To Mask or Not to Mask?

[jamil]

So... you think you're not still claiming the false eqivalence? Become it really, really seems like you are.


I'm not concerned about getting sick; I am relatively young and healthy. I'm much more likely to have an asymptomatic case than a lethal one.

I do find it concerning that you seem not to identify life as an inalienable right

Well. Okay, it's not an equivalence. One is a bit worse than the other. One is more contagious than the other. Both can be spread before symptoms. The flu up to 2 days. Covid? Up to two weeks. People can die from both, and usually morbidity tends to follow age and co-morbidities. The death rate for covid appears to be higher than for the flu.

So clearly the flu trails covid in the badness continuum. And it is a continuum. Think of it as the badness vs attributes continuum as if we could numerate attributes proportionally. Okay. So where is the line where along that continuum where it becomes morally wrong not to wear a mask?

Of course you understand all that. I'm guessing that you feel that there is a threshold in the contributions of presymptomatic spreading and death rate vs "badness" that's somewhere between 2 and 14 days and x vs y death rate. At least hopefully you understand that though they're not completely equal, there is a threshold that you're applying that makes it abruptly okay for the one and not the other. I'd be curious if, say, 4 days is okay and 5 is where you don the mask to protect society from yourself. Or maybe it's higher. 10/11, maybe.

 

[dudley0]

Yup. One of the things my 14 year old G-daughter has helped me to see and understand is what I think and feel is right and proper don't mean anymore. I am now irrelevant. I have served my purpose and folks continue to rely on me but my opinions and advice fall on deaf ears. Such is the circle of life.

We busted our butts to actually build this place. Now those Morons want to tear it all apart.

My 20 somethings are the same way. Sometimes I just can't say anything correctly.

 

[hoosierhawkeye]

10% chance of rain tomorrow. By chance I am where the cloudburst happens and I get drenched. I am 100% wet. No big deal. I will dry.
All the statistics don't matter at all if -- 1) I never contract the disease or--- 2)I get it, am asymptomatic, pass it to a family member and that person dies.
One of those chances with the odds is worth the risk of missing the odds. The other one is not worth the risk.

 

[drillsgt]

10% chance of rain tomorrow. By chance I am where the cloudburst happens and I get drenched. I am 100% wet. No big deal. I will dry.
All the statistics don't matter at all if -- 1) I never contract the disease or--- 2)I get it, am asymptomatic, pass it to a family member and that person dies.
One of those chances with the odds is worth the risk of missing the odds. The other one is not worth the risk.

Scenario #2 is irrelevant to the mask wearing debate.

 

[BigRed]

10% chance of rain tomorrow. By chance I am where the cloudburst happens and I get drenched. I am 100% wet. No big deal. I will dry.
All the statistics don't matter at all if -- 1) I never contract the disease or--- 2)I get it, am asymptomatic, pass it to a family member and that person dies.
One of those chances with the odds is worth the risk of missing the odds. The other one is not worth the risk.

You are free to choose to stay locked in a basement.

I am continuing on with life.

 

[nonobaddog]

That seems to be part of the problem with all the mandates and lock downs. The dumocraps aren't satisfied with taking personal responsibility for their own fears, they want to project them to everybody so everybody is supposed to behave like they want.
It is a strange combination fear, stupidity, control and ego.

 

[CampingJosh]

Well. Okay, it's not an equivalence. One is a bit worse than the other. One is more contagious than the other. Both can be spread before symptoms. The flu up to 2 days. Covid? Up to two weeks. People can die from both, and usually morbidity tends to follow age and co-morbidities. The death rate for covid appears to be higher than for the flu.

So clearly the flu trails covid in the badness continuum. And it is a continuum. Think of it as the badness vs attributes continuum as if we could numerate attributes proportionally. Okay. So where is the line where along that continuum where it becomes morally wrong not to wear a mask?

Of course you understand all that. I'm guessing that you feel that there is a threshold in the contributions of presymptomatic spreading and death rate vs "badness" that's somewhere between 2 and 14 days and x vs y death rate. At least hopefully you understand that though they're not completely equal, there is a threshold that you're applying that makes it abruptly okay for the one and not the other. I'd be curious if, say, 4 days is okay and 5 is where you don the mask to protect society from yourself. Or maybe it's higher. 10/11, maybe.

The answer is that I don't know enough about communicable disease to work out the proper response, and so I go with best practices.

I have a lot more experience and formal training with firearms than with communicable disease. Still, I don't try to make up my own rules for safe gun handling; I stick with Jeff Cooper's four rules. But every once in a while I come across a situation (a public range, usually) where another expectation is added. During those situations, I follow the additional rules, too.

