Where do you stand on "living with Covid", "getting back to normal"

[GodlessCommie]

a) Agreed. But I'm not willing to put in the kind of enforcement at this point to make them the same. And yes, because freedom.
b) Case loads rising, hospitalizations rising.
c) That's not how it works. All 72,000 would not die. 72,000 would get infected and then 0.5%, at most, would die = 360 people.

It sounds callous to say "let 360 people die so I don't have to walk around wearing a surgical mask", but its the truth that many people would be willing take that risk.

In the US, there have been ~50,000,000 cases. Reduce that by 9% = 4,500,000 * 0.5% = 22,500 fewer deaths over 2 years, if we all started wearing surgical masks on March 1, 2020 (when the CDC lied and advised us not to in order to protect mask supply for healthcare workers) and continued to this day. Assuming 100% use by people in the US.

That also assumes we either 1) never stop wearing them or 2) eventually COVID-19 disappears or becomes a statistically insignificant disease. Both are very unlikely, so there is a chance you simply delay rather than prevent death, which still has value.

a) you are welcome to make the freedom argument
b) as much as in LA w/o mask mandate or less?
c) yes, this is how it works. Assuming constant cases to deaths ration, 9% fewer cases = 9% fewer deaths. 9% deaths is 72,000 people.

Your math is off. US had ~50M cases, which led to ~800K deaths. That's 1.6%, not 0.5%. And then you have the same 72K needlessly dead Americans.

That's not counting second-order effects, btw - like dying in an ER lobby.

[Chris22]

I'm also operating on the assumption that COVID will be around forever. However, I do not accept that the only reaction to a permanent change is to accept all negative consequences.

…Mask mandates should stay, for all - it's too unreliable to trust the goodwill, and people respond better to simple rules that don't change.

Do I read this to mean you think mask mandates should be here forever?  Because…no.

[GodlessCommie]

Do I read this to mean you think mask mandates should be here forever?  Because…no.

Do I read this to mean that we should keep losing 1,000+ friends and neighbors forever? Because... no.

But that's ok. I'll wait until you move from an "unlikely to be killed by Covid" category to a "likely to be killed by Covid" category, and then ask again.

[GodlessCommie]

On a more serious note, I would not throw the word "forever" around. Before I got accused that my screen name has a literal meaning, there are some obvious criteria of success:

- US develops a culture of voluntary mask wearing in appropriate (to be defined) circumstances
- there is a widely available treatment of Covid that doesn't require hospitalization, and drives mortality down to a certain threshold
- the virus mutates and/or our immune system adapts to it to the point that its lethality is comparable to a flu

[seattlecyclone]

Pretty much every other possible mitigation effort requires people to abstain from activities that would otherwise bring positive value to their lives, and for what? So that if people happen to be infected without knowing it they'll have less opportunity to pass it along to someone else who—if they do get infected—will probably turn out fine unless they didn't get their vaccine? That's where I start to say I'm not interested in playing along anymore.

...or have a weakened immune system. People receiving an organ transplant, cancer survivors, autoimmune disorders - these things are not rare by any stretch, and these people had enough trouble staying alive even before Covid. Do you want to re-think you answer with this in mind?

Not really. It sucks to have a weakened immune system, no argument there. If you're in that category you definitely need to take precautions regardless of what mitigation strategies I may or may not employ, and I don't envy you for that. If you plan to visit people in that category, additional caution also seems warranted; maybe take a COVID test beforehand or something? As someone with a fine immune system who never (to my knowledge) directly socializes with transplant patients etc., I consider my responsibility to be a bit less than that. I got my vaccine (boosted!). I wear a mask when requested. I consider myself to have done my part there. Again, if everyone did that much and nothing else the situation would be much better.

It's like if you have a food allergy: the onus falls disproportionately on you to avoid exposure. You can't expect to show up to a party and assume that all of the food is free of gluten, nuts, bananas, shellfish, dairy, and everything else that people tend to be allergic to. No, you need to ask about ingredients if you're not sure, maybe bring your own snacks, or if the allergy is that severe maybe you need to avoid parties entirely unless you know all the attendees are committed to doing what's necessary to accommodate you. It's not really fair that you have to do extra work to keep yourself safe from foods you can't eat, but it's also not fair to expect everyone else to abstain from bringing foods that they enjoy to a party just because a small minority might not be able to stomach them.

So, let me throw it back to you. If COVID will be around forever, what things should we not have anymore because they're just too risky? Should nobody ever eat at a restaurant again? Sing in a choir? Play in an orchestra? Go to a basketball game? Where's your line between acceptable and unacceptable risks given the ever-present virus?

I'm also operating on the assumption that COVID will be around forever. However, I do not accept that the only reaction to a permanent change is to accept all negative consequences.

There are mitigation measures that can (and should) be taken. Improved ventilation is the most obvious one. Others can require vaccination and/or frequent testing, which orchestras are doing already. Mask mandates should stay, for all - it's too unreliable to trust the goodwill, and people respond better to simple rules that don't change. WFH rules may need to be strengthened, possibly through legislation. Paid sick live is a must - it's a travesty that we didn't have it before, it's 10x worse that we don't have it now. Internet must reach 100% of households.

This is not a very concrete answer to my question. Do you or do you not believe that there are activities that we inherently should not do ever again while COVID exists? Or are even the most risky things (like singing in a choir) okay to return to once they upgrade the HVAC system and everyone is vaccinated?

In general, I don't have all the answers (and that's an understatement), but I invite you to approach it from the angle of "if there's the will, there's the way". What this topic tells me is that we lost the will, not that there's no way (again, look North).

At the beginning of the pandemic, I was hopeful that we could come together to defeat this thing. We did not. It's not just that we lost the will, it's that we never had it, at least not in sufficient numbers to move the needle. Given that reality, it seems Sisyphean to continue to make sacrifices for the sake of controlling this disease.

[trollwithamustache]

I'm also operating on the assumption that COVID will be around forever. However, I do not accept that the only reaction to a permanent change is to accept all negative consequences.

…Mask mandates should stay, for all - it's too unreliable to trust the goodwill, and people respond better to simple rules that don't change.

Do I read this to mean you think mask mandates should be here forever?  Because…no.

You guys keep wanking around on masks, and will keep wanking in circles forever because masks both work and lots of statistical evidence at a gross level of them not working.

