How is it so HARD for you to do it? The only chickens are the ones who are too chicken to put on the mask while it's still the safest thing to do.
"Even with 100% vaccination there will still be..." Excuse me, are you a virologist? An epidemiologist? Why would you spout such a line as fact?
I've not said wearing a mask was difficult, it is merely the act of a coward when done by the vaccinated.
I say it as fact because it is one. Even if you wipe out covid from every human on earth by some miracle it has already spread to populations of wild animals. Unlike tuberculosis and the black plague coronavirus does not present visible symptoms in the majority of those spreading it, and wouldn't be isolated before reintroduction to the population.
@hypolite @Zettour @fractalman237@social.isurf.ca @hankg @kinetix indeed. It's a sign of weakness /not/ to wear a mask. Masks are annoying. Those who can tolerate wearing them are actually the ones demonstrating strength. How are these unmasked idiots thinking they can get some machismo cred as they show they can't handle it?
@Zettour To call the machismo factor a non-factor contradicts your comments about mask wearing being "cowardly". To say "efficacy of masks post-vax" is vague. It makes no sense to speak of efficacy w/out mention of which outcome you are referring to. Their is efficacy in avoiding hosptitalization, efficacy in avoiding death, & there is efficacy in transmission mitigation.
@Zettour Since you gave an efficacy measurement that is popularly quoted in the mass media (95%), we know you are talking about hospitalization efficacy not transmission efficacy. This is why hypolite mentioned the value in protecting those around you. It is not "cowardly" to protect those around you- it's the opposite of cowardly.
@Zettour The cowardly act is to expose those around you for the personal gain of avoiding the inconvenience of the mask.
@Zettour Vaccinated people are more likely to be asymptomatic when infected, which means they are less likely to know when they are carrying the virus, thus less likely to know when they can transmit it.
@Zettour Although we know Zettour called fractalman237 (who said the mask was to protect others) "cowardly", there are some non-obvious reasons to mask-up: to avoid facial recognition systems in the cities as mass surveillance becomes more rampant. The mask wearing trend is good for defeating facial rec thus good for privacy.
If you want to wear a mask due to surveillance that is a separate discussion. There is limited privacy relief from what I've read, DHS is already implementing a system where 77% of masked people can be identified. I don't see anything less than a full face mask being effective a decade from now.
@Zettour You don't know what you're reading. That article doesn't say what you think it does. It covers studies on infection probability "among the vaccinated" (which means from a vaccinated person to another vaccinated person). It does not cover transmission rate from a vaccinated person to an unvaccinated person.
@Zettour You also misunderstand what "coward" means. It's "one who is not brave enough to fight or do something difficult/dangerous/unpleasant that they should do". So you've got two things wrong here. Mask wearing is the unpleasant action to fight the virus, which means the cowardice is on those /not/ wearing the mask. It's also your action, not the action of others.
@Zettour Influencing someone else to fight something doesn't follow from the meaning of cowardice, nor is the analogy relevant. When Alice wears a mask to protect Bob, Alice burdens herself with unpleasantries, which is not the same as coercing a child to wear protective gear before skateboarding, for example.
In the case of a vaccinated person being infected in the 10% there is a lowered risk of infecting others, the greater the viral load the greater the symptoms.
@Zettour Again, you don't know what you're reading. That's the rate that a vaccinated person avoids becoming infected themselves, not a measure of transmission to others. Also note that it's and "effectiveness" rate, not an "efficacy". The efficacy of the same outcome is lower.
@Zettour the J&J vaccine has an efficacy of 66.3 percent in avoiding "mild to moderate" symptoms. That means there is at least a 33.7% chance of getting infected despite the vaccine.
I will cough on everyone you love, and my age group has a 99.99% survival rate of the virus.
