vaccines v herd immunity

[El Presidente]

1 hour ago, rcarlson said:

Honestly, you can't understand why people have a problem with putting what is rightly termed an experimental vaccine into their bodies?  Selfish?  

I couldn't agree with you more. 

[Meklown]

9 hours ago, PigFish said:

where did this plague come from? The CCP!

 

9 hours ago, PigFish said:

When they killed 100 million to engineer their society

 

9 hours ago, PigFish said:

engineering a virus

LOL what

[Philc2001]

I don't see anything wrong with some healthy skepticism about vaccination. I was hesitant, skeptical, and somewhat worried the vaccines were not adequately tested. For the record, I have never had a flu vaccine. Fortunately, I have access to numerous certified medical doctors at my work, so I was able to have some frank and detailed discussions with a few of them about the vaccines, and express my concerns (fears?). These are practicing doctors, some of which are senior medical directors at hospitals and clinics, and several have volunteered their services at local community hospitals to help out. 

After a few chats it became apparent to me, and this is strictly my own pov, that the risk of COVID related adverse health outcomes and possible death are far greater than the risk of any kind of side effects from vaccination. Of course, these doctors have seen a lot of people die in front of them daily from COVID-19, held their hands as they passed away, so they have a lot of front-line experience.

One of my main questions to them all was, are you getting the vaccine? They all confirmed they had already been vaccinated. My next question was, are you encouraging your family to vaccinated, including your kids? Without hesitation every one said absolutely, in fact it was their top priority as soon as the age qualifications permit it (even those with kids just 6 years old).

I wondered too whether MRNA vaccines were safe, if they had been adequately tested, and until I spoke to the doctors I was under the impression MRNA vaccines were a new and untested approach to vaccination. I was surprised to find this was not the case. Below is the text of the response I received from one of the doctors I approached for input. This is unedited;

 

Quote

Here are some bulleted points in response to your questions:

*I'm pro-vaccine in general and strongly recommend that everyone receive any of the COVID vaccines when available to them, this includes the mRNA vaccines, Moderna and Pfizer.

*mRNA vaccines are not new tech. They have been used for decades - Zika, rabies, etc.

*The FDA did NOT change the strictness of criteria to approve these vaccines for emergency authorization. Pharma was able to produce these vaccines because they combined steps in the vaccine development process which is a scientifically sound approach. If you look at the actual vaccine trials, these were large trials with lots of people with pretty good representation across ethnicities. Data is less for children < 18 yo though Pfizer is approved for 18 yo+.

*In my medical opinion, the benefits of vaccination far outweigh the risks. The risks with mRNA vaccines are acceptably low. There is always risk of side effects with any vaccine or medication.

*The mRNA used in the vaccine does not actually integrate or become part of our DNA and the mRNA is actually removed from our body after it has triggered cells to create the protein (from coronavirus) which triggers an immune response in our body. (We are never exposed to the full coronavirus in the vaccination process; it's not a live vaccine.) This immune response is what protects us if we are exposed to COVID-19 after vaccination. I have minimal concerns about long term effects of the vaccine. And again the benefits outweigh these minimal concerns in my mind.

 

Personal details which may be useful.

*My husband and I have already received the Moderna vaccine in January. First dose, we had injection site discomfort, typical of influenza vaccine. 2nd dose we had more significant side effects - felt like the flu for 36 hours -body aches, chills, low grade fever, overall felt crappy. Although this didn't feel great, it was a great sign that the vaccine was doing its job. It was triggering my immune system to create protective antibodies to fight COVID if I were ever to be exposed to the real virus. We both fully recovered after 36 hours. I have same age friends who have had NO side effects to Moderna after the 2nd dose. My father, who is 79 yo, had the Pfizer vaccine with no side effects with either dose. Generally I have heard of fewer side effects with Pfizer. 

*I am online every day to try and get both of my kids 17 yo and 18 yo vaccinated asap. They are the most important people in my life and protecting them through vaccination is my top priority.