Now that they are available, why don't we just require N95s? they meet a standard, fit/seal better and are what the medicos use when they are seeing dirty people.  If they did a large scale study, n95s will way outperform masking.

[PDXTabs]

Now that they are available, why don't we just require N95s? they meet a standard, fit/seal better and are what the medicos use when they are seeing dirty people.  If they did a large scale study, n95s will way outperform masking.

Because the Republicans aren't going to support a mask mandate and the Democrats aren't going to require poor people to buy N95s.

[trollwithamustache]

Now that they are available, why don't we just require N95s? they meet a standard, fit/seal better and are what the medicos use when they are seeing dirty people.  If they did a large scale study, n95s will way outperform masking.

Because the Republicans aren't going to support a mask mandate and the Democrats aren't going to require poor people to buy N95s.

oh no, you just brought cost into the equation.  I'm gonna duck and cover now!

[moof]

Do I read this to mean you think mask mandates should be here forever?  Because…no.

Do I read this to mean that we should keep losing 1,000+ friends and neighbors forever? Because... no.

But that's ok. I'll wait until you move from an "unlikely to be killed by Covid" category to a "likely to be killed by Covid" category, and then ask again.

We've come to this numb state where through a lot of actions and in-actions we are losing a 9-11's worth of fellow American's every ~2.5 days or so without seemingly feeling much about it.  We went on a badly planned/executed war for 2 decades over 2,996 killed Americans while mostly shrugging off ~1,300 a day average deaths today (mostly preventable).  Intentional dis-information spreaders have helped to cause many times that much death with no real repercussions (or in some cases they have even been lionized for it).  We will have ongoing suffering among a significant minority of the survivors who have permanent damage to lungs, organs, and livelihoods.  It is that backdrop that makes me so angry when people flaunt mask rules, or have large indoor gatherings that largely nullify the on-going efforts and sacrifices of others to keep this tamped down.

We do however find ourselves faced with the conundrum of the need to someday get back to a semi-normal place.  With a significant minority of the population refusing vaccination, and the risk to the <55y.o. vaccinated crowd down to a level commensurate with a bad flu season, maybe we should just go back to normal and let things run their course?  It would be some hellish scenes with hospitals overrun for a few months, with death panels choosing who gets a bed and who gets left to die, but maybe we'd get to the other side sooner.  Horrible choices we are stuck with due to on-going mismanagement (still poor rapid test availability), and rampant selfish behavior.  I've become nihilistic at this point, and feel like I am going through the motions to be responsible, but feeling like it is increasingly pointless.

[PDXTabs]

Now that they are available, why don't we just require N95s? they meet a standard, fit/seal better and are what the medicos use when they are seeing dirty people.  If they did a large scale study, n95s will way outperform masking.

Because the Republicans aren't going to support a mask mandate and the Democrats aren't going to require poor people to buy N95s.

oh no, you just brought cost into the equation.  I'm gonna duck and cover now!

I'm just here doing what I always do: attempting to point out the obvious. I guess the other option would be to live in a country with a functional government that could distribute them for free some how.

[seattlecyclone]

On a more serious note, I would not throw the word "forever" around. Before I got accused that my screen name has a literal meaning, there are some obvious criteria of success:

- US develops a culture of voluntary mask wearing in appropriate (to be defined) circumstances
- there is a widely available treatment of Covid that doesn't require hospitalization, and drives mortality down to a certain threshold
- the virus mutates and/or our immune system adapts to it to the point that its lethality is comparable to a flu

As far as lethality is concerned we're there already, at least for those who are vaccinated. A typical flu season will see several hundred thousand Americans hospitalized for influenza. 0.1-0.2% of the population hospitalized in the year is pretty typical, and about a tenth of those hospitalized die. Right now in my county we're seeing vaccinated people turn up in the hospital for COVID at a rate of 0.12 per 100,000 population per day. Multiply that out by 365 and we get about 0.04% of the vaccinated population in the hospital annually, less than even a light flu season. The death rate (as a fraction of those hospitalized) seems higher for COVID than flu, but the lower COVID hospitalization rate means the overall death rate seems pretty comparable between the two diseases.

Again, this is all for the vaccinated population. The unvaccinated population is still experiencing outcomes at least 10x worse than the flu.

We do however find ourselves faced with the conundrum of the need to someday get back to a semi-normal place.  With a significant minority of the population refusing vaccination, and the risk to the <55y.o. vaccinated crowd down to a level commensurate with a bad flu season, maybe we should just go back to normal and let things run their course?  It would be some hellish scenes with hospitals overrun for a few months, with death panels choosing who gets a bed and who gets left to die, but maybe we'd get to the other side sooner.  Horrible choices we are stuck with due to on-going mismanagement (still poor rapid test availability), and rampant selfish behavior.  I've become nihilistic at this point, and feel like I am going through the motions to be responsible, but feeling like it is increasingly pointless.

This is exactly where I'm at. I don't foresee a future in which we come together to defeat the virus, so we may as well encourage all the antivaxxers to get together in a big orgy or something, cull the less-healthy ones from the gene pool, and get to the other side.

[Chris22]

At the beginning of the pandemic I wore an N95 once. I hated walking around the grocery store trying to suck air through that thing. No thanks. Not wearing one anymore. I wear my little thin cotton double-layer mask and that’s good enough for the theater for me.

[Chris22]

Do I read this to mean you think mask mandates should be here forever?  Because…no.

Do I read this to mean that we should keep losing 1,000+ friends and neighbors forever? Because... no.

But that's ok. I'll wait until you move from an "unlikely to be killed by Covid" category to a "likely to be killed by Covid" category, and then ask again.

At some point the virus will have infected everyone and there won’t be anyone left for it to burn through. I’m turning 40 early next year, so the odds are good that happens long before I hit the age of “likely to be killed by Covid”.

[Villanelle]

If you don't know anyone who has died of covid, or had serious complications of covid, it's possibly because the risk factors for that are closely related to poverty and race and you don't know enough people in that demographic.

Or they don't hang out with old people.  Every COVID death I am aware of in my extended network was over the age of 80 and/or in an assisted living facility.  Every COVID story I've heard  was basically "it was horrible, you don't want it" and they were fine 3-4 days later with no hospitalization.

So no, I don't want to get COVID, but it is not like there are bodies in the street a la the bubonic plague.

I don't know [well] anyone who has died of Covid, but none of the hospitalizations I know are among very old people (I think the oldest is in his mid50s).

