|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jul 30, 2021 22:59:33 GMT -5
Well said hoyaatheart55. Precautions are important, but they can be taken too far. Just today the New York Times acknowledged that humans have vainly overestimated their power over viruses. NYT even admitted, “This spring, caseloads were not consistently higher in parts of the U.S. that had relaxed masking and social distancing measures (like Florida and Texas) than in regions that remained vigilant.” At this point it would be ridiculous to mandate vaccines and masks for sporting events. I read that same newsletter from the NYT, but the logic there is flawed. We saw consistently with the different "Waves" that the Virus hits different areas at different times. So you can't just look at the same time period in different locations because that's comparing apples and oranges. You need to look at the places when they had the same level of virus circulating. The Data clearly shows that 1) masking works 2) the vaccines work. The places that are getting hit the hardest right now are the ones with the lowest vaccine rates. Vaccination ought to be required to take place in public life at this point. Like France is doing now. You want to go to a restaurant, movie, or sporting event you need to be vaccinated. (Unless you cannot receive the vaccine or have religious reason to not receive it, then you need to provide a negative covid test from that day).
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Jul 31, 2021 8:00:19 GMT -5
Definitely headed towards a mandatory vaccine situation. Those clinging to religious or medical reasons would have to test at least weekly and mask up at work.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,369
|
Post by SSHoya on Jul 31, 2021 9:26:43 GMT -5
Definitely headed towards a mandatory vaccine situation. Those clinging to religious or medical reasons would have to test at least weekly and mask up at work. Come on, man. You wanna take away my "right to infect?!" Freedumb!! Those of us who have behaved responsibly — wearing masks and, since the vaccines became available, getting our shots — cannot be held hostage by those who can’t be bothered to do the same, or who are too deluded by misinformation to understand what is so clearly in their own interest. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/30/require-vaccine-its-time-stop-coddling-reckless/?itid=hp_opinions
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jul 31, 2021 10:07:43 GMT -5
They need to hurry up and get kids vaccinated. That would push the vaccination rate up to the 80-85% range.
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Jul 31, 2021 18:27:09 GMT -5
They need to hurry up and get kids vaccinated. That would push the vaccination rate up to the 80-85% range.
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Jul 31, 2021 18:49:42 GMT -5
14% of the population is under 12 and vaccine responses in young children have often been quite poor. Often vaccines for young children require multiple doses or often specially developed vaccines. Assuming the current pfizer or moderna vaccine works well in older children (say 5 and over), I think a 5-7% total increase in vaccination rate for the whole population might be possible with this strategy assuming that the 40% of adults who won't get vaccines are also unlikely to vaccinate their children. So, no this will not get us anywhere near to 80-85% of our total population. Since people don't want a free vaccine provided by our tax dollars which has been proven to to save lives, I suggest a new strategy. A dual strategy of making the vaccine have a cost past a future date as well as a "moron" tax fining anyone who does not get the vaccine by an even later date could be used to provide incentive. This would certainly be justified as people who are un-vaccinated are clearly a danger to public safety and health.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2021 18:56:12 GMT -5
14% of the population is under 12 and vaccine responses in young children have often been quite poor. Often vaccines for young children require multiple doses or often specially developed vaccines. Assuming the current pfizer or moderna vaccine works well in older children (say 5 and over), I think a 5-7% total increase in vaccination rate for the whole population might be possible with this strategy assuming that the 40% of adults who won't get vaccines are also unlikely to vaccinate their children. So, no this will not get us anywhere near to 80-85% of our total population. Since people don't want a free vaccine provided by our tax dollars which has been proven to to save lives, I suggest a new strategy. A dual strategy of making the vaccine have a cost past a future date as well as a "moron" tax fining anyone who does not get the vaccine by an even later date could be used to provide incentive. This would certainly be justified as people who are un-vaccinated are clearly a danger to public safety and health. You know the Republicans don't want people to wear masks. They were pushing for people not to get vaccinated for a long time and still some are still anti vaccine (though most of them have been vaccinated). What do you think they are trying to accomplish with their reckless rhetoric and what is their ultimate agenda?