For better or worse, I got the pfizer vaccine and I personally had no side effects or any reaction beyond some soreness in the arm for a day. But my wife had a 101 fever and was achy and out of it for 2 days. Several of our friends had similar stories, one half had a reaction, the other felt nothing. I still have family who is skeptical, but they are coming around.

If you're on the fence I hope this helps. 

 

[Fuzz]

A lot of the research required for the Covid vaccines had already been conducted for SARS, MERS, HIV, Ebloa, Zika and influenza vaccines. Once the genome for Covid was released, multiple vaccine programs commenced, repurposing decades of research on vaccine design.

 

[mprach024]

20 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

A lot of the research required for the Covid vaccines had already been conducted for SARS, MERS, HIV, Ebloa, Zika and influenza vaccines. Once the genome for Covid was released, multiple vaccine programs commenced, repurposing decades of research on vaccine design.

 

I think I read that Ugur Sahin, the Biontech creator of the Pfizer vaccine, his background was in using mRNA as a delivery method for cancer research.  I could be crossing wires here so feel free to correct me.  Essentially he just took the method that he and his partner and many other scientists have been working with for a decade plus and applied it to the virus once they had the genome.  Again I could be mushing details but that feels like proper recall of what I read.  

[BellevilleMXZ]

Well its glad to hear some of you folks are in areas that have low/no cases, and reopened for the most part, Here in Ontario, Canada, its a bit of a zoo right now. We have been locked down for roughly 3 weeks, with roughly 3 more to go....WITH higher cases than ever. Where I am, its not as bad as some bigger cities, so as the hospitals are overwhelmed there, they are now flying people in from those areas to OUR hospitals. Great times😟 Sadly we have a shortage of doses, so its a bit of an uphill battle to say the least. The Fed.Gov. is to blame for this mess,imo as they botched the vax purchase contracts, and the main issue, is were VERY slow to restrict foreign in. There have been THOUSANDS of known infected flights coming in. I was against getting the vax at first, months ago, due to not knowing if there will be long term effects. But at this point I will certainly go ahead and get it when able to. Stay safe folks.   

[Fuzz]

You do not see the reduction in Covid infections from a lockdown for weeks.

[BEVOSREVENGE]

On 4/30/2021 at 4:01 PM, FrancisK7 said:

Belief doesn't really matter, it's a fact that vaccinated people can still catch and spread the virus

Ah, yes facts.

0.02% to 0.0008% breakthrough rate once vaccinated (sources vary).  The CDC reports 9,245 breakthrough cases out of 95,000,000 fully vaccinated. See below

Total number of vaccine breakthrough infections reported to CDC	9,245
Females	5,827 (63%)
People aged ≥60 years	4,245 (45%)
Asymptomatic infections	2,525 (27%)
Hospitalizations*	835 (9%)
Deaths†	132 (1%)

*241 (29%) of the 835 hospitalizations were reported as asymptomatic or not related to COVID-19.
†20 (15%) of the 132 fatal cases were reported as asymptomatic or not related to COVID-19.

Also per the CDC "Early data show the vaccines do help keep people with no symptoms from spreading COVID-19."

FYI here is another fact, not a single N95 mask on my plane flight back from Colorado today (not TSA, not airline crew, not passengers).  Plenty of other things called masks (you know the ones that do nothing but make the timid feel good).

 

[Ryan]

10 hours ago, rcarlson said:

Honestly, you can't understand why people have a problem with putting what is rightly termed an experimental vaccine into their bodies?  Selfish?           

I can understand why people have a problem with it. I think most people can understand that. Fear of the unknown is natural. By "unknown" in this case, I mean what has not yet been personally experienced. Very much is known about these vaccines and their effects, after testing and 100s of millions of live doses.

However, "selfish?", yes absolutely. It's a definition of selfishness. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone or name-calling. What I mean is, putting one's own fear of what they don't trust above the health of the broader community and the health of those we come into contact with is, objectively, selfish.

If every age-group had a 1 in 6 chance of dying of Covid, there would be far less fear of the vaccine and much less discussion about it. I'm not trying to judge anyone. It's just that's the way it is.

