This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Here's your Mask Protocol  (Read 71428 times)

DocJones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
  • theofascist
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #195 on: April 27, 2021, 07:33:07 PM »
You are mindless goof if you believe it makes you a hypochondriac to wear a mask around other people after a year in which ~600,000 americans died of a novel virus spread through air droplets.
70% of those who caught it wore masks all the time outside their home. 
It doesn't spread via "air droplets". 
It's aerosolized and it passes right through masks like mosquitos through a chain link fence.
Wearing a mask is a psychological crutch for the mentally impaired.

DocJones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
  • theofascist
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #196 on: April 27, 2021, 07:40:37 PM »
CDC has now cleared vaccinated people to be outdoors without a mask in non-crowded situations.
So they CDC has cleared what we've been doing since this thing began even before vaccinations.




moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #197 on: April 27, 2021, 07:49:37 PM »
CDC has now cleared vaccinated people to be outdoors without a mask in non-crowded situations.
How nice of our would-be overlords to throw us a bone.

Nisi forte non de serveitute, sed de conditione serviendi, recusandum est a nobis.
No bones for the anti-vaxxers (that also happen to overlap considerably with the anti-maskers).

Since they are not actually a 'vaccine' what do anti-vaxxers have to do with it?
Did you read the part about vaccinated people being the ones allowed to go maskless?

Which doesn't have anything to do with my question.

Since the jabs being offered are not vaccines (in either the legal or scientific definition) what do anti-vaxxers have to do with the situation?

Explain how they are not vaccines. In particular, I'd love to hear how the Johnson and Johnson vaccine isn't a vaccine.

Did they start allowing J&J again?  I wondered why they shut it down when it had far fewer issues than the other two 'offerings'.

The Pfizer and Moderna jabs are not vaccines because a 'vaccine' is specifically an item made from dead or less potent forms of the virus in order to stimulate the bodies immune system to produce antibodies to fight it.

Neither of those two do that.  They alter the body to produce an item that will bond in a manner that prevents Covid from being able to cause a high enough virus load in the body.  Basically an internally created chemical blocker that prevents Covid from attaching.

This is why

1) During 'Warp Speed', they were talking about immunity from lawsuits for the manufacturers...actual vaccines have been granted civil immunity for the manufacturers since the 80s.

2) The Moderna SEC filing lists it as 'gene therapy' (I have not specifically read the filing for Pfizers, but the biochemistry itself is similar)
[note: There is nothing wrong with gene therapy as such...that is how we'll fix diabetes and a host of other genetic disorders.]

3) The 'experts' say you can still be a carrier or actually catch it...because it is not activating the immune system and you actually can still catch it.  It is supposed to keep the virus load low enough to prevent bad results.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2021, 07:51:47 PM by moonsweeper »
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

DocJones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
  • theofascist
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #198 on: April 27, 2021, 08:01:03 PM »
[note: There is nothing wrong with gene therapy as such...

Well not that we know of...


moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #199 on: April 27, 2021, 08:24:51 PM »
 ;D

There can always be bad effects.  I am just suggesting that the research itself is not inherently bad...

Technically speaking, that is the reason I am not getting a jab.  I never get the flu shot because I can count on one hand the number of times I have been sick in the last 40 years.  I am better within 24-36 hours, maybe a little tired out to 48.  My immune system seems to work exceptionally well, so I prefer not to mess with it.  Since the jab alters body chemistry, I prefer to leave mine as is. Adding the possibility of unknown long-term effects just puts more weight on the 'no' side of the scale.

My stepfather is getting/has gotten one of the jabs (don't know which off the top of my head) and considering he is 80 and has had a stroke that is probably the right decision.  His health issues mean the harsher symptoms could be a problem and long-term effects are not a big factor at that age.

"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #200 on: April 27, 2021, 08:55:15 PM »
CDC has now cleared vaccinated people to be outdoors without a mask in non-crowded situations.
How nice of our would-be overlords to throw us a bone.

Nisi forte non de serveitute, sed de conditione serviendi, recusandum est a nobis.
Isn't "no gods, no masters" the mantra of the commie totalitarians?