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,326
|
Post by tashoya on Jul 31, 2021 19:58:15 GMT -5
14% of the population is under 12 and vaccine responses in young children have often been quite poor. Often vaccines for young children require multiple doses or often specially developed vaccines. Assuming the current pfizer or moderna vaccine works well in older children (say 5 and over), I think a 5-7% total increase in vaccination rate for the whole population might be possible with this strategy assuming that the 40% of adults who won't get vaccines are also unlikely to vaccinate their children. So, no this will not get us anywhere near to 80-85% of our total population. Since people don't want a free vaccine provided by our tax dollars which has been proven to to save lives, I suggest a new strategy. A dual strategy of making the vaccine have a cost past a future date as well as a "moron" tax fining anyone who does not get the vaccine by an even later date could be used to provide incentive. This would certainly be justified as people who are un-vaccinated are clearly a danger to public safety and health. You know the Republicans don't want people to wear masks. They were pushing for people not to get vaccinated for a long time and still some are still anti vaccine (though most of them have been vaccinated). What do you think they are trying to accomplish with their reckless rhetoric and what is their ultimate agenda? Stoking anger against the Dems, regardless of the cost.
|
|
|
Post by MrDouglass on Aug 1, 2021 0:04:39 GMT -5
You actually think this all boils down to Republicans pushing an “agenda” to stoke anger against Democrats at any cost? You think the millions of Americans who have raised freedom issues are simply “dumb”? You can’t see any gray area in the science, even after the NYT, the paragon of progressives, identifies multiple perplexities? I’m sorry, but all of you pushing for widespread mask and vaccine mandates are rushing to judgment. There is still much to learn about this virus. It is obviously dangerous, just as dangerous as the 1968 influenza which killed 1 to 4 million people worldwide. Covid needs to be taken seriously. But we also have to undertake a risk utility analysis with every mandated precaution, and I don’t think we have enough statistics to support some of the extreme measures that have been considered. Sure, there are numerous negative statistics, but others have been relatively positive, such as dramatically decreasing death rates at numerous times when increasing death rates were expected. Obviously this post is not designed to examine the matter thoroughly, but I hope you are not offended if I suggest the statistics do not all line up neatly in support of your conclusions. I also hope you’re not offended if I suggest that you may be failing to see things from the other side. When anyone suggests facts or statistics that conflict with your own, like in the NYT article, you merely brush them away. You may believe your cotton masks have protected you, but you are clearly infected with confirmation bias. Of course, the “you” to whom I’m referring is only those few people above who quickly attacked me when I dared suggest that mask and vaccine mandates are ridiculous. Maybe the word “ridiculous” was inflammatory, and if so I apoligize. Probably I should have instead used the words “unnecessary at this point.”
|
|
jwp91
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,035
|
Post by jwp91 on Aug 1, 2021 4:09:19 GMT -5
You actually think this all boils down to Republicans pushing an “agenda” to stoke anger against Democrats at any cost? You think the millions of Americans who have raised freedom issues are simply “dumb”? You can’t see any gray area in the science, even after the NYT, the paragon of progressives, identifies multiple perplexities? I’m sorry, but all of you pushing for widespread mask and vaccine mandates are rushing to judgment. There is still much to learn about this virus. It is obviously dangerous, just as dangerous as the 1968 influenza which killed 1 to 4 million people worldwide. Covid needs to be taken seriously. But we also have to undertake a risk utility analysis with every mandated precaution, and I don’t think we have enough statistics to support some of the extreme measures that have been considered. Sure, there are numerous negative statistics, but others have been relatively positive, such as dramatically decreasing death rates at numerous times when increasing death rates were expected. Obviously this post is not designed to examine the matter thoroughly, but I hope you are not offended if I suggest the statistics do not all line up neatly in support of your conclusions. I also hope you’re not offended if I suggest that you may be failing to see things from the other side. When anyone suggests facts or statistics that conflict with your own, like in the NYT article, you merely brush them away. You may believe your cotton masks have protected you, but you are clearly infected with confirmation bias. Of course, the “you” to whom I’m referring is only those few people above who quickly attacked me when I dared suggest that mask and vaccine mandates are ridiculous. Maybe the word “ridiculous” was inflammatory, and if so I apoligize. Probably I should have instead used the words “unnecessary at this point.” The real experts are unequivocal on the impacts of masks and vaccines. So many people have died. Almost more than any other event in American history. I would encourage you to reconsider your sources.