But I do agree that the "I don't know anyone who has had a serious case of Covid, or even Covid at all" in most cases probably have fairly homogeneous social circles.  Geography, age, income/net worth, type of career path (blue collar/factory/white collar/ and even things like healthcare, teaching, etc, within those categories), and even things like physical fitness levels.  If most of your friends live in your town (which has had a relatively low infection rate), and are 25-35 yo marathon runners who have white collar jobs that were WFH for a long while (and maybe still) and who all accept the vaccine science and been fully vaxxed and maybe boosted, then yeah, it's much more possible to have kept Covid outside your bubble than if you know people from all walks of life, around the world, up to age 80.  That's going to make it more difficult to have been untouched.

I have 3 sets of friends (and their families) right now who are infected as I type.  Literally around the world (from London to California).  Thankfully all are vaccinated (though not some of the younger kiddos, and I don't know about boosters) and otherwise fairly young (under 45, some under 35) and healthy.  One is pregnant, which is worrisome, but seems to be fairing well. 

[GodlessCommie]

It's not really fair that you have to do extra work to keep yourself safe from foods you can't eat, but it's also not fair to expect everyone else to abstain from bringing foods that they enjoy to a party just because a small minority might not be able to stomach them.

On the contrary, people in my circle fall over backwards to not bring food know to cause a friend grief to a party. I assumed it's like that everywhere.

This is not a very concrete answer to my question. Do you or do you not believe that there are activities that we inherently should not do ever again while COVID exists? Or are even the most risky things (like singing in a choir) okay to return to once they upgrade the HVAC system and everyone is vaccinated?

You keep trying to get me into a corner with absolutes. But everything is a matter of degrees. I don't know every single activity, and thus I don't know if anything may need to be off the table completely.

But lets take choirs. Best I know, people involved in them
- require vaccination
- improve ventilation
- take frequent tests

This seems like an appropriate level of precautions. I would be comfortable having one next door, or attending one. It would be appropriate for an audience - which doesn't take frequent tests - to wear masks.

[GodlessCommie]

At some point the virus will have infected everyone and there won’t be anyone left for it to burn through. I’m turning 40 early next year, so the odds are good that happens long before I hit the age of “likely to be killed by Covid”.

Do I understand it right that your attitude is informed by an expectation of never being in "likely to be killed by Covid" category?

[GodlessCommie]

As far as lethality is concerned we're there already, at least for those who are vaccinated. A typical flu season will see several hundred thousand Americans hospitalized for influenza. 0.1-0.2% of the population hospitalized in the year is pretty typical, and about a tenth of those hospitalized die. Right now in my county we're seeing vaccinated people turn up in the hospital for COVID at a rate of 0.12 per 100,000 population per day. Multiply that out by 365 and we get about 0.04% of the vaccinated population in the hospital annually, less than even a light flu season. The death rate (as a fraction of those hospitalized) seems higher for COVID than flu, but the lower COVID hospitalization rate means the overall death rate seems pretty comparable between the two diseases.

Excellent! I did not follow super-closely, but I recall Washington State in general, and Seattle area specifically, doing Covid mitigation better than others. Clearly, you are enjoying the benefits of it.

This is a datapoint that I did not have. Let me think about it, before I respond just to try to prove myself right.

[Chris22]

At some point the virus will have infected everyone and there won’t be anyone left for it to burn through. I’m turning 40 early next year, so the odds are good that happens long before I hit the age of “likely to be killed by Covid”.

Do I understand it right that your attitude is informed by an expectation of never being in "likely to be killed by Covid" category?

 No, you snarkily commented you’d ask me again when I was in an age group likely to be killed by Covid. I snarkily responded that it will be a long time before I get there.

[OtherJen]

It's not really fair that you have to do extra work to keep yourself safe from foods you can't eat, but it's also not fair to expect everyone else to abstain from bringing foods that they enjoy to a party just because a small minority might not be able to stomach them.

On the contrary, people in my circle fall over backwards to not bring food know to cause a friend grief to a party. I assumed it's like that everywhere.

This is not a very concrete answer to my question. Do you or do you not believe that there are activities that we inherently should not do ever again while COVID exists? Or are even the most risky things (like singing in a choir) okay to return to once they upgrade the HVAC system and everyone is vaccinated?

You keep trying to get me into a corner with absolutes. But everything is a matter of degrees. I don't know every single activity, and thus I don't know if anything may need to be off the table completely.

But lets take choirs. Best I know, people involved in them
- require vaccination
- improve ventilation
- take frequent tests

This seems like an appropriate level of precautions. I would be comfortable having one next door, or attending one. It would be appropriate for an audience - which doesn't take frequent tests - to wear masks.

My choir director couldn’t legally require vaccines, but he could and did require masks at all rehearsals and last weekend’s concert, set a cap on the number of singers to make sure that we didn’t overtax the building’s ventilation and could be spaced safely, shooed us all out of the room for a long break during each rehearsal to clear out the air, and was more lenient than usual with the absence policy. Our last concert before COVID was on Feb. 29, 2020, 2 weeks before the schools shut down statewide and 3 weeks before the hospitals started getting overwhelmed. I’m still astounded that we didn’t seed a superspreader event at that concert.

[jfer_rose]

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210907/masks-limit-covid-spread-study

I was mistaken, it was 9% less, not 5%.

Compared to villages that didn't mask, those where masks of any type were worn had about 9% fewer symptomatic cases of COVID-19. The finding was statistically significant and was unlikely to have occurred by chance alone.

This is not a very accurate takeaway from the Bangladesh mask study. If you read the actual study, you see that there were a series of interventions with various reductions in COVID  (from 9-35% reductions). Which you're right, that doesn't sound very impressive taken alone. However, in the villages they worked with, they were not able to change the needle that much with regards to mask wearing. The best mask-wearing rate they achieved was 42%. So to me, that is actually really impressive reduction when you consider that the majority of people were still unmasked. In my politically blue city, significantly more than 42% of people wear masks in public at the moment.

Many overviews of research studies are very misleading-- it is difficult to convey all the nuance.

[RetiredAt63]

I've been reading this thread for awhile and I suddenly had a whole viewpoint shift it.

Life never goes "back to normal"  It keeps changing.  Another "back to normal" could be lots of drunk driving, I remember those days.  There may be people who miss them.  I don't.  Oh, and shall we go "back to normal" where the normal was scarlet fever (rheumatic fever) that caused life-long heart damage?  Where measles caused life-long complications?  Where Rubella meant the possibility of a child with birth defects (Agatha Christie wrote a murder mystery based on this, it was a real issue).