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4013
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #201 on: April 28, 2021, 08:12:58 AM »
CDC has now cleared vaccinated people to be outdoors without a mask in non-crowded situations.
How nice of our would-be overlords to throw us a bone.

Nisi forte non de serveitute, sed de conditione serviendi, recusandum est a nobis.
Isn't "no gods, no masters" the mantra of the commie totalitarians?
Which is funny, since the god of commie totalitarians is the State. And consistently they devolve into neo-feudalist societies rather than their magical 'equality for all' paradise.

In any case, the line is from Cato's Letters, or Essays on Liberty Civil and Religious and Other Important Subjects, by John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon.

KingCheops

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 1272
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #202 on: April 28, 2021, 10:28:06 AM »
;D

There can always be bad effects.  I am just suggesting that the research itself is not inherently bad...

Technically speaking, that is the reason I am not getting a jab.  I never get the flu shot because I can count on one hand the number of times I have been sick in the last 40 years.  I am better within 24-36 hours, maybe a little tired out to 48.  My immune system seems to work exceptionally well, so I prefer not to mess with it.  Since the jab alters body chemistry, I prefer to leave mine as is. Adding the possibility of unknown long-term effects just puts more weight on the 'no' side of the scale.

My stepfather is getting/has gotten one of the jabs (don't know which off the top of my head) and considering he is 80 and has had a stroke that is probably the right decision.  His health issues mean the harsher symptoms could be a problem and long-term effects are not a big factor at that age.

I crunched the numbers from Health Canada for my age cohort.  170k in the 40-49 bracket have tested positive.  2.8% ended up hospitalized, 0.3% admitted to ICU, 0.13% died.  Granted I'm overweight and out of shape (as a result of WFH and no gyms) and my family has a history of diabetes but I'm still willing to take those odds.  I don't imagine my odds are much better driving my daughter and wife to/from their schools each day.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11746
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #203 on: April 28, 2021, 12:18:03 PM »
I am just suggesting that the research itself is not inherently bad...

Technically speaking, that is the reason I am not getting a jab.  I never get the flu shot because I can count on one hand the number of times I have been sick in the last 40 years.  I am better within 24-36 hours, maybe a little tired out to 48.  My immune system seems to work exceptionally well, so I prefer not to mess with it.  Since the jab alters body chemistry, I prefer to leave mine as is. Adding the possibility of unknown long-term effects just puts more weight on the 'no' side of the scale.

My stepfather is getting/has gotten one of the jabs (don't know which off the top of my head) and considering he is 80 and has had a stroke that is probably the right decision.  His health issues mean the harsher symptoms could be a problem and long-term effects are not a big factor at that age.

I crunched the numbers from Health Canada for my age cohort.  170k in the 40-49 bracket have tested positive.  2.8% ended up hospitalized, 0.3% admitted to ICU, 0.13% died.  Granted I'm overweight and out of shape (as a result of WFH and no gyms) and my family has a history of diabetes but I'm still willing to take those odds.  I don't imagine my odds are much better driving my daughter and wife to/from their schools each day.

Unless you have some particularly death-defying drive to their schools, the odds of a fatal crash are more then ten times lower. In the U.S., the driver fatality rate is around ​150 deaths per 10 billion vehicle-miles driven. Say you drive 20 miles to their schools every day, that's around 0.01% per year. cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_United_State.  That's more then ten times less likely than death by covid-19.

Put it another way. The overall death rate in the age cohort of 40-49 is around 300 per 100,000 (ref). That's 0.3%. So if someone in that age bracket were to get covid-19 with an 0.13% chance of death, they have a much greater chance of death (+40%).

The deal with vaccination, though, is even greater -- because people aren't just risking their own deaths. By carrying the disease, they can infect others who are less healthy and have greater odds of death. For example, for me, my church has lots of 70+ year old members. If I am around them, I could increase their odds - not to mention my parents and other relatives, or just elderly or immune-compromised people in the grocery store.

