it seems- but you can't do so credibly.
What does keeping kids home from school have to do with communism? Cecily Myart-Cruz, the head of one of the largest and most influential teachers' unions in the country, offers a glimpse into this in this revealing interview herehttps://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/...eachers-union/
The idea is to have a sort of "trickle up" effect. If kids have to stay home, many parents will feel forced to also stay at home to supervise, which will lead to a (further) shortage of workers, which will harm businesses, which can be passed up to corporations and, ultimately, banks. It's a bit bat**** crazy, yes. But that's an apt characterization of radicals like Myart-Cruz.
Incidences of asymptomatic spread are EXCEEDINGLY rare. Admittedly, this is a forbidden fact: It is a truth which is forbidden from the public square.
Discipline or punishment is what it is. I think it's wrong to look at these measures as merely anodyne "protective" measures, when they are utterly unprecedented, profoundly draconian violations of civil liberties, which often are *NOT* backed in science or data. We've seen one draconian measure after another presented as "Following the science" which was anything but that, and then ultimately justified because it was made "out of an abundance of caution."
Assertion, plus conflating asymptomatic and presymptomatic. Most egregiously, basing an argument in ignorance of a case like Typhoid Mary. It was established early last century or even earlier that it's lawful to quarantine contagious people who don't feel sick.
Quote:
Missed on the aspiring communists is the paradox they create with this kind of talk: If kids, who are safe, are interacting with people who are fully vaccinated, and those people really aren't safe, then what is being said is that the vaccines are useless. It says that, even with full vaccination, people aren't safe to interact with others in public. This amounts to severe misinformation, of course. But, you can't credibly have it both ways. You can't, on the one hand, claim the vaccines are essential and that everyone should get them, and then on the other hand come back and claim that fully vaccinated people aren't safe. Mind you, you CAN do both of these things simultaneously- you are, it seems- but you can't do so credibly.
What does keeping kids home from school have to do with communism? Cecily Myart-Cruz, the head of one of the largest and most influential teachers' unions in the country, offers a glimpse into this in this revealing interview herehttps://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/...eachers-union/
The idea is to have a sort of "trickle up" effect. If kids have to stay home, many parents will feel forced to also stay at home to supervise, which will lead to a (further) shortage of workers, which will harm businesses, which can be passed up to corporations and, ultimately, banks. It's a bit bat**** crazy, yes. But that's an apt characterization of radicals like Myart-Cruz.
Of course that's basically a personal attack and for the record I consider Communism stupid and loathsome.
Besides that, most people realize that Delta and Omicron are different and that the vaccine is reasonably effective against the former. Furthermore, no credible medical professional ever said that the vaccine alone would prevent all transmission and some categories of people don't get much protection via vaccination. Now mitigation measures will have to be stepped up to control vaccine-evading Omicron.
It's clear that some of the cases in the county are due to people who put imagined rights ahead of public safety.
Assertion, plus conflating asymptomatic and presymptomatic. Most egregiously, basing an argument in ignorance of a case like Typhoid Mary. It was established early last century or even earlier that it's lawful to quarantine contagious people who don't feel sick.
Of course that's basically a personal attack and for the record I consider Communism stupid and loathsome.
Besides that, most people realize that Delta and Omicron are different and that the vaccine is reasonably effective against the former. Furthermore, no credible medical professional ever said that the vaccine alone would prevent all transmission and some categories of people don't get much protection via vaccination. Now mitigation measures will have to be stepped up to control vaccine-evading Omicron.
It's clear that some of the cases in the county are due to people who put imagined rights ahead of public safety.
Crime is a bigger threat to public safety than Covid.
Assertion, plus conflating asymptomatic and presymptomatic. Most egregiously, basing an argument in ignorance of a case like Typhoid Mary. It was established early last century or even earlier that it's lawful to quarantine contagious people who don't feel sick.
Of course that's basically a personal attack and for the record I consider Communism stupid and loathsome.
Besides that, most people realize that Delta and Omicron are different and that the vaccine is reasonably effective against the former. Furthermore, no credible medical professional ever said that the vaccine alone would prevent all transmission and some categories of people don't get much protection via vaccination. Now mitigation measures will have to be stepped up to control vaccine-evading Omicron.