I'd like new normals.  Normals where people who are sick can stay home from work without pressure instead of being forced germ vectors.  Normals where people working hourly jobs don't get dinged for taking time for health care (like getting vaccinated for something).  Normals where people respect social norms and boundaries instead of complaining about them. 

And let's also remember that for a lot of people on this globe, life will never "go back to normal" because they died, or someone close to them died, or they or someone close to them has long term health consequences. I've heard horror stories from social workers here in Ontario of families devastated by Covid.   The Spanish Flu caused long term consequences for my family, things did not and could not go "back to normal" for them. 


"Back to normal" is a pipe dream.   

[seattlecyclone]

It's not really fair that you have to do extra work to keep yourself safe from foods you can't eat, but it's also not fair to expect everyone else to abstain from bringing foods that they enjoy to a party just because a small minority might not be able to stomach them.

On the contrary, people in my circle fall over backwards to not bring food know to cause a friend grief to a party. I assumed it's like that everywhere.

Sure, if I have a close friend with an allergy and I know they'll be attending the party I'll do what I can to accommodate their needs. That's common courtesy. If I'm going to a party where I don't know everyone, and one of those people has a severe peanut allergy, but that wasn't communicated to me in advance, I can't be expected not to bake a batch of peanut butter cookies. At the end of the day it's the responsibility of the person with the allergy to look out for themselves and communicate their needs to others, not my responsibility to avoid ever bringing foods containing any allergens anywhere on the off chance I'll encounter someone who can't handle it.

I feel COVID is similar in this way. If you have a compromised immune system you need to look out for yourself and make sure the people who visit you are taking appropriate precautions. This was true before COVID and is still true today. Expecting us all to act as though we're about to visit a cancer patient is a bridge too far in my opinion.

This is not a very concrete answer to my question. Do you or do you not believe that there are activities that we inherently should not do ever again while COVID exists? Or are even the most risky things (like singing in a choir) okay to return to once they upgrade the HVAC system and everyone is vaccinated?

You keep trying to get me into a corner with absolutes. But everything is a matter of degrees. I don't know every single activity, and thus I don't know if anything may need to be off the table completely.

But lets take choirs. Best I know, people involved in them
- require vaccination
- improve ventilation
- take frequent tests

This seems like an appropriate level of precautions. I would be comfortable having one next door, or attending one. It would be appropriate for an audience - which doesn't take frequent tests - to wear masks.

I'm not trying to "back you into a corner," just trying to better understand your position. I keep saying that I think vaccinated people should be able to generally go through life as before without precautions other than perhaps masking if they have respiratory symptoms, and you keep pushing back on this. So what specifically more do you expect from people, and for how long? This choir example is helpful, thanks. I think we'll have to agree to disagree about the long-term necessity of requiring vaccinated people to get frequent lab tests as a condition of participating in group ensembles, team sports, and the like. That's just not something I can see people putting up with forever.

[HPstache]

I've been reading this thread for awhile and I suddenly had a whole viewpoint shift it.

Life never goes "back to normal"  It keeps changing.  Another "back to normal" could be lots of drunk driving, I remember those days.  There may be people who miss them.  I don't.  Oh, and shall we go "back to normal" where the normal was scarlet fever (rheumatic fever) that caused life-long heart damage?  Where measles caused life-long complications?  Where Rubella meant the possibility of a child with birth defects (Agatha Christie wrote a murder mystery based on this, it was a real issue).

I'd like new normals.  Normals where people who are sick can stay home from work without pressure instead of being forced germ vectors.  Normals where people working hourly jobs don't get dinged for taking time for health care (like getting vaccinated for something).  Normals where people respect social norms and boundaries instead of complaining about them. 

And let's also remember that for a lot of people on this globe, life will never "go back to normal" because they died, or someone close to them died, or they or someone close to them has long term health consequences. I've heard horror stories from social workers here in Ontario of families devastated by Covid.   The Spanish Flu caused long term consequences for my family, things did not and could not go "back to normal" for them. 


"Back to normal" is a pipe dream.

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end. 

[RetiredAt63]

I've been reading this thread for awhile and I suddenly had a whole viewpoint shift it.

Life never goes "back to normal"  It keeps changing.  Another "back to normal" could be lots of drunk driving, I remember those days.  There may be people who miss them.  I don't.  Oh, and shall we go "back to normal" where the normal was scarlet fever (rheumatic fever) that caused life-long heart damage?  Where measles caused life-long complications?  Where Rubella meant the possibility of a child with birth defects (Agatha Christie wrote a murder mystery based on this, it was a real issue).

I'd like new normals.  Normals where people who are sick can stay home from work without pressure instead of being forced germ vectors.  Normals where people working hourly jobs don't get dinged for taking time for health care (like getting vaccinated for something).  Normals where people respect social norms and boundaries instead of complaining about them. 

And let's also remember that for a lot of people on this globe, life will never "go back to normal" because they died, or someone close to them died, or they or someone close to them has long term health consequences. I've heard horror stories from social workers here in Ontario of families devastated by Covid.   The Spanish Flu caused long term consequences for my family, things did not and could not go "back to normal" for them. 


"Back to normal" is a pipe dream.

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Are you even wearing your mask correctly?  And wearing a correct mask?

Lots of medical people wears masks every day all day.  Is it so hard for us for shorter less frequent periods of time?  Of course here we are all observing the mask mandate, so that is a different perspective than if 10% of people are wearing them.

[seemsright]

In OR today we have 3 weeks until the hospitals are over ran, the virus is everywhere. Doomsday...Doomsday.

Now our Gov has not done a speech in over 70 days before today. The Dr who did the modeling for the new virus strain has not been right this whole time. I figure this noise will stop when we get a new Gov. Because Oregon is going to play this game forever.

We will never be free of masks, and have general freedoms back.

And she removed the outdoor masks requirements right before the big Civil War football game. So inside masks wont go away till something important comes that has a national stage.

It just does not make since. I dont need a mask to sit down at a restaurant, but I need one to walk to the table and leave.

The masks are just theater. I need one to buy groceries but I dont need one if I am drinking a beer at the bar....the logic is lost on me.

[nereo]

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Can you explain why masks are such a key issue for you?
As someone who’s had to wear masks for much of my work I have a hard time understanding why some people object to it so strongly

Is the mandate part? 