Melichor

  • Watching the World Burn
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • M
  • Posts: 106
  • What?
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #204 on: April 28, 2021, 12:32:51 PM »
Quote from: jhkim
The deal with vaccination, though, is even greater -- because people aren't just risking their own deaths. By carrying the disease, they can infect others who are less healthy and have greater odds of death. For example, for me, my church has lots of 70+ year old members. If I am around them, I could increase their odds - not to mention my parents and other relatives, or just elderly or immune-compromised people in the grocery store.

Your position is that COVID-19 vaccines prevent a vaccinated person from carrying the disease.
Are you really sure that's accurate? Even the great and powerful CDC isn't sure at this time.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11746
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #205 on: April 28, 2021, 01:25:42 PM »
Quote from: jhkim
The deal with vaccination, though, is even greater -- because people aren't just risking their own deaths. By carrying the disease, they can infect others who are less healthy and have greater odds of death. For example, for me, my church has lots of 70+ year old members. If I am around them, I could increase their odds - not to mention my parents and other relatives, or just elderly or immune-compromised people in the grocery store.

Your position is that COVID-19 vaccines prevent a vaccinated person from carrying the disease.
Are you really sure that's accurate? Even the great and powerful CDC isn't sure at this time.

It isn't 100% in efficacy - and it isn't completely proven, but yes, there is good reason to think that vaccination will reduce the chances of transmission. It's been true of other diseases for certain. For covid-19, here's the CDC report on effectiveness studies to date:

Quote
Table 1b. Effectiveness against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission
CountryPopulationVaccineOutcomeVaccine effectiveness or risk reduction
United States (27)General adult populationPfizer-BioNTech or ModernaAsymptomatic infection80%*
United Kingdom (Scotland) (28)Healthcare workers and household membersPfizer-BioNTech or AstraZenecaHousehold members: SARS-CoV-2 infection54%**
Israel (19)General adult populationPfizer-BioNTechAsymptomatic infection94%**
* 0 days after second dose
** 14 days after second dose

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/fully-vaccinated-people.html

EDITED TO ADD: And no, the U.S. CDC isn't all-knowing or perfect -- but these are studies at least across three different countries showing an effect. There is variations in results across different countries, but all of them show that covid-19 is a highly infectious, highly deadly disease -- and that the vaccines are largely effective and safe by comparison. For this to all be a hoax, it would require international cooperation on an unprecedented scale.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2021, 01:34:43 PM by jhkim »

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #206 on: April 28, 2021, 02:03:29 PM »
I am just suggesting that the research itself is not inherently bad...

Technically speaking, that is the reason I am not getting a jab.  I never get the flu shot because I can count on one hand the number of times I have been sick in the last 40 years.  I am better within 24-36 hours, maybe a little tired out to 48.  My immune system seems to work exceptionally well, so I prefer not to mess with it.  Since the jab alters body chemistry, I prefer to leave mine as is. Adding the possibility of unknown long-term effects just puts more weight on the 'no' side of the scale.

My stepfather is getting/has gotten one of the jabs (don't know which off the top of my head) and considering he is 80 and has had a stroke that is probably the right decision.  His health issues mean the harsher symptoms could be a problem and long-term effects are not a big factor at that age.

I crunched the numbers from Health Canada for my age cohort.  170k in the 40-49 bracket have tested positive.  2.8% ended up hospitalized, 0.3% admitted to ICU, 0.13% died.  Granted I'm overweight and out of shape (as a result of WFH and no gyms) and my family has a history of diabetes but I'm still willing to take those odds.  I don't imagine my odds are much better driving my daughter and wife to/from their schools each day.

Unless you have some particularly death-defying drive to their schools, the odds of a fatal crash are more then ten times lower. In the U.S., the driver fatality rate is around ​150 deaths per 10 billion vehicle-miles driven. Say you drive 20 miles to their schools every day, that's around 0.01% per year. cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_United_State.  That's more then ten times less likely than death by covid-19.

