CDC new no mask policy seems like a giant FU

[Freedom2016]

I hate the notion of telling vaccinated people to put on a faux show in public for the sake of community cohesion. That seems wrong to me in so many ways.

No different than telling all of the low-risk and recovered to put on a faux show in public like we've been for the past year.

what show? that "faux-show" helped save high-risk lives

+1

DH and I are low priority for vaccination but we're thrilled that family, friends, and neighbors are increasingly getting their shots. We're following the new CDC guidelines and are hosting my vaccinated in-laws tomorrow, who have not hugged their grandchildren in a year.

[bigblock440]

I hate the notion of telling vaccinated people to put on a faux show in public for the sake of community cohesion. That seems wrong to me in so many ways.

No different than telling all of the low-risk and recovered to put on a faux show in public like we've been for the past year.

what show? that "faux-show" helped save high-risk lives

How exactly did having somebody who recovered and is immune distance and mask save lives?

[StashingAway]

1) We've never been "all in this together". That's what the media kept spitting at us, just like "these trying times". Some people lost their livliehoods and others made out like bandits. Others get to go romp around while others of us have to wait for our vacciene is just how it goes. Life isn't fair. I will wait for my vacciene then go and hug my family members who are also vaccinated.

2) I'm incredibly greatful that we have not one, not two, but three vaccines being rolled out at amazing pace! But nah, why not complain AGAIN. Plugged into the news cycle. If we had a cure for cancer, some of you would complain that certain cancers get treated first. Tend your own garden and quit worrying about all of this tedious political BS. Didn't we have enough of that last year? Or is it impossible to remove now that it's started?

3) This has never been about "fair". It should be about controlling the spread and keeping hospitalizations down. People get caught up in the virtue signaling of masks and made it political on both "sides". In reality the circumstances now, with cases dropping significantly and immunity increasing, the rules are going to be different than the were last year when we were trying to keep death rate down.

People are going to do stupid things. We cannot possibly regulate the stupid out. If someone is not wearing a mask when they should be, well, eh... who gives? Some people are going to be wearing masks indefinitely because we like them. Should we complain that they are doing so? Or should we mind our own and try to cultivate a better world.

Thanks for letting me vent. I'm just tired of the bickering. We have to build a better world from this and people are still nit-picking very minor details.

Or maybe the CDC just gave us all the bird, maliciously. IDK

[bigblock440]

I hate the notion of telling vaccinated people to put on a faux show in public for the sake of community cohesion. That seems wrong to me in so many ways.

No different than telling all of the low-risk and recovered to put on a faux show in public like we've been for the past year.

what show? that "faux-show" helped save high-risk lives

How exactly did having somebody who recovered and is immune distance and mask save lives?

You cannot tell by looking at someone whether or not they are immune.

So if you make a rule that allows people to not mask and distance if they have had the disease and recovered, you have to trust that only people who actually are immune will go maskless.

There are plenty of people who would lie and claim to be immune because they just don't want to wear a mask.

So, it saves lives by not making it possible for the maskless liars to put others at risk.

Can you look at someone and tell that they've been vaccinated? 

[GuitarStv]

I hate the notion of telling vaccinated people to put on a faux show in public for the sake of community cohesion. That seems wrong to me in so many ways.

No different than telling all of the low-risk and recovered to put on a faux show in public like we've been for the past year.

what show? that "faux-show" helped save high-risk lives

How exactly did having somebody who recovered and is immune distance and mask save lives?

You cannot tell by looking at someone whether or not they are immune.

So if you make a rule that allows people to not mask and distance if they have had the disease and recovered, you have to trust that only people who actually are immune will go maskless.

There are plenty of people who would lie and claim to be immune because they just don't want to wear a mask.

So, it saves lives by not making it possible for the maskless liars to put others at risk.

Can you look at someone and tell that they've been vaccinated?

No.  Which is why it makes sense to continue to enforce mask mandates until everyone is vaccinated.