[HPstache]

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Can you explain why masks are such a key issue for you?
As someone who’s had to wear masks for much of my work I have a hard time understanding why some people object to it so strongly

Is the mandate part?

It's the mandate part.  I should not have to pretend that I am sick for the rest of my life wearing a mask while in public places in the offchance I am asymptomatic a virus that we an effective vaccine for.  It just does not make sense anymore... it did for a short time, but no longer.  I'm all for wearing a mask, staying home from work when you are actually sick... that would be a great thing to come out of this.  But telling everyone to wear a mask from here on out regardless of if it's actually useful is dumb and the mandates have got to go.  Especially as pointed out above, restaurants and airplanes are proof that we really don't care as much as some people seem to think we do.

[Log]

Just to push back on the many references to airplanes in this thread: the ventilation in airplanes goes above and beyond any other “indoor” space you enter in regular life. Taking your mask off to eat or drink on a plane is more comparable to outdoor dining than indoor dining.

(Yes, I agree that putting a mask on to walk to your table at a restaurant is pretty stupid, but at minimum it can be considered to a courtesy to the restaurant host, who is being exposed to countless strangers in any given shift of work.)

[Chris22]

(Yes, I agree that putting a mask on to walk to your table at a restaurant is pretty stupid, but at minimum it can be considered to a courtesy to the restaurant host, who is being exposed to countless strangers in any given shift of work.)

But if we’re going to yell “trust the science!” we need to trust that science says the risk is sustained contact for ~15 minutes. Not brief incidental contact like one has with a restaurant host.

[HPstache]

(Yes, I agree that putting a mask on to walk to your table at a restaurant is pretty stupid, but at minimum it can be considered to a courtesy to the restaurant host, who is being exposed to countless strangers in any given shift of work.)

But if we’re going to yell “trust the science!” we need to trust that science says the risk is sustained contact for ~15 minutes. Not brief incidental contact like one has with a restaurant host.

I'm not in contact with anyone at the grocery store for more than 15 minutes.... why am I wearing a mask there?

[GuitarStv]

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Can you explain why masks are such a key issue for you?
As someone who’s had to wear masks for much of my work I have a hard time understanding why some people object to it so strongly

Is the mandate part?

Wearing a mask semi-regularly has been causing a pretty significant flare up of my cystic acne.  I fucking hate wearing them primarily for this reason.

[Cranky]

I've been reading this thread for awhile and I suddenly had a whole viewpoint shift it.

Life never goes "back to normal"  It keeps changing.  Another "back to normal" could be lots of drunk driving, I remember those days.  There may be people who miss them.  I don't.  Oh, and shall we go "back to normal" where the normal was scarlet fever (rheumatic fever) that caused life-long heart damage?  Where measles caused life-long complications?  Where Rubella meant the possibility of a child with birth defects (Agatha Christie wrote a murder mystery based on this, it was a real issue).

I'd like new normals.  Normals where people who are sick can stay home from work without pressure instead of being forced germ vectors.  Normals where people working hourly jobs don't get dinged for taking time for health care (like getting vaccinated for something).  Normals where people respect social norms and boundaries instead of complaining about them. 

And let's also remember that for a lot of people on this globe, life will never "go back to normal" because they died, or someone close to them died, or they or someone close to them has long term health consequences. I've heard horror stories from social workers here in Ontario of families devastated by Covid.   The Spanish Flu caused long term consequences for my family, things did not and could not go "back to normal" for them. 


"Back to normal" is a pipe dream.

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Why? Masks are so not a big deal, and seem like common courtesy. Other people don’t need your germs.

Really, it seems like people can go back to any version of normal that they want - you can travel and go to the movies and restaurants and parties and concerts if you want to. Why not wear a mask in the grocery store in case someone there *is* elderly or immunocompromised or just unlucky.

I think that some people have never worn anything slightly uncomfortable before.

[Michael in ABQ]

I've been reading this thread for awhile and I suddenly had a whole viewpoint shift it.

Life never goes "back to normal"  It keeps changing.  Another "back to normal" could be lots of drunk driving, I remember those days.  There may be people who miss them.  I don't.  Oh, and shall we go "back to normal" where the normal was scarlet fever (rheumatic fever) that caused life-long heart damage?  Where measles caused life-long complications?  Where Rubella meant the possibility of a child with birth defects (Agatha Christie wrote a murder mystery based on this, it was a real issue).

I'd like new normals.  Normals where people who are sick can stay home from work without pressure instead of being forced germ vectors.  Normals where people working hourly jobs don't get dinged for taking time for health care (like getting vaccinated for something).  Normals where people respect social norms and boundaries instead of complaining about them. 

And let's also remember that for a lot of people on this globe, life will never "go back to normal" because they died, or someone close to them died, or they or someone close to them has long term health consequences. I've heard horror stories from social workers here in Ontario of families devastated by Covid.   The Spanish Flu caused long term consequences for my family, things did not and could not go "back to normal" for them. 


"Back to normal" is a pipe dream.

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Why? Masks are so not a big deal, and seem like common courtesy. Other people don’t need your germs.

Really, it seems like people can go back to any version of normal that they want - you can travel and go to the movies and restaurants and parties and concerts if you want to. Why not wear a mask in the grocery store in case someone there *is* elderly or immunocompromised or just unlucky.

I think that some people have never worn anything slightly uncomfortable before.

Will it ever end? Here in New Mexico we've had a mask mandate almost continuously for the whole pandemic. At what point will enough people be vaccinated or acquire natural immunity that we can stop the charade? Wear a mask into a restaurant and then leave it off for an hour while you eat your meal. Then put it back on for 20 seconds to walk outside. Or have two people sitting in an office with masks on for an hour talking to each other. 3 feet apart, 6 feet apart, it doesn't make a difference. It's bullshit and we all know it.

Life is back to normal for me. I'm glad that I work for myself now so I don't have to worry about all this BS.

[HPstache]

I've been reading this thread for awhile and I suddenly had a whole viewpoint shift it.

Life never goes "back to normal"  It keeps changing.  Another "back to normal" could be lots of drunk driving, I remember those days.  There may be people who miss them.  I don't.  Oh, and shall we go "back to normal" where the normal was scarlet fever (rheumatic fever) that caused life-long heart damage?  Where measles caused life-long complications?  Where Rubella meant the possibility of a child with birth defects (Agatha Christie wrote a murder mystery based on this, it was a real issue).