Put it another way. The overall death rate in the age cohort of 40-49 is around 300 per 100,000 (ref). That's 0.3%. So if someone in that age bracket were to get covid-19 with an 0.13% chance of death, they have a much greater chance of death (+40%).

The deal with vaccination, though, is even greater -- because people aren't just risking their own deaths. By carrying the disease, they can infect others who are less healthy and have greater odds of death. For example, for me, my church has lots of 70+ year old members. If I am around them, I could increase their odds - not to mention my parents and other relatives, or just elderly or immune-compromised people in the grocery store.

1)  I think he lives in Canada, not the US...
2)  Assuming his wife/daughter go to school 5 days a week, he is making that round trip almost everyday...is he being exposed to Covid every day?  If not then that has to be taken into account as well
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

KingCheops

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 1272
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #207 on: April 28, 2021, 02:06:05 PM »
Quote from: jhkim
The deal with vaccination, though, is even greater -- because people aren't just risking their own deaths. By carrying the disease, they can infect others who are less healthy and have greater odds of death. For example, for me, my church has lots of 70+ year old members. If I am around them, I could increase their odds - not to mention my parents and other relatives, or just elderly or immune-compromised people in the grocery store.

Your position is that COVID-19 vaccines prevent a vaccinated person from carrying the disease.
Are you really sure that's accurate? Even the great and powerful CDC isn't sure at this time.

They've been saying the opposite.  You can still carry and spread, and even get sick, after the vaccination (I thought I saw news reports about some states having more covid deaths among vaccinated now than non-vaccinated?  probably misremembering).  The best analogy (now that the nanny state requires seat belts) is an Airbag in your car.  Me not having an airbag doesn't make you more likely to die or be seriously injured.  So why should I have to pay for airbags in my car?

I'm by no means an anti-vaxxer.  I've probably had more than the average Canadian because I've travelled to Egypt.  I just don't think companies should get to push out experimental therapies nor that being vaccinated should be required at this time.  If I were as old as my mom (72, obese, diabetic) I would 100% get the jab.  My wife is getting it (which I'm not thrilled about because I'm worried about long term -- but she's just asking for the astrazeneca).  I will likely get it next year when we hope to take my girls to Disneyland.  I will probably have to be forced at gun point to get my daughters vaccinated at this point however.

KingCheops

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 1272
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #208 on: April 28, 2021, 02:13:32 PM »
I am just suggesting that the research itself is not inherently bad...

Technically speaking, that is the reason I am not getting a jab.  I never get the flu shot because I can count on one hand the number of times I have been sick in the last 40 years.  I am better within 24-36 hours, maybe a little tired out to 48.  My immune system seems to work exceptionally well, so I prefer not to mess with it.  Since the jab alters body chemistry, I prefer to leave mine as is. Adding the possibility of unknown long-term effects just puts more weight on the 'no' side of the scale.

My stepfather is getting/has gotten one of the jabs (don't know which off the top of my head) and considering he is 80 and has had a stroke that is probably the right decision.  His health issues mean the harsher symptoms could be a problem and long-term effects are not a big factor at that age.

I crunched the numbers from Health Canada for my age cohort.  170k in the 40-49 bracket have tested positive.  2.8% ended up hospitalized, 0.3% admitted to ICU, 0.13% died.  Granted I'm overweight and out of shape (as a result of WFH and no gyms) and my family has a history of diabetes but I'm still willing to take those odds.  I don't imagine my odds are much better driving my daughter and wife to/from their schools each day.

Unless you have some particularly death-defying drive to their schools, the odds of a fatal crash are more then ten times lower. In the U.S., the driver fatality rate is around ​150 deaths per 10 billion vehicle-miles driven. Say you drive 20 miles to their schools every day, that's around 0.01% per year. cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_United_State.  That's more then ten times less likely than death by covid-19.

Put it another way. The overall death rate in the age cohort of 40-49 is around 300 per 100,000 (ref). That's 0.3%. So if someone in that age bracket were to get covid-19 with an 0.13% chance of death, they have a much greater chance of death (+40%).