|
|
|
Post by MrDouglass on Aug 1, 2021 5:46:41 GMT -5
You actually think this all boils down to Republicans pushing an “agenda” to stoke anger against Democrats at any cost? You think the millions of Americans who have raised freedom issues are simply “dumb”? You can’t see any gray area in the science, even after the NYT, the paragon of progressives, identifies multiple perplexities? I’m sorry, but all of you pushing for widespread mask and vaccine mandates are rushing to judgment. There is still much to learn about this virus. It is obviously dangerous, just as dangerous as the 1968 influenza which killed 1 to 4 million people worldwide. Covid needs to be taken seriously. But we also have to undertake a risk utility analysis with every mandated precaution, and I don’t think we have enough statistics to support some of the extreme measures that have been considered. Sure, there are numerous negative statistics, but others have been relatively positive, such as dramatically decreasing death rates at numerous times when increasing death rates were expected. Obviously this post is not designed to examine the matter thoroughly, but I hope you are not offended if I suggest the statistics do not all line up neatly in support of your conclusions. I also hope you’re not offended if I suggest that you may be failing to see things from the other side. When anyone suggests facts or statistics that conflict with your own, like in the NYT article, you merely brush them away. You may believe your cotton masks have protected you, but you are clearly infected with confirmation bias. Of course, the “you” to whom I’m referring is only those few people above who quickly attacked me when I dared suggest that mask and vaccine mandates are ridiculous. Maybe the word “ridiculous” was inflammatory, and if so I apoligize. Probably I should have instead used the words “unnecessary at this point.” The real experts are unequivocal on the impacts of masks and vaccines. So many people have died. Almost more than any other event in history. I would encourage you to reconsider your sources. First of all, no one is questioning the seriousness of Covid. You apparently didn’t read my post carefully. Of course, Covid pales in comparison to history’s worst pandemics, but it is still extremely serious. Secondly, your statement about experts being “unequivocal on the impacts of masks and vaccines” misses the point. Obviously masks and vaccines are beneficial, but the question is whether they should be mandated at sporting events, and here I would ask you to remember the critical thinking skills that you learned Georgetown…. Imagine our arena filled with fans to some significant degree. Would masks have a significant effect on transmission? At first glance it seems so, but let’s be realistic. Everyone in there is going to be drinking a beverage, maybe eating a hotdog, all while hollering with their masks intermittingly down. Breath is going to be flying around just like it always does in a sporting event. Maybe not as much, but it’s still gonna be there. Even if you’ve had a vaccine, you may very well be a breakthrough patient who spreads Covid just like the unvaccinated. Plus there are other issues. While everyone agrees that masks reduce the odds of transmission, there have always been legitimate albeit taboo questions as to the degree of protection provided by masks. Even if they reduce the odds of transmission, I would submit that transmission still occurs to no insignificant degree. Some materials filter better than others, some people wear them more tightly than others, some people comply with nose coverage better than others, some people pull them down as chin straps for the sake of comfort more than others, some people repeatedly use the same mask for a long period of time and even flip sides, unwittingly transforming their masks into spitwad sheets, on and on. Please understand, I am not saying masks are worthless! I’m only questioning whether we should mandate masks at a sporting event. If masks are not going to truly stop transmission in a crowded closed environment, wouldn’t the responsible measure simply be to continue prohibiting attendance, or at least limit attendance to a very small percentage of the seats so that people can truly be separated by 6 feet in all directions? (not that I support these measures either). Of course, people can still wear their masks if they want to, and that is great. I am simply questioning whether they should be mandatory at a sporting event. As for vaccines, I am questioning whether they should be mandatory now that we have learned (in the last few weeks) about breakthrough transmission. Again, I’m not saying vaccines are worthless! I’m just asking whether they should be mandatory at a sporting event. It is a risk-utility question. Finally, above you asked me to “reconsider my sources,“ and you made a reference to “real experts.“ Well, the source that I cited for my original post was the New York Times. Do you think that the New York Times has been irresponsible during the pandemic? If the New York Times acknowledges numerous perplexities about the virus (as it just did) and questions some of the measures that have been mandated over the last year (as it did with outdoor mask mandates), are you going to question the New York Times as a source? Do you think the New York Times editors would allow some rogue reporter to take reckless positions? If so, then I repeat my assertion that you are suffering from confirmation bias. You may also be failing to think critically. I especially make this last assertion in light of your use of the phrase “real experts,” as if any expert who would dare take a position contrary to yours on some aspect of Covid must simply be a fraud. I have clearly gone on too long about this, and I do not plan to respond to continued attacks, especially those demonstrating a lack of critical thinking. I will simply close by repeating that the issue here is merely whether masks and vaccines should be mandated at sporting events, and I do not think those mandates are necessary at this time.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Aug 1, 2021 7:09:32 GMT -5
Does this thread even belong on HoyaTalk?