It's clear that some of the cases in the county are due to people who put imagined rights ahead of public safety.
Sooner rather than later, there needs to be a requirement that evidence is presented that demonstrates said person is contagious. Thus far, this has not happened. EVERYONE has just been presumed to be contagious, often without any evidence specific to the persons being quarantined.
Each and every person walking down a sidewalk *could* suddenly assault another person walking down the sidewalk. But, we don't use that fact to prohibit people from walking down the sidewalk. Now, if someone threatens to assault someone else, or already has been known to assault others, THEN we may impose restrictions on said person. Point being, there needs to be better and more substantial evidence of a threat beyond the mere idea that anyone could be a threat.
Omicron only evades antibodies; Memory T and B cells still protect against severe disease. For that reason, it is incorrect to state that fully vaccinated people are not safe interacting with the public. I suppose they aren't safe from eventually testing positive, but they are safe from severe illness or death from Covid.
Literally EVERYONE has or will caught it. Neither government nor humanity can totally eliminate cases of this. Trying to do so is on par with trying to eliminate lightning, or earthquakes. Sure, it's more fun to just cast the opposite political tribe as being filthy moral monsters. But, ultimately, that is neither beneficial nor appropriate.
Crime is a bigger threat to public safety than Covid.
And many of the "protective measures", aka infringements on basic human rights, are helping to contribute to the rise in crime by way of poorer mental health.
Once again, we have to distinguish between prudent precaution and excess zeal. It seems to me, that in some quarters there is rampant and unbridled desire to make the world just-so, to punish or at least to corrall any persons or entities who oppose this vision, and to doggedly pursue an antiseptic and coddled kind of life, it being thought, that to be limited but safe, is inherently better than the opposite.
Look folks... no serious people gleefully cheer 1000 or 2000 American deaths daily, or 8000 worldwide, or whatever the number is. I take no pleasure from hearing that a friend's parent has died from Covid. But here's the thing... life is fragile, you see? No, we shouldn't just **** it away. But to what lengths ought I legitiately to go, to protect yours, or should you go, to protect mine? We are fellow citizens, neighbors, members of the community. But we are not brothers. I am not your kin. If you die, I am saddened. But I will not be disconsolate or raving in dispair. I will do a modicum of things, to advance the vitality of your life; such is what fellow citizens do. But it is only a modicum. And rest assured, I demand no more from you, nor do you rise in my assessment, were you to voluntariy do more.
Once again, we have to distinguish between prudent precaution and excess zeal. It seems to me, that in some quarters there is rampant and unbridled desire to make the world just-so, to punish or at least to corrall any persons or entities who oppose this vision, and to doggedly pursue an antiseptic and coddled kind of life, it being thought, that to be limited but safe, is inherently better than the opposite.
Look folks... no serious people gleefully cheer 1000 or 2000 American deaths daily, or 8000 worldwide, or whatever the number is. I take no pleasure from hearing that a friend's parent has died from Covid. But here's the thing... life is fragile, you see? No, we shouldn't just **** it away. But to what lengths ought I legitiately to go, to protect yours, or should you go, to protect mine? We are fellow citizens, neighbors, members of the community. But we are not brothers. I am not your kin. If you die, I am saddened. But I will not be disconsolate or raving in dispair. I will do a modicum of things, to advance the vitality of your life; such is what fellow citizens do. But it is only a modicum. And rest assured, I demand no more from you, nor do you rise in my assessment, were you to voluntariy do more.
Yep. The reasoning sure seems simple and straight-forward. And yet they persist in the opposite direction. It's why we are reasonable to question if there are other motives in play which they are not being forthcoming about.
For the weeklong period that ended Dec. 11, for every 100,000 unvaccinated residents, there were 272 L.A. County residents who were newly infected with the coronavirus. By comparison, for every 100,000 residents who were considered fully vaccinated but hadn’t received a booster, 68 were infected.
Those who had received their booster had the lowest risk of infection. For every 100,000 residents who received a booster, only 12 were infected that week.
That means unvaccinated people were 23 times more likely to be infected with the coronavirus than vaccinated people who received a booster shot.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