Might I be able to come up with my own set of practices that would keep me from harming anyone around me? Yeah, probably, but there's already a standard. I don't toss out any of the four rules even though I know that there's unnecessary redundancy. When it comes to situations where an accident could deprive someone else of their life, ignoring best practices seems, at the very least, imprudent.

As you know, wearing a mask was not originally part of the best practices for Covid. Later, when more information was available, masks were added. That's when I started wearing a mask. If masks become a best practice during flu season, I'll wear one for that, too. That's not the inconsistency Hatin wants it to be.

 

[jamil]

The answer is that I don't know enough about communicable disease to work out the proper response, and so I go with best practices.

I have a lot more experience and formal training with firearms than with communicable disease. Still, I don't try to make up my own rules for safe gun handling; I stick with Jeff Cooper's four rules. But every once in a while I come across a situation (a public range, usually) where another expectation is added. During those situations, I follow the additional rules, too.

Might I be able to come up with my own set of practices that would keep me from harming anyone around me? Yeah, probably, but there's already a standard. I don't toss out any of the four rules even though I know that there's unnecessary redundancy. When it comes to situations where an accident could deprive someone else of their life, ignoring best practices seems, at the very least, imprudent.

As you know, wearing a mask was not originally part of the best practices for Covid. Later, when more information was available, masks were added. That's when I started wearing a mask. If masks become a best practice during flu season, I'll wear one for that, too. That's not the inconsistency Hatin wants it to be.

That’s not a terrible answer. Appeal to authority. So then is it immoral not to think the authority is correct? A particular authority said masks were unnecessary and then said they were. And then admitted that it was not new information that changed his recommendations but was a need to manipulate behavior.

 

[CampingJosh]

That’s not a terrible answer. Appeal to authority. So then is it immoral not to think the authority is correct?

At your request, I have tried to remove any mention of morality and instead focus on principle. A society based on individual rights requires self-restraint so as to avoid violating others' rights. Some number of people have been deprived of their right to life needlessly. I can't speculate on how many deaths could have been prevented, but surely that number is higher than zero.

Appeal to authority isn't great, but it's better than an appeal to hubris, which has come up often in this thread. But I also don't think it's solely an appeal to authority, as we've seen several countries follow those guidelines closely and do much better at limiting disease transmission.

 

[nonobaddog]

Some number of people have been deprived of their right to life needlessly. I can't speculate on how many deaths could have been prevented, but surely that number is higher than zero.

About 40%.

 

[SwikLS]

 

[phylodog]

That seems to be part of the problem with all the mandates and lock downs. The dumocraps aren't satisfied with taking personal responsibility for their own fears, they want to project them to everybody so everybody is supposed to behave like they want.
It is a strange combination fear, stupidity, control and ego.

They fear anything that threatens the fragile daydream world they've imagined exists. Things like honesty, reality and responsibility are terrifying. The more everyone conforms to the exact mold they've created, the more comfortable they are.

 

[Ingomike]

A society based on individual rights requires self-restraint so as to avoid violating others' rights. Some number of people have been deprived of their right to life needlessly. I can't speculate on how many deaths could have been prevented, but surely that number is higher than zero.

It actually is a pretty simple calculation, if was that bad that masks needed to be worn, no mandate or social pressure would needed, the human brain would see the carnage and self preservation would kick in and folks would take the steps to prevent their death.

Anything other than that standard is about control.

Wuwho flu has not met that standard to your frustration.

 

[NKBJ]

Today's conservatives should know from childhood that not doing what the establishment is trying to coerce you into has always been the best path forward.

 

[chipbennett]

I'm not talking about police or any role of government. I am talking to a group of people who claim to have a principled understanding of individual rights. The principled view is not just that others must avoid intruding on your rights but also that you must avoid intruding on others' rights.

There is no evidence that someone not wearing a mask is in any way whatsoever intruding on the rights of any other person. Fullstop.

Your claim to the contrary is more or less the same line of argumentation that says that someone merely carrying a firearm is infringing on the right to safety of others around the carrier. One, there is no right to "safety", just as there is no right not to get sick. Two, again, there is no evidence that someone carrying a firearm is likely to cause harm to another using that firearm, just as there is no evidence that someone merely not wearing a mask is going to make someone else sick from a respiratory virus.

 

[SwikLS]

just gonna leave this here

 

[nonobaddog]

If that person is alone in their own house - I know how they voted.

 

[NKBJ]

Zinc and silver are probably more effective than beard covers.

 

[SwikLS]

 

[MindfulMan]