|
|
jwp91
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,035
|
Post by jwp91 on Aug 1, 2021 8:26:11 GMT -5
The real experts are unequivocal on the impacts of masks and vaccines. So many people have died. Almost more than any other event in history. I would encourage you to reconsider your sources. First of all, no one is questioning the seriousness of Covid. You apparently didn’t read my post carefully. Of course, Covid pales in comparison to history’s worst pandemics, but it is still extremely serious. Secondly, your statement about experts being “unequivocal on the impacts of masks and vaccines” misses the point. Obviously masks and vaccines are beneficial, but the question is whether they should be mandated at sporting events, and here I would ask you to remember the critical thinking skills that you learned Georgetown…. Imagine our arena filled with fans to some significant degree. Would masks have a significant effect on transmission? At first glance it seems so, but let’s be realistic. Everyone in there is going to be drinking a beverage, maybe eating a hotdog, all while hollering with their masks intermittingly down. Breath is going to be flying around just like it always does in a sporting event. Maybe not as much, but it’s still gonna be there. Even if you’ve had a vaccine, you may very well be a breakthrough patient who spreads Covid just like the unvaccinated. Plus there are other issues. While everyone agrees that masks reduce the odds of transmission, there have always been legitimate albeit taboo questions as to the degree of protection provided by masks. Even if they reduce the odds of transmission, I would submit that transmission still occurs to no insignificant degree. Some materials filter better than others, some people wear them more tightly than others, some people comply with nose coverage better than others, some people pull them down as chin straps for the sake of comfort more than others, some people repeatedly use the same mask for a long period of time and even flip sides, unwittingly transforming their masks into spitwad sheets, on and on. Please understand, I am not saying masks are worthless! I’m only questioning whether we should mandate masks at a sporting event. If masks are not going to truly stop transmission in a crowded closed environment, wouldn’t the responsible measure simply be to continue prohibiting attendance, or at least limit attendance to a very small percentage of the seats so that people can truly be separated by 6 feet in all directions? (not that I support these measures either). Of course, people can still wear their masks if they want to, and that is great. I am simply questioning whether they should be mandatory at a sporting event. As for vaccines, I am questioning whether they should be mandatory now that we have learned (in the last few weeks) about breakthrough transmission. Again, I’m not saying vaccines are worthless! I’m just asking whether they should be mandatory at a sporting event. It is a risk-utility question. Finally, above you asked me to “reconsider my sources,“ and you made a reference to “real experts.“ Well, the source that I cited for my original post was the New York Times. Do you think that the New York Times has been irresponsible during the pandemic? If the New York Times acknowledges numerous perplexities about the virus (as it just did) and questions some of the measures that have been mandated over the last year (as it did with outdoor mask mandates), are you going to question the New York Times as a source? Do you think the New York Times editors would allow some rogue reporter to take reckless positions? If so, then I repeat my assertion that you are suffering from confirmation bias. You may also be failing to think critically. I especially make this last assertion in light of your use of the phrase “real experts,” as if any expert who would dare take a position contrary to yours on some aspect of Covid must simply be a fraud. I have clearly gone on too long about this, and I do not plan to respond to continued attacks, especially those demonstrating a lack of critical thinking. I will simply close by repeating that the issue here is merely whether masks and vaccines should be mandated at sporting events, and I do not think those mandates are necessary at this time. While I consider the NYT to be a generally reliable source, I wouldn’t bet my health on every single item they have reported. I don’t know the article you cite nor the credentials of its author. Your arguments basically suggest a best course of action of a full shut down of college sports. Maybe if people could wear appropriate masks properly and forewent a hot dog and a soda, we could attend Hoya basketball games.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2021 8:36:28 GMT -5
I'm amazed you can get through an entire ramble like that and not mention your affinity for crypto.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,457
|
Post by TC on Aug 1, 2021 10:41:56 GMT -5
Maybe if people could wear appropriate masks properly and forewent a hot dog and a soda, we could attend Hoya basketball games. I think this is a great reason to have the games at McDonough because no one is going to eat those awful McDonough hot dogs.
|
|