[elisbce]

Yeah, when we are two years into the pandemic, with 5.4 million deaths and over 280 million infections by COVID, with tens of millions of health workers globally working long hours and overtime in their sweat-filled protective gowns and gears, all you could care about is whether your daughter can see a world with faces uncovered.

If people can just stop their BS, get vaxxed, cover their face, and avoid gatherings, the pandemic would be over in a month, and we wouldn't need to do all this shit, would we?

[nradov]

That is misinformation. While I encourage everyone eligible to get vaccinated, the vaccines don't reliably prevent infection or transmission. The main benefit is in reducing severe symptoms. Likewise face masks only marginally reduce the risks of transmission in individual interactions. But since the virus is endemic it will never be "over". Everyone can expect to be exposed periodically. You can't expect people to wear masks forever.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/vinay-prasad/94646

[fivea]

> Likewise face masks only marginally reduce the risks of transmission in individual interactions.

Even if your personal assertion regarding the effectiveness of facial masks in containing COVID spread had any bearing in reality, don't you believe that such a low effort/high reward move is well justified given the current public health scenario, and more importantly the need to avoid escalating to higher-impact measures?

This irrational opposition to facial masks reads like ranting against other basic personal higiene etiquette, such as covering coughs and sneezes.

[josephcsible]

How did you get "high reward" from "only marginally reduce the risks"? Also, do you wear glasses? Masks are way worse if you do.

> This irrational opposition to facial masks reads like ranting against covering coughs and sneezes.

To me, it feels more like if you got told to keep your mouth covered all the time because sometimes you suddenly cough or sneeze.

[fivea]

> How did you get "high reward" from "only marginally reduce the risks"?

Don't you believe that reducing or outright eliminating the chance that a single person you come across to not experience hospitalization or death due to covid constitutes a worthy reward given the tradeoff?

> Also, do you wear glasses?

Why do you feel this is relevant?

[josephcsible]

> Don't you believe that reducing or outright eliminating the chance that a single person you come across to not experience hospitalization or death due to covid constitutes a worthy reward given the tradeoff?

I agree that reducing the risk constitutes a reward. I don't agree it constitutes a high reward, since the reduction is only marginal.

> > Also, do you wear glasses?

> Why do you feel this is relevant?

Based on this response, I assume that you don't wear glasses, or you'd know exactly why it's relevant: masks make them fog up all the time.

[fivea]

> I agree that reducing the risk constitutes a reward. I don't agree it constitutes a high reward, since the reduction is only marginal.

I suggest you review your definition of "marginal". Even the use of low-effecriveness cloth masks have been observed as reducing the symptomatic seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 by about 9%, and in the outbreak aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt it was associated with a 70% reduced risk of infection.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...

I also couldn't help notice how you base your personal assertions in no evidence or observation, and instead you simply repeat your baseless assertions without any substance. Do you feel this conveys any relevance to these personal beliefs?

[jollybean]

" the vaccines don't reliably prevent infection or transmission. "

I think his is actually misleading.

The vaccines significantly reduce transmission overall - mostly due to the fact people are much less likely to get COVID in the first place if they are vaccinated.

Where you can maybe have a point, is that people who are vaccinated - who do get COVID - may transmit it at the same rate as those who were unvaccinated and infected. Maybe.

But this is a secondary effect to the first order issue, which is that vaccines significantly reduce infections in the first place, and therefore reduces R0.

Yes, cloth masks are marginal, but they are at least 'another layer' of protection.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...