The deal with vaccination, though, is even greater -- because people aren't just risking their own deaths. By carrying the disease, they can infect others who are less healthy and have greater odds of death. For example, for me, my church has lots of 70+ year old members. If I am around them, I could increase their odds - not to mention my parents and other relatives, or just elderly or immune-compromised people in the grocery store.

1)  I think he lives in Canada, not the US...
2)  Assuming his wife/daughter go to school 5 days a week, he is making that round trip almost everyday...is he being exposed to Covid every day?  If not then that has to be taken into account as well

Yup I'm a Canuckistani.  Yes I know my chances of death are less than 0.13% from driving but hyperbole aside my greater point is that waking up and operating in society bears non-zero risk of dying.  Space junk could land on my head, we could finally have that earthquake they've been threatening my whole life, someone could shoot up either school my family attends, someone could invade my home.  Fucking derka derkas could bomb something or China could invade.  Life is risk man.  I was scared of Kung Flu back in Jan 2019 when it was mostly just China and I started stocking up on food.  Since then the numbers show that while deadlier than the 2018 flu its not exactly the fucking Spanish Flu (especially since that one affected both the young and the old not just people near death anyway).

My bubble is everyone in my eldest daughter's class, my youngest daughter's preschool, and my wife has 2 different classes per quarter (with 1 spare now).  Factor in all the people in those people's bubbles and my "bubble" is probably several hundreds.  My wife's grade 8's last quarter were self-isolated and I had to drive her to the testing site for a rapid test.  A bunch of my eldest daughter's class mates were self-isolated 3 weeks ago.  I'm 99% sure I had Covid back at Christmas 2019 but don't want to get tested because I don't want to add to the fear mongering "oh no cases are still going up!!!!  Sky is falling!"

Melichor

  • Watching the World Burn
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • M
  • Posts: 106
  • What?
Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Reply #209 on: April 28, 2021, 03:55:52 PM »
Quote from: jhkim
It isn't 100% in efficacy - and it isn't completely proven, but yes, there is good reason to think that vaccination will reduce the chances of transmission. It's been true of other diseases for certain. For covid-19, here's the CDC report on effectiveness studies to date:

Quote
Table 1b. Effectiveness against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission
CountryPopulationVaccineOutcomeVaccine effectiveness or risk reduction
United States (27)General adult populationPfizer-BioNTech or ModernaAsymptomatic infection80%*
United Kingdom (Scotland) (28)Healthcare workers and household membersPfizer-BioNTech or AstraZenecaHousehold members: SARS-CoV-2 infection54%**
Israel (19)General adult populationPfizer-BioNTechAsymptomatic infection94%**
* 0 days after second dose
** 14 days after second dose

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/fully-vaccinated-people.html

EDITED TO ADD: And no, the U.S. CDC isn't all-knowing or perfect -- but these are studies at least across three different countries showing an effect. There is variations in results across different countries, but all of them show that covid-19 is a highly infectious, highly deadly disease -- and that the vaccines are largely effective and safe by comparison. For this to all be a hoax, it would require international cooperation on an unprecedented scale.

Why do you say hoax? Are you having doubts?
No one else has called this a hoax, it obviously isn't.
What it is though, is overblown, overwrought, political and promoted using biased and shaky data.

Asymptomatic infection 0 days after second dose = 80% effectiveness???   Were the subjects infected before the second dose was administered?

The second row (Scotland) isn't even for Asymptomatic infection, but rather Household members: SARS-CoV-2 infection. And only within  the population of Healthcare workers and household members.

The Third row (Israel) cites a Pfizer press release. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/real-world-evidence-confirms-high-effectiveness-pfizer
80% is referred to once in the press release:
Quote
The MoH analysis was conducted when more than 80% of tested specimens in Israel were variant B.1.1.7, providing real-world evidence of the effectiveness of BNT162b2 for prevention of COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths due to variant B.1.1.7.

The CDC has proven themselves to be biased and agenda driven.
Word salads, obviously vague and errant data, suppressed information, and the 'bend the knee' attitude of those in charge, their minions and followers are reasons why some have issue with what's going on.