The fact is, some age-groups do have a 16% of death from the disease, as do some people with existing vulnerabilities. Vaccines, for all of us, to try to slow or halt the spread of the disease, protect those people. From dying.

Regarding long term effects. There is evidence of a far greater possibility of long term debilitating effects from the disease itself, in those who survive the initial infection, than there is from any of the vaccines.

   

 

[rcarlson]

1 hour ago, Ryan said:

I can understand why people have a problem with it. I think most people can understand that. Fear of the unknown is natural. By "unknown" in this case, I mean what has not yet been personally experienced. Very much is known about these vaccines and their effects, after testing and 100s of millions of live doses.

However, "selfish?", yes absolutely. It's a definition of selfishness. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone or name-calling. What I mean is, putting one's own fear of what they don't trust above the health of the broader community and the health of those we come into contact with is, objectively, selfish.

If every age-group had a 1 in 6 chance of dying of Covid, there would be far less fear of the vaccine and much less discussion about it. I'm not trying to judge anyone. It's just that's the way it is.

The fact is, some age-groups do have a 16% of death from the disease, as do some people with existing vulnerabilities. Vaccines, for all of us, to try to slow or halt the spread of the disease, protect those people. From dying.

Regarding long term effects. There is evidence of a far greater possibility of long term debilitating effects from the disease itself, in those who survive the initial infection, than there is from any of the vaccines.

   

 

There is no evidence of "long term" effects.  The vaccine has only been in use for months.  Selfishness or self-determination? High risk groups have a different choice to make.  But everyone has a choice to make for themselves, their families, their unborn, as does the stranger that can decide whether to take the vaccine for themselves.      

[rcarlson]

If reliable, how does a 99.992% effectiveness rate (.0000013% death rate -- nearly half of which are over age 60) support post immunization mask mandates?  Unless there's more to it, that eye-poppingly miniscule number suggests that masks are on their way out.  

[Philc2001]

1 hour ago, rcarlson said:

If reliable, how does a 99.992% breakthrough rate (.0000013% death rate -- nearly half of which are over age 60) support post immunization mask mandates?  Unless there's more to it, that eye-poppingly miniscule number suggests that masks are on their way out.  

breakthroughs are entirely asymptomatic, and there is no mandatory tracking of people after vaccination or follow-up testing, so the numbers cannot be precise. Neither are the numbers of those not vaccinated. Testing in the US has been spotty at best, even long before the vaccines were introduced.  

What we do know is the very vast majority of people vaccinated do not get serious symptoms, they do not show up in emergency rooms or require intubation, but we do know for a fact they could still be infected and could still transmit the disease. 

When it comes to masking, it's not just to protect the person wearing the mask, it's just as beneficial for the community. I personally am vaccinated but I am still donning my mask, even in the gym, in the park, in the grocery stores, and anywhere I go in the community. It does't take any effort, and it doesn't burden me in any way, so I don't see the big deal. YMMV.

[Corylax18]

10 hours ago, BEVOSREVENGE said:

FYI here is another fact, not a single N95 mask on my plane flight back from Colorado today (not TSA, not airline crew, not passengers).  Plenty of other things called masks (you know the ones that do nothing but make the timid feel good).

 

This is something I've yet to wrap my head around. I just dont understand why EVERYONE is completely content to play pretend with these things. 

The cloth masks that most people wear and the way the wear them provide almost no protection, from any virus, that's ever existed. Even the CDC states a roughly 30% efficacy rate, even when worn properly, by both parties. Most people don't even wear them right! Nose hanging out, Thick beard (Me, it ain't n95 rated), improper fit. We're going to look back at these masks like the ridiculous bird masks the docs wore during the plague. In practice, they generate roughly the same level of protection. ZERO

If you paid me to be your body guard, but I told you I could only stop 1 out of every 3 attacks you would face, would you still pay me?

If they made a boarding announcement at the gate that the plane had a 70% chance of going down, would you still fly?

When did a 70% failure rate become a "success"? 