I'd like new normals.  Normals where people who are sick can stay home from work without pressure instead of being forced germ vectors.  Normals where people working hourly jobs don't get dinged for taking time for health care (like getting vaccinated for something).  Normals where people respect social norms and boundaries instead of complaining about them. 

And let's also remember that for a lot of people on this globe, life will never "go back to normal" because they died, or someone close to them died, or they or someone close to them has long term health consequences. I've heard horror stories from social workers here in Ontario of families devastated by Covid.   The Spanish Flu caused long term consequences for my family, things did not and could not go "back to normal" for them. 


"Back to normal" is a pipe dream.

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Why? Masks are so not a big deal, and seem like common courtesy. Other people don’t need your germs.

Really, it seems like people can go back to any version of normal that they want - you can travel and go to the movies and restaurants and parties and concerts if you want to. Why not wear a mask in the grocery store in case someone there *is* elderly or immunocompromised or just unlucky.

I think that some people have never worn anything slightly uncomfortable before.

By all means.  Wear a mask for the rest of your life.  From 2020 and into the future, it will not seem out of the ordinary.  Mask mandates in indoor public spaces though... they will go away with time.  I just wish it would happen sooner.

[sui generis]

I agree with you. If you're making the decision to uncover your face to eat in a restaurant, there's little point in masking between the door and your table.

I agree. It's dumb, and it's one of the counterproductive, 100% performative things.

Whoa, this is actually something I disagree with based on my understanding of how contracting the disease actually works. Any amount of time you have a mask on (purportedly) reduces the amount of virus that can accumulate in your upper respiratory system and to the degree you can keep it 10, or 1000 or 10000 less particles that can accumulate because you wore your mask for a few minutes more here and there in a condensed period of time, then you might have actually made the difference in where enough have accumulated to actually cause you to get the disease and possibly spread to others no?

I am not being performative when I do this, I really am under the impression it's possible I'm preventing a critical mass from accumulating. Every hour counts! For instance, a 6 how business meeting in masks but 1 hour not wearing masks, as mentioned above???  Even if you were exposed you've prevented potentially a lot of accumulation by wearing a mask for over 80% of the time!

I'd really like to know the answer to this because I have to spend almost 12 hours masked (counting public transit time on both sides, airport and airplane time) to visit family next week and there's no way I'll be able to keep my mask on 100 percent of that time without ever taking a drink or having a little nourishment. And you're telling me if I remove my mask to drink some water and eat some food in that 12 hours I've just wasted my other 11.5 or more hours of being masked (and I'm just being performative?)? That does not sound right to me, but I do honestly welcome a correction if it's demonstrable that I am wrong.

 I plan to minimize the time I'm without mask since I'll be seeing my elderly FIL and an unvaccinated 3 year old niece, but if I'm wrong, I may as well keep the mask off longer than it takes to shovel a little food and water down my gullet since I can increase my own comfort without changing my COVID risk.

ETA: Just for clarity's sake ...I realize I only quoted posts that refer specifically to restaurants, but my post is largely in response to the discussion in these posts and the others above that also discussed performative masking in other and broader contexts. I'm on my phone and more detailed quoting is being me ATM

[Chris22]

Being unmasked for short periods of time in the general public is not the same thing.

My point was if I was in a room for 6 straight hours with a group of people, and 5 of those were spent masked, that is undone because in the 6th full hour unmasked we have plenty of chance to infect each other with whatever we may be carrying.

[Cranky]

I've been reading this thread for awhile and I suddenly had a whole viewpoint shift it.

Life never goes "back to normal"  It keeps changing.  Another "back to normal" could be lots of drunk driving, I remember those days.  There may be people who miss them.  I don't.  Oh, and shall we go "back to normal" where the normal was scarlet fever (rheumatic fever) that caused life-long heart damage?  Where measles caused life-long complications?  Where Rubella meant the possibility of a child with birth defects (Agatha Christie wrote a murder mystery based on this, it was a real issue).

I'd like new normals.  Normals where people who are sick can stay home from work without pressure instead of being forced germ vectors.  Normals where people working hourly jobs don't get dinged for taking time for health care (like getting vaccinated for something).  Normals where people respect social norms and boundaries instead of complaining about them. 

And let's also remember that for a lot of people on this globe, life will never "go back to normal" because they died, or someone close to them died, or they or someone close to them has long term health consequences. I've heard horror stories from social workers here in Ontario of families devastated by Covid.   The Spanish Flu caused long term consequences for my family, things did not and could not go "back to normal" for them. 


"Back to normal" is a pipe dream.

All of those things sound great, but can we just stop mask mandates?  That's all I really care about in the end.

Why? Masks are so not a big deal, and seem like common courtesy. Other people don’t need your germs.

Really, it seems like people can go back to any version of normal that they want - you can travel and go to the movies and restaurants and parties and concerts if you want to. Why not wear a mask in the grocery store in case someone there *is* elderly or immunocompromised or just unlucky.

I think that some people have never worn anything slightly uncomfortable before.

Will it ever end? Here in New Mexico we've had a mask mandate almost continuously for the whole pandemic. At what point will enough people be vaccinated or acquire natural immunity that we can stop the charade? Wear a mask into a restaurant and then leave it off for an hour while you eat your meal. Then put it back on for 20 seconds to walk outside. Or have two people sitting in an office with masks on for an hour talking to each other. 3 feet apart, 6 feet apart, it doesn't make a difference. It's bullshit and we all know it.

Life is back to normal for me. I'm glad that I work for myself now so I don't have to worry about all this BS.

If you want to eat in a restaurant, you can do that. How is that not back to normal? I agree that masks in restaurants don’t make much sense, because taking them off to eat ruins any protection they provide. I wouldn’t eat in a restaurant now if you paid me, but it’s not something I personally value.

But I remain curious about why people find them so objectionable. I barely noice that I have one on. In fact, now that it’s cold I wear one to walk outside because it’s more comfortable than breathing cold air.

[OtherJen]

I agree with you. If you're making the decision to uncover your face to eat in a restaurant, there's little point in masking between the door and your table.

I agree. It's dumb, and it's one of the counterproductive, 100% performative things.

Whoa, this is actually something I disagree with based on my understanding of how contracting the disease actually works. Any amount of time you have a mask on (purportedly) reduces the amount of virus that can accumulate in your upper respiratory system and to the degree you can keep it 10, or 1000 or 10000 less particles that can accumulate because you wore your mask for a few minutes more here and there in a condensed period of time, then you might have actually made the difference in where enough have accumulated to actually cause you to get the disease and possibly spread to others no?