[dandarc]

So, my friend's roommate has had confirmed Covid twice. Mardi-Gras 2020 and even if not official, this guy who is rooming with a doctor in NYC, decided he had to go to Carnival in Brazil in 2021. From what I'm told, this guy is a walking billboard of what not to do. Anecdotal but I think a cautionary tale that goes to Ockhamist's point - we do need to remain vigilant even after being vaccinated as individuals. Spread is trending the right way, but certainly not low enough to where we can think we're done with this one.

[StashingAway]

I hate the notion of telling vaccinated people to put on a faux show in public for the sake of community cohesion. That seems wrong to me in so many ways.

No different than telling all of the low-risk and recovered to put on a faux show in public like we've been for the past year.

what show? that "faux-show" helped save high-risk lives

How exactly did having somebody who recovered and is immune distance and mask save lives?

You cannot tell by looking at someone whether or not they are immune.

So if you make a rule that allows people to not mask and distance if they have had the disease and recovered, you have to trust that only people who actually are immune will go maskless.

There are plenty of people who would lie and claim to be immune because they just don't want to wear a mask.

So, it saves lives by not making it possible for the maskless liars to put others at risk.

Can you look at someone and tell that they've been vaccinated?

No.  Which is why it makes sense to continue to enforce mask mandates until everyone is vaccinated.

Even in private gatherings? Because that's what OP is talking about. We're getting "shafted" by the CDC, who had said, simply, that fully vaccinated people can gather in small groups without masks. That's it! It would be infuriatingly silly for them to say otherwise. Incredibly, incredibly pretentious to have the gall to say that even if you are low risk and vaccinated that you cannot visit your family without wearing a mask. It would be completely, 100% against the science of the spread of the disease.

The CDC has said nothing about voluntary wearing a mask in these settings. The CDC has still said in large groups and public that masks are still recommended to be mandated. The CDC isn't the government; they are just making recommendations. If California wanted to make a mandate to wear masks in every setting all the time, CDC isn't stopping them.

For those folks who have been touting the science of disease spread, being offended when the CDC says it's safe once small groups are vaccinated sure is against that line of thought. This whole time it hasn't been about science... it's been about picking sides. It's been about media just aggressively creating division and making us hate each other. It's been a religious misunderstanding of each other and is frankly just exhausting.

It's just freggin masks. Who the eff puts so much gall dern energy into creating an insurmountable enemy narrative that we can't just let it go (on either side; I'm also talking to my parents who somehow can't just shut up and wear the things in public, somehow it's offensive to them to do so).

[Bloop Bloop Reloaded]

Some people believe in science and some believe in optics. Here in Melbourne even when we knew 90% of coronavirus infections were contained in certain suburbs that were adjacent to each other we still kept the same lockdown rules for the entire city (and indeed regional communities 100km away) for the sake of not pissing off the "less privileged", lol. Same reason why all businesses that were non-essential had to shut regardless of whether they were a 100-person gym or a 1-person office that could easily be sealed from risk of transmission.

[StashingAway]

Some people believe in science and some believe in optics. Here in Melbourne even when we knew 90% of coronavirus infections were contained in certain suburbs that were adjacent to each other we still kept the same lockdown rules for the entire city (and indeed regional communities 100km away) for the sake of not pissing off the "less privileged", lol. Same reason why all businesses that were non-essential had to shut regardless of whether they were a 100-person gym or a 1-person office that could easily be sealed from risk of transmission.

The optics of the CDC saying two vaccinated people can't take off their masks in private is more troublesome to me.

If the CDC said that that was off limits, I'd be pissed and throw in the towel. If a town I lived in a town said that, then I'd be frustrated but follow along. If my family members said that then I'd follow along so that everyone is comfortable. The point is that the CDC should be giving general advice, not try to micromanage human psychology and what each world government should implement.