[SirVantes]

34 minutes ago, Corylax18 said:

This is something I've yet to wrap my head around. I just dont understand why EVERYONE is completely content to play pretend with these things. 

The cloth masks that most people wear and the way the wear them provide almost no protection, from any virus, that's ever existed. Even the CDC states a roughly 30% efficacy rate, even when worn properly, by both parties. Most people don't even wear them right! Nose hanging out, Thick beard (Me, it ain't n95 rated), improper fit. We're going to look back at these masks like the ridiculous bird masks the docs wore during the plague. In practice, they generate roughly the same level of protection. ZERO

If you paid me to be your body guard, but I told you I could only stop 1 out of every 3 attacks you would face, would you still pay me?

If they made a boarding announcement at the gate that the plane had a 70% chance of going down, would you still fly?

When did a 70% failure rate become a "success"? 

It's better than nothing - which is how most people live their entire lives.  Want a Mercedes?  Have only 30% of the price ? Okay, a Honda will have to do.  People don't say, "No Merc, I'll walk."

You may say a mask is different, because it's an inconvenience rather than something you want.  Well, if you are going into battle and all they have is paper-based body armour that stops one round out of three, would you wear one or not?  "But a bullet will kill me..." and we're back to mortality debates etc.

Also, even if we accept that a mask is 30% effective, presumably it's 30% effective in isolation.  What is the effectiveness combined with hygiene, social distancing and other measures?  In any case, 30% effectiveness simplistically still means 30% fewer infections and 30% fewer eventual mortalities.  Pretty sure India will take that now.

[rcarlson]

9 hours ago, Philc2001 said:

What we do know is the very vast majority of people vaccinated do not get serious symptoms, they do not show up in emergency rooms or require intubation, but we do know for a fact they could still be infected and could still transmit the disease. 

 

Again, using the numbers (which I agree are dubious because it's based on self-reporting, among other things), "vast majority" is a vast overstatement.  It's as about as close to non-existent as one could reasonably imagine.  If this ain't it, what number is required before the masks come off or you let people decide for themselves where they congregate?   

[Corylax18]

6 minutes ago, SirVantes said:

It's better than nothing - which is how most people live their entire lives.  Want a Mercedes?  Have only 30% of the price ? Okay, a Honda will have to do.  People don't say, "No Merc, I'll walk."

You may say a mask is different, because it's an inconvenience rather than something you want.  Well, if you are going into battle and all they have is paper-based body armour that stops one round out of three, would you wear one or not?  "But a bullet will kill me..." and we're back to mortality debates etc.

Also, even if we accept that a mask is 30% effective, presumably it's 30% effective in isolation.  What is the effectiveness combined with hygiene, social distancing and other measures?  In any case, 30% effectiveness simplistically still means 30% fewer infections and 30% fewer eventual mortalities.  Pretty sure India will take that now.

"Better than Nothing" should be the official Slogan for the entire response to this thing. 

Better than nothing, but not much in many cases. 

30% is BEST CASE, both people wearing their cloth masks securely

I get what your saying, I'm not an anti masker or anti vaxer. I wear mine without bitching(though I do hate it) and am patiently waiting to get my second shot, but our reactions to this virus have been extremely illogical. 

30% has never been acceptable for the safety on a gun, for a seatbelt, for an airplane, for anything really. But all of a sudden, now it is? 

"I'm protecting my grandmother by wearing a mask when I see her." No, you arent, you placing here at greatly elevated risk. If you really loved her and weren't just "going through the motions" you would shave your face bare, wear an n95 mask, and a face shield and get tested before you went to visit her. THAT would be caring, protecting, participating in the greater good. 

Slapping on a Bandana that you can see through is playing pretend. We're all pretending to care about our fellow man right now. If this pandemic has proven anything its the we clearly and demonstrably don't give a flying F about each other. We pretend to do, sure, but we don't. 

[Philc2001]

5 hours ago, rcarlson said:

Again, using the numbers (which I agree are dubious because it's best on self-reporting among other things), "vast majority" is a vast overstatement.  It's as about as close to non-existent as one could reasonably imagine.  If this ain't it, what number is required before the masks come off or you let people decide for themselves where they congregate?   