I am not being performative when I do this, I really am under the impression it's possible I'm preventing a critical mass from accumulating. Every hour counts! For instance, a 6 how business meeting in masks but 1 hour not wearing masks, as mentioned above???  Even if you were exposed you've prevented potentially a lot of accumulation by wearing a mask for over 80% of the time!

I'd really like to know the answer to this because I have to spend almost 12 hours masked (counting public transit time on both sides, airport and airplane time) to visit family next week and there's no way I'll be able to keep my mask on 100 percent of that time without ever taking a drink or having a little nourishment. And you're telling me if I remove my mask to drink some water and eat some food in that 12 hours I've just wasted my other 11.5 or more hours of being masked (and I'm just being performative?)? That does not sound right to me, but I do honestly welcome a correction if it's demonstrable that I am wrong.

 I plan to minimize the time I'm without mask since I'll be seeing my elderly FIL and an unvaccinated 3 year old niece, but if I'm wrong, I may as well keep the mask off longer than it takes to shovel a little food and water down my gullet since I can increase my own comfort without changing my COVID risk.

ETA: Just for clarity's sake ...I realize I only quoted posts that refer specifically to restaurants, but my post is largely in response to the discussion in these posts and the others above that also discussed performative masking in other and broader contexts. I'm on my phone and more detailed quoting is being me ATM

If you'd bothered to quote the rest of my post, I explained that I considered restaurants to be an exception because those places are optional (unlike grocery stores, medical clinics, schools, etc).

If you're eating in a restaurant, you've made the choice to have your face uncovered for at least the time when you're eating. Researchers have already studied previous restaurant-associated viral outbreaks to demonstrate that table-to-table transmission can occur and is largely a function of 1) the amount of virus shed by a sick diner and 2) the airflow pattern in the restaurant. Neither of those are controllable by the average diner; it's the risk they take. COVID is highly contagious and can be transmitted very quickly, even through casual contact. Those who dine in restaurants are accepting that risk of exposure.

Regarding plane travel: there's a reason why I refuse to travel by plane unless absolutely necessary. Once you've arrived at your destination, I strongly recommend masking around anyone immunocompromised until you receive a negative test result.

[OurTown]

As far as mandates from federal, state, and or local governments are concerned, I would say vax yes masks no.  With respect to personal behavior we are at 2 shots and will get the 3rd at or around 6 months.  We wear masks when required or requested. 

[RetiredAt63]

With flying the risk depends on where you are relative to the air input.

If I needed to fly, the airport itself would worry me more than the airplane.  Especially lining up for the security check. 

[former player]

Covid infections in the UK are currently doubling every two days.   It looks as though delta variant numbers are stable and mostly infecting people who are unvaccinated or not previously infected, omicron variant numbers are rising steeply and thought to be infecting the vaccinated and previously infected that delta cannot reach.

There still isn't firm data on the percentage of serious illness caused by omicron.  It might be lower or might not, and if it is lower that might be because the people who are catching it tend to already have some immunity.   The problem at a population level is that the number of infections is so high that even a lower percentage of people needing hospital care or dying would mean the same number or greater of people needing hospital care or dying.  (And of course, if you are unlucky enough to be one of the people needing that care it's no consolation that you were less likely to be unlucky.)

One of the messaging issues I think is of concern is the use of "milder" in relation to variants.   Any variant so far is able to kill people, so in an individual sense is not necessarily a "mild" disease.   It's only "milder" at a population level in that it seriously affects fewer people. Using "milder" to describe this population level change is misleading in relation to any one individual, who  if they catch the disease is still at risk (a lower risk, but still a risk) of getting a case which is in no way "mild".    There has also been research that of those hospitalised with covid two-thirds are still suffering the effects of covid a year later, and the overall risk of dying in that year is much higher than for equivalent non-covid patients.

I started out wearing a cloth mask, I've graduated to an FFP3.  I didn't like wearing the cloth masks to start but got used to them, same again with the FFP3.   I've come to regard it as just something I do, like putting on a seatbelt in the car (or on a plane, in the days when I was still flying).  It's the new normal for me and not a problem: it's good for me and good for my community.

[roomtempmayo]

Quick question regarding hospitals being overwhelmed.

Who/what determines the order of triage when there aren't enough beds for everyone?  And can it be changed with legislation?

I think any social bandaid yanking needs to be coupled with a very clear policy that the voluntarily unvaccinated are at the back of the line for care.  Like, waiting in the parking lot until there's a bed and the docs and nurses have finished a nice long coffee break back of the line.

[former player]

Quick question regarding hospitals being overwhelmed.

Who/what determines the order of triage when there aren't enough beds for everyone?  And can it be changed with legislation?

I think any social bandaid yanking needs to be coupled with a very clear policy that the voluntarily unvaccinated are at the back of the line for care.  Like, waiting in the parking lot until there's a bed and the docs and nurses have finished a nice long coffee break back of the line.

Death panels!

[sui generis]

I agree with you. If you're making the decision to uncover your face to eat in a restaurant, there's little point in masking between the door and your table.

I agree. It's dumb, and it's one of the counterproductive, 100% performative things.

Whoa, this is actually something I disagree with based on my understanding of how contracting the disease actually works. Any amount of time you have a mask on (purportedly) reduces the amount of virus that can accumulate in your upper respiratory system and to the degree you can keep it 10, or 1000 or 10000 less particles that can accumulate because you wore your mask for a few minutes more here and there in a condensed period of time, then you might have actually made the difference in where enough have accumulated to actually cause you to get the disease and possibly spread to others no?

I am not being performative when I do this, I really am under the impression it's possible I'm preventing a critical mass from accumulating. Every hour counts! For instance, a 6 how business meeting in masks but 1 hour not wearing masks, as mentioned above???  Even if you were exposed you've prevented potentially a lot of accumulation by wearing a mask for over 80% of the time!

I'd really like to know the answer to this because I have to spend almost 12 hours masked (counting public transit time on both sides, airport and airplane time) to visit family next week and there's no way I'll be able to keep my mask on 100 percent of that time without ever taking a drink or having a little nourishment. And you're telling me if I remove my mask to drink some water and eat some food in that 12 hours I've just wasted my other 11.5 or more hours of being masked (and I'm just being performative?)? That does not sound right to me, but I do honestly welcome a correction if it's demonstrable that I am wrong.