I dunno, it just all seems so catty. Why even care? The people who are wearing masks will still make good decisions. The people that aren't wearing masks certainly aren't going to start. But you WILL throw a lot of people for a loop with something like a recommendation to still wear masks all the time, even if vaccinated in a small private group. I'm one of those people. I've been following along, extra careful. Even as a low risk candidate, I haven't been in public for over a year (other than outdoors). I take an insanely small amount of trips to the grocery store. It's all just to help us as a society get through the pandemic.

But whining about the CDC saying that you're way lower risk once vaccinated is too far for me. At some point we cannot let identity politics define us. I am not a masker or anti-masker. Those are made up terms by the media and we bought into it hook, line and sinker. I wear a mask at my job even though I have like 1% human contact in the day.

We can chose to be offended by "reading between the lines" of the CDC, or we can be MMM stoics and go about our day. I'm trying to do that, obviously not very well, ha!

[GuitarStv]

I hate the notion of telling vaccinated people to put on a faux show in public for the sake of community cohesion. That seems wrong to me in so many ways.

No different than telling all of the low-risk and recovered to put on a faux show in public like we've been for the past year.

what show? that "faux-show" helped save high-risk lives

How exactly did having somebody who recovered and is immune distance and mask save lives?

You cannot tell by looking at someone whether or not they are immune.

So if you make a rule that allows people to not mask and distance if they have had the disease and recovered, you have to trust that only people who actually are immune will go maskless.

There are plenty of people who would lie and claim to be immune because they just don't want to wear a mask.

So, it saves lives by not making it possible for the maskless liars to put others at risk.

Can you look at someone and tell that they've been vaccinated?

No.  Which is why it makes sense to continue to enforce mask mandates until everyone is vaccinated.

Even in private gatherings? Because that's what OP is talking about. We're getting "shafted" by the CDC, who had said, simply, that fully vaccinated people can gather in small groups without masks. That's it!

That's not really it though.

The CDC guidelines also said that a vaccinated person doesn't need to quarantine if they have close contact with a covid infected person.  In addition, they also say that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks to visit anyone who is unvaccinated who they don't think is high risk.

Both of these are (to the best of my knowledge) not currently supported by the science that we have about disease transmission, and are a lot more problematic than the common sense part of the CDC recommendations that you mentioned up above.

[StashingAway]

The CDC guidelines also said that a vaccinated person doesn't need to quarantine if they have close contact with a covid infected person.  In addition, they also say that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks to visit anyone who is unvaccinated who they don't think is high risk.

Both of these are (to the best of my knowledge) not currently supported by the science that we have about disease transmission, and are a lot more problematic than the common sense part of the CDC recommendations that you mentioned up above.

Bolded the important bits. I'll trust that the CDC has better knowledge about the science of disease spread than you (no offense, and I could be wrong by trusting them so I say it humbly)

Also, you're misrepresenting them just a touch. They say don't quarantine if you have no symptoms after interacting with an infected person.

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

[GuitarStv]

The CDC guidelines also said that a vaccinated person doesn't need to quarantine if they have close contact with a covid infected person.  In addition, they also say that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks to visit anyone who is unvaccinated who they don't think is high risk.

Both of these are (to the best of my knowledge) not currently supported by the science that we have about disease transmission, and are a lot more problematic than the common sense part of the CDC recommendations that you mentioned up above.

Bolded the important bits. I'll trust that the CDC has better knowledge about the science of disease spread than you (no offense, and I could be wrong by trusting them so I say it humbly)

Also, you're misrepresenting them just a touch. They say don't quarantine if you have no symptoms after interacting with an infected person.

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

100% of people have no symptoms immediately after contact with an infected person.  That's actually a big part of the reason this pandemic became a thing.  You don't show symptoms until well after being able to transmit the disease.

[Bloop Bloop Reloaded]

I hate the notion of telling vaccinated people to put on a faux show in public for the sake of community cohesion. That seems wrong to me in so many ways.