I could be mistaken, but it seems you may be trying to extrapolate from one metric to justify a different metric. I don't think the percentages indicated really tell us how many of those people are actually carriers of the virus, which is what I think you are trying to get at. Additionally, I'm not sure that even if you have been vaccinated that you would want to let your guard down and let yourself be infected. Surely, you would have protection so you may not get terribly sick, but I personally would rather not tempt faith. Could be just me.

 

7 hours ago, Corylax18 said:

This is something I've yet to wrap my head around. I just dont understand why EVERYONE is completely content to play pretend with these things. 

The cloth masks that most people wear and the way the wear them provide almost no protection, from any virus, that's ever existed. Even the CDC states a roughly 30% efficacy rate, even when worn properly, by both parties. Most people don't even wear them right! Nose hanging out, Thick beard (Me, it ain't n95 rated), improper fit. We're going to look back at these masks like the ridiculous bird masks the docs wore during the plague. In practice, they generate roughly the same level of protection. ZERO

If you paid me to be your body guard, but I told you I could only stop 1 out of every 3 attacks you would face, would you still pay me?

If they made a boarding announcement at the gate that the plane had a 70% chance of going down, would you still fly?

When did a 70% failure rate become a "success"? 

I use a KN95 mask against my skin, and a 4 layer cloth mask over that when I go out. I find the KN95 masks look pretty silly, and early last year I had some custom made masks that cover from the bridge of my nose, over my chin, to the top of my neck. The KN95 masks are pretty close to the N95 in terms of effectiveness, and since there is no valve they filter air both inward and outward. The valved N95 masks seem to allow unfiltered air outward from the person wearing them, so I was not keen on those.

[SirVantes]

4 minutes ago, Corylax18 said:

"Better than Nothing" should be the official Slogan for the entire response to this thing. 

Better than nothing, but not much in many cases. 

30% is BEST CASE, both people wearing their cloth masks securely

I get what your saying, I'm not an anti masker or anti vaxer. I wear mine without bitching(though I do hate it) and am patiently waiting to get my second shot, but our reactions to this virus have been extremely illogical. 

30% has never been acceptable for the safety on a gun, for a seatbelt, for an airplane, for anything really. But all of a sudden, now it is? 

"I'm protecting my grandmother by wearing a mask when I see her." No, you arent, you placing here at greatly elevated risk. If you really loved her and weren't just "going through the motions" you would shave your face bare, wear an n95 mask, and a face shield and get tested before you went to visit her. THAT would be caring, protecting, participating in the greater good. 

Slapping on a Bandana that you can see through is playing pretend. We're all pretending to care about our fellow man right now. If this pandemic has proven anything its the we clearly and demonstrably don't give a flying F about each other. We pretend to do, sure, but we don't. 

Yeah, I have to agree with you that the mask situation is far from ideal.  But there's the possibility that it is genuinely the best of a bad lot.  N95 masks would be better, but they to have to be worn properly, and how many people will wind up actually do that?  Then you factor in the inevitable panic buying, the shortages/hoarding, the fakes (essentially the PPE situation in the community at large) and you're likely no better off than the lowest common denominator that you can sustain.

[mprach024]

For those that are Anti Vax, Anti Mask, Anti Lockdown.  I seriously am asking for an explanation so I can better at least try to understand your logic - 

What exactly....IS your plan?  I’ve yet to hear it.  I’ve heard fear mongering and doubts, I understand both of those emotions.  But what are you suggesting we do?  

Open everything up?  Dont restrict?  Don’t vax?  Don’t mask?  Tough titties to those that die - ‘Merica?  Please help me understand.

 

[BEVOSREVENGE]

4 hours ago, FrancisK7 said:

You just made my point, thank you! 

Really happy to be of service.

Can we say with any degree of certainty that vaccinated people are unlikely to spread COVID to unvaccinated individuals?

"The emerging data confirms what many of us thought would be the case—that not only do the vaccines stop symptomatic COVID, but they also make it highly unlikely that someone can even be infected at all.  I think the preponderance of the evidence supports the fact that vaccinated individuals are not able to spread the virus."

"Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials but it's also in real-world data," CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told Rachel Maddow on Monday, March 29. Walensky was describing the results of a new CDC study of vaccinated Americans, which found that they not only had very high resistance to COVID-19, but also to asymptomatic infections of the SARS-CoV-2 virus – and, by extension, are very unlikely to spread it to other people.

Here is something to lighten the mood around here on this subject.

https://twitter.com/BarrettWilson6/status/1386914904997867522?s=20

[Kaptain Karl]

Just got my second one! 
 

Here’s my thinking on this: if a foreign army were to invade, how many (imagine if you were of military age) of us would volunteer to fight and die for our country, friends and family? I know I would. I see getting vaccinated as something similar, but it’s a FAR lesser risk to your body and mind to protect and help your country, friends and family. Really a no brainer to me. 
The covid response has been far too politically charged. Both sides have been driven by emotion about it and the results on both sides have been pure stupidity. Use logic and reason rather than who screams the loudest on social media. 

[Corylax18]

6 hours ago, mprach024 said:

For those that are Anti Vax, Anti Mask, Anti Lockdown.  I seriously am asking for an explanation so I can better at least try to understand your logic - 

What exactly....IS your plan?  I’ve yet to hear it.  I’ve heard fear mongering and doubts, I understand both of those emotions.  But what are you suggesting we do?  

Open everything up?  Dont restrict?  Don’t vax?  Don’t mask?  Tough titties to those that die - ‘Merica?  Please help me understand.

 

I don't consider myself to be in the "Anti" anything camp. But I do think the reaction this virus elicited, world wide, was embarrassing for our species.  

Politicians on one side holding unmasked press conference's in China towns decrying the damage of racist border closures. Then a month later complaining that those in power didn't lock down the borders soon enough. 

Luke warm "lockdowns" like we saw in the states, absolutely no coordination between the governments of massive countries, childish in-fighting, billions wasted to prop up massive companies and well off individuals while the people that actually needed help where largely ignored. 3rd, 4th, 5th waves, 2 years (maybe more) of constantly changing new rules and restrictions. We've greatly damaged society/social norms, that's nearly impossible to quantify. The nanny state's grip has gotten even tighter. 

I'll finish with this. If the last year or so is truly the best we can do, as a species, then we're toast. I don't see the species lasting past two more generations. 

[rcarlson]

5 hours ago, Philc2001 said:

I could be mistaken, but it seems you may be trying to extrapolate from one metric to justify a different metric. I don't think the percentages indicated really tell us how many of those people are actually carriers of the virus, which is what I think you are trying to get at. Additionally, I'm not sure that even if you have been vaccinated that you would want to let your guard down and let yourself be infected. Surely, you would have protection so you may not get terribly sick, but I personally would rather not tempt faith. Could be just me.

I don't disagree.  I was responding to the post that said the numbers made a case of some kind.  It relates to the post-vaccination mask wearing discussion of "facts" rather than "beliefs" that occurred before you posted.  But question to you was serious one: what is required to demonstrate that people should be free to choose whether to wear masks or not for themselves in your opinion?      

 

4 hours ago, mprach024 said:

For those that are Anti Vax, Anti Mask, Anti Lockdown.  I seriously am asking for an explanation so I can better at least try to understand your logic - 

What exactly....IS your plan?  I’ve yet to hear it.  I’ve heard fear mongering and doubts, I understand both of those emotions.  But what are you suggesting we do?  

Open everything up?  Dont restrict?  Don’t vax?  Don’t mask?  Tough titties to those that die - ‘Merica?  Please help me understand.

 

I think I'd favor opening up and no mask mandates when the vaccine is available to all high risk groups. Not sure where we are with that.  But much like whether to permit cigar smoking at your place, let the owner decide whether or not to impose mask restrictions and let the individual decide what their risk tolerance is in choosing where to congregate.  'Merica is always a good option.

[Corylax18]

53 minutes ago, Philc2001 