 I plan to minimize the time I'm without mask since I'll be seeing my elderly FIL and an unvaccinated 3 year old niece, but if I'm wrong, I may as well keep the mask off longer than it takes to shovel a little food and water down my gullet since I can increase my own comfort without changing my COVID risk.

ETA: Just for clarity's sake ...I realize I only quoted posts that refer specifically to restaurants, but my post is largely in response to the discussion in these posts and the others above that also discussed performative masking in other and broader contexts. I'm on my phone and more detailed quoting is being me ATM

If you'd bothered to quote the rest of my post, I explained that I considered restaurants to be an exception because those places are optional (unlike grocery stores, medical clinics, schools, etc).

If you're eating in a restaurant, you've made the choice to have your face uncovered for at least the time when you're eating. Researchers have already studied previous restaurant-associated viral outbreaks to demonstrate that table-to-table transmission can occur and is largely a function of 1) the amount of virus shed by a sick diner and 2) the airflow pattern in the restaurant. Neither of those are controllable by the average diner; it's the risk they take. COVID is highly contagious and can be transmitted very quickly, even through casual contact. Those who dine in restaurants are accepting that risk of exposure.

Regarding plane travel: there's a reason why I refuse to travel by plane unless absolutely necessary. Once you've arrived at your destination, I strongly recommend masking around anyone immunocompromised until you receive a negative test result.

So I think I'm correct and I really disagree with the use of the word performative. Anyone may think that it is irresponsible to eat in a restaurant or travel by plane or not, and fine because those are all opinions.

But it should be a fact that if wearing a mask actually does block the accumulation of the virus, then every additional minute one wears it, they *may* be blocking that critical mass of virus accumulation. Because that depends on many factors (density of people, whether or not there are sick people, time spent, air flow at that location) one can never know if they are making a difference by keeping a mask on for an additional minute or two, but the fact that doing so *could* make all the difference as a factual matter pretty much is the opposite of performative.

[nereo]

Quick question regarding hospitals being overwhelmed.

Who/what determines the order of triage when there aren't enough beds for everyone?  And can it be changed with legislation?

Every major hospital and health care center have medical triage protocols in place. Typically these are approved by the hospitals board or directors, and often with consultation with people who specialize in medical ethics as well as lawyers who specialize in medical law.

[Dee18]

There's an interesting discussion of triage during the pandemic here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/09/22/crisis-standards-of-care/

To my personal dismay, some hospitals' plans have a clear preference for treating younger patients when there are scarce resources. 

[GuitarStv]

Quick question regarding hospitals being overwhelmed.

Who/what determines the order of triage when there aren't enough beds for everyone?  And can it be changed with legislation?

I think any social bandaid yanking needs to be coupled with a very clear policy that the voluntarily unvaccinated are at the back of the line for care.  Like, waiting in the parking lot until there's a bed and the docs and nurses have finished a nice long coffee break back of the line.

Death panels!

Oh.  So . . . thanks Obama?

[PhilB]

I'd hope (foolishly of course) that we could take some of the heat out of this debate if we could all be a lot clearer on what anti-covid measures were actually for.  There are at least three quite separate reasons to take precautions and if people confuse why they are being asked to do things they will be less willing to comply.

The most obvious reason is to protect yourself, but it's also the weakest one if you re young and healthy as the odds are that any one individual in the category is unlikely to be seriously ill, especially if they have been vaccinated.

The second reason is to protect other people - which is a very noble idea, but begs the question of for how long and at what cost?  There has to be a point at which society needs to say this cost is too high and the onus must fall on the vulnerable to shield themselves.  I don't know where that point is - but hopefully we can establish some consensus on that over time.

The third reason is to prevent the healthcare system from being overwhelmed.  If Covid is going to be endemic in the future, then clearly we may need to expand the capacity of the healthcare system to cope but the more immediate question is what temporary measures do we need to take to flatten the curve enough for the system to cope. In this context it should be much more obvious that even flawed measures like masking can make perfect sense.  Even if a measure only gave a 1% decrease in risk, that 1% could easily be the difference on whether the hospitals cope or not. 

[roomtempmayo]

@nereo Good to know.  Seems like we might need to update the triage protocols for voluntarily assumed and anti-social risk, in the same way that the alcoholic should be at the back of the line for a liver transplant.

I'd hope (foolishly of course) that we could take some of the heat out of this debate if we could all be a lot clearer on what anti-covid measures were actually for. 

I don't think the United States agrees in the slightest whether there is any mutual obligation to one another at all.

If there is obligation, we disagree about its extent.

If we were to agree on the extent, we disagree about whether the government should enforce it. 

And if the government should enforce it, whether that enforcement should be state or federal.

Our current reality would be much different if we agreed that (1) we have basic mutual obligations, (2) expert knowledge is an accepted way of articulating the best way to implement those obligations, and (3) the federal government should use the force of law to require the behaviors that experts think best respects our mutual obligations.

But we agree on none of those points, and so we just keep muddling through.

[Michael in ABQ]

@nereo Good to know.  Seems like we might need to update the triage protocols for voluntarily assumed and anti-social risk, in the same way that the alcoholic should be at the back of the line for a liver transplant.

I'd hope (foolishly of course) that we could take some of the heat out of this debate if we could all be a lot clearer on what anti-covid measures were actually for. 

I don't think the United States agrees in the slightest whether there is any mutual obligation to one another at all.

If there is obligation, we disagree about its extent.

If we were to agree on the extent, we disagree about whether the government should enforce it. 

And if the government should enforce it, whether that enforcement should be state or federal.

Our current reality would be much different if we agreed that (1) we have basic mutual obligations, (2) expert knowledge is an accepted way of articulating the best way to implement those obligations, and (3) the federal government should use the force of law to require the behaviors that experts think best respects our mutual obligations.

But we agree on none of those points, and so we just keep muddling through.

Yes, I adamantly disagree on this point. American is a representative republic, not a technocracy. Experts are just as human as the rest of us and have their biases and agendas. Fauci lied repeatedly about funding the research that almost certainly led to the release of this pandemic into the world. Why should he get to decide how we get to live our lives? I'm thankful to not live in a dictatorship like China, or a quasi-dictatorship like Australia, where the federal government can restrict my movements, or right to free speech, or arbitrarily shut down my business.