No different than telling all of the low-risk and recovered to put on a faux show in public like we've been for the past year.

what show? that "faux-show" helped save high-risk lives

How exactly did having somebody who recovered and is immune distance and mask save lives?

You cannot tell by looking at someone whether or not they are immune.

So if you make a rule that allows people to not mask and distance if they have had the disease and recovered, you have to trust that only people who actually are immune will go maskless.

There are plenty of people who would lie and claim to be immune because they just don't want to wear a mask.

So, it saves lives by not making it possible for the maskless liars to put others at risk.

Can you look at someone and tell that they've been vaccinated?

No.  Which is why it makes sense to continue to enforce mask mandates until everyone is vaccinated.

Even in private gatherings? Because that's what OP is talking about. We're getting "shafted" by the CDC, who had said, simply, that fully vaccinated people can gather in small groups without masks. That's it!

That's not really it though.

The CDC guidelines also said that a vaccinated person doesn't need to quarantine if they have close contact with a covid infected person.  In addition, they also say that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks to visit anyone who is unvaccinated who they don't think is high risk.

Both of these are (to the best of my knowledge) not currently supported by the science that we have about disease transmission, and are a lot more problematic than the common sense part of the CDC recommendations that you mentioned up above.

Why should a vaccinated person quarantine? He or she is vaccinated and the risk of re-infection is low. If we took such a conservative stance we'd be banning non-flu vaccinated people from international flights but we don't do that. At some stage you have to draw the line and let people live. High-risk people need to take more precautions than low risk people and the onus is not entirely on low-risk people to take precautions for the sake of others.

[StashingAway]

The CDC guidelines also said that a vaccinated person doesn't need to quarantine if they have close contact with a covid infected person.  In addition, they also say that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks to visit anyone who is unvaccinated who they don't think is high risk.

Both of these are (to the best of my knowledge) not currently supported by the science that we have about disease transmission, and are a lot more problematic than the common sense part of the CDC recommendations that you mentioned up above.

Bolded the important bits. I'll trust that the CDC has better knowledge about the science of disease spread than you (no offense, and I could be wrong by trusting them so I say it humbly)

Also, you're misrepresenting them just a touch. They say don't quarantine if you have no symptoms after interacting with an infected person.

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

100% of people have no symptoms immediately after contact with an infected person.  That's actually a big part of the reason this pandemic became a thing.  You don't show symptoms until well after being able to transmit the disease.

And 100% of people aren't themselves contagious immediately after contact. What's your point?

There's a possibility that the CDC is just winging it.

There's also a possibility that they've got a year's worth of data and are doing huge amounts of modeling to figure out how much the disease will spread in various scenarios. Perhaps the people who are vaccinated and show no symptoms but do in fact have Covid are either rare or have a small viral load. Perhaps the massive increase in vaccinated people means that the likelihood of super spreaders is reduced by enough that the CDC is comfortable issuing the statements that it did.

I don't know.

[PDXTabs]

The CDC guidelines also said that a vaccinated person doesn't need to quarantine if they have close contact with a covid infected person.  In addition, they also say that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks to visit anyone who is unvaccinated who they don't think is high risk.

Both of these are (to the best of my knowledge) not currently supported by the science that we have about disease transmission, and are a lot more problematic than the common sense part of the CDC recommendations that you mentioned up above.

Bolded the important bits. I'll trust that the CDC has better knowledge about the science of disease spread than you (no offense, and I could be wrong by trusting them so I say it humbly)

Also, you're misrepresenting them just a touch. They say don't quarantine if you have no symptoms after interacting with an infected person.

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

100% of people have no symptoms immediately after contact with an infected person.  That's actually a big part of the reason this pandemic became a thing.  You don't show symptoms until well after being able to transmit the disease.

And? The CDC's guidelines seem to past the smell test for a reasonable compromise.