Have you noticed that our dear leaders have been all over the map regarding the wearing of masks or face coverings as part of the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
Yeah, me too.
First, masks were useless. Turns out that was a lie meant to ensure that sufficient N95 masks were available to medical professionals.
Then, anything that wasn’t N95 was useless. That was an oversimplification of a nonbinary reality: N95s are better than tight-weave cloth or paper, tight-weave cloth or paper is better than a bandana, and a bandana is better than nothing.
Finally, certain public events (cough, cough, BLM protests) are “too important” to be included in the large-gathering bans or mask-mandates that other public events are being subject to. As if the virus has some sort of woke-discriminator. “Oh, you’re doing social justice? Ok, I won’t infect you.”
So, now, my social media and news feeds are littered with stories of people not wearing masks in public places, of others mask-shaming them, and of still others screaming that the whole mask thing (and in some cases the pandemic itself) is a hoax. The latter is often “supported” by armchair “analysis” (both deserve scare quotes) that argues the virus’s mortality is overstated, that statistics are being monkeyed with in order to amplify the pandemic’s severity, and the like. Since the Internet became a thing, crackpot erudition can be found to support any position at any time. That actual scientific inquiry has become infected with political correctness, excessive logrolling, and a massive reproducibility problem only exacerbates people’s tendency to find and share that which supposedly validates their preferred narrative.
Yet, truth remains truth. COVID is not just another flu bug. It’s worse. While we’ve better learned how to treat it, and have a better sense of who’s at risk, it’s still uncontained, and it’s still harming and killing people.
It will continue to do so until one of two things happens: Enough people get sick (and recover) to achieve herd immunity, or a vaccine is developed, mass-produced, and mass-distributed. Yes, there’s a chance it’ll fizzle out, either by mutation to a more benign form or simply by being isolated away, but there’s no rational reason to think that that’s what we should expect.
The fact that politicians have acted like politicians in response to COVID doesn’t change the truth. While it should serve as a reminder of what we already know: that we shouldn’t overly rely on their wisdom, we shouldn’t expect them to be consistent and apolitical, and that we should view them not as saviors but as the pond scum we generally know them to be, it shouldn’t motivate us to be contrarian.
We shouldn’t fault them for getting some things wrong, because the early information on the virus was scant and conflicting, and many decisions were little more than guesses. We should call them to task for getting things wrong where they knew better (NY governor Andrew Cuomo and the nursing homes comes to mind). But, we shouldn’t let those instances drive us to behavior that we know is wrong, either.
In other words…
Wear a ****ing mask.
It’s a really trivial imposition, in the grand scheme, considering how ravaging this bug is to the elderly and other high-risk groups. Remember, you’re not just wearing it to keep yourself from getting sick, and you’re not wearing it to keep that other young and healthy person from getting sick. You’re wearing it to prevent a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th degree of separation, high-risk person from getting sick. You’re wearing it to keep that young person’s grandparent from getting sick. You’re wearing it to keep that person’s immunocompromised, or obese, or COPD-afflicted, or kidney-sick friend, relative, or acquaintance from getting sick.
Yeah, I get it, it’s bullshit that politicians are giving a bye to massive social justice protests while getting all bully-thug on everyone else, but mask-refusal isn’t truth-to-power, it’s just petty obstinacy. You’re not “showing” the shitheads in charge that you’re not sheep, you’re just being selfish.
Wear a ****ing mask. It’s good citizenship, it’s a kindness to your fellow Americans, and it’s the most trivial of impositions. Even if you believe that COVID is overstated, or that the numbers are being doctored, you can wear a mask. No one of any value is going to chasten you for being a sheep or a sellout. Wearing one doesn’t risk your rights or put your liberty at peril. And, who knows, you might actually keep yourself or someone else from getting sick.
Loading ...
Your obscenities negated your argument.
I do not accept your advice
A – My ‘obscenities’ are irrelevant to the point I make.
B – This is not a G-rated blog, and I’ve used salty language in countless previous posts.
C – Focusing on that salty language, instead of the simple realities therein, further proves my point about mask-refusers.
The fact, people have been murdering each other for several millennia, doesn’t make it right.
Just wear a BLM shirt and go around shouting that you’re upset and you don’t need to wear a mask?
My take is that the mask reduces the risk of the wearer transmitting it.
The mask doesn’t cover your eyes, which is one of the paths to infections, so I wonder how much protections my glasses give me.
I wear the mask so that others don’t worry about me spreading it, and in hope that it will encourage others to wear theirs.
Still keep as much distance between yourself and others is probably the best preventive measure.
” herd immunity, or a vaccine is developed” well we are hearing that the antibodies don’t stick around for long, though I’ve read that once your body knows how to make a certain antibody it can quickly start production again (I don’t know if that is true but I read it on the internet)
Quote of the moment: Gen. Patton’s oddly non-profane explanation of profanity. When I want my men to remember something important, to really make it stick, I give it to them double dirty. It may not sound nice to some bunch of little old ladies at an afternoon tea party, but it helps my soldiers to remember.
There’s still a ton we don’t know about this bug, including questions regarding reinfection, the persistence of antibodies, the immunity they confer, and much more.
All that *reinforces* the idea of low-difficulty mitigation things like hand washing and mask wearing. They aren’t certain proof against either catching or transmitting, but they do help.
I’ve seen excessive uses of profanity that detract from a point (usually, because the point itself is weak and the profanity is being used as a virtue signal in and of itself), and I’ve seen uses that drive a point home. Mine was out of exasperation for what should be obvious.
Wearing cloth masks does not inhibit the transmission of the virus between people. Physical distance inhibits the transmission. Cloth masks are the safety blanket politicians use to enforce and demonstrate their power.
Get Outlook for Android
There’s ample scholarship that says otherwise.
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent
FTA:
““The concept is risk reduction rather than absolute prevention.” “You don’t throw up your hands if you think a mask is not 100 percent effective. That’s silly. Nobody’s taking a cholesterol medicine because they’re going to prevent a heart attack 100 percent of the time, but you’re reducing your risk substantially.”
Furthermore, is *this* the truth-to-power moment you want to hang your hat on? This triviality, this matter of virtually zero impact on your life?
That the government says “Do X” doesn’t validate X, but it doesn’t validate not-X either. If the government were absolutely silent on the matter of masks, but instead lots of health professionals suggested them, would you still resist?
I don’t dispute that there may be a chance a mask will block a virus, but the main and most effective way is physical distance. In the begining Fauci told people not to wear masks. He and others later admitted that they were attempting to avoid a run on masts, mainly the N95 mask, by giving out this information. Essentially he was telling Americans that he lied to them.
Then, after encouraging the wearing of masks, but weeks later, he admitted that there was only a 3% chance of a cloth mask inhibiting the transmission. Best thing you can do is have hand sanitizer with you at all times and use a cloth or other throw away item if you need to grasp objects in public. Use sanitizer wipes on handles you may be using such as grocery carts before grasping them. Don’t touch your face with your hands, use an arm or towel. Don’t depend on the store to do those things. Keep a distance of 4 to 6 feet by either backing away or asking someone(reminding) to keep that distance. Use good hygiene everywhere, at home and in public. Good hygiene is the number one way to stop a virus. I’ve been tracking this virus since January 8-10, before the media or anyone began to mention it.
We stocked up on hand sanitizer and wipes, paper towels to grasp, gloves to use(one hand). I started teaching kids everyday to use good hygiene and how. Everyday. I was worried that it would be dangerous for kids.
But, again, does the government’s past misbehavior invalidate everything they tell us?
The link I shared posits a nontrivial risk mitigation. Given how miniscule the imposition of wearing a mask in indoor public places is, I really don’t get the resistance, other than from a “I don’t want to be told…” petulance.
Yes, there are all sorts of other things that mitigate as well, and we all should do them. Why so much brouhaha about masks?
And – do you object to a business requiring customers wear them?
I don’t oppose the wearing of masks. What I do oppose is the “science” that says the wearing of masks mitigate the virus when it does very little if anything and politicians making the same claim. All politicians at all times should be doubted as to their motivation, no matter who they are. I wear masks where needed, in grocery stores that are crowded, if not, then I don’t. I don’t wear masks alone or while outdoors. If a store appears too crowded, then I leave and return at a less crowded time.
Get Outlook for Android
The science is evolving, and there are contradictory claims. As I shared, there’s credible evidence that it mitigates more than some argue.
But, nowhere in any of this did I advocate for government mandates. My argument is one of basic citizenship. If you can do something that’s of virtually zero consequence to you, that might save the life of someone with whom you cross paths, or someone in that someone’s household, why be so resistant to it?
Our behaviors are similar. I wear masks in indoor public spaces, and if I’m outdoors and going to be within feet of strangers. I don’t wear them alone, or in the car, or out in a field.
I don’t base my behavior on what the government tells me. If it tells me something I validate separately, its telling me doesn’t affect that validation.
Then our only disagreement is between the conflicting evidence that is constantly being changed. What does this tell you?
Get Outlook for Android
Consider that scientific inquiry involves margins of error. As research progresses, those margins (and conflicts) narrow. Now, I already noted that the government lied to us, and I’ve repeatedly noted that this isn’t about what the government suggests or mandates we do.
It comes down to a simple question that you haven’t really answered – what’s the down side? Why so much resistance to a really trivial behavior?
Thank you for posting the article. However I wish there was more science and better communication regarding masks outdoors. I wear a mask in a store or business because it makes sense where people are breathing the same indoor air. However I typically don’t wear one outdoors when going for a walk, as part of my goal for the walk is fresh air and sunshine (it’s also easy to avoid crowds). But I see so many people now walking around alone outdoors, or even going for jogs/riding a bike alone with a mask on. WHY? If it makes you feel better, carry on. However it’s distressing to see people veering off sidewalks, giving dirty looks etc. whenever there is a maskless person in public but is still socially distanced. I don’t see any science that shows risk in this situation – or what the risk is even from a passerby who is not actively coughing.
I fear that all these “wear a mask!” orders without nuance is creating a lot of new terrified fanatics, and is making us overly fearful and distrustful of one another – a phenomenon that may not go away.
When the crisis ebbs, the fear and distrust will as well. It’s human nature to fear the unknown, and the virus is still very much unknown. But, it also takes work to maintain that absent a credible threat.
I see no mention of “face shields”. Does a much better job of protecting one then a mask.
“Wear a ****ing mask. It’s good citizenship, it’s a kindness to your fellow Americans, and it’s the most trivial of impositions”
And that is why “Libertarian” has no universal definition (neither does any other word, for that matter). But if there’s a thing that distinguishes libertarians from anarchists, kindness would be in there somewhere. No need for asterisks.
What is unlibertarian about my request? No matter how it’s couched, it’s a request. The only way one can deem this unlibertarian is to assume that I am calling for coercion and enforcement. Nowhere in my article did I even hint at coercion, however.
I reject the notion that “libertarian” doesn’t have a universal (or close enough for practical purposes) definition. There are certainly variances and nuances in the ideology, but it’s *far* more definable than either liberalism or conservatism, and while libertarians love to argue with and denounce each other, they all do so from a framework of individual rights, voluntarism, and mutually beneficial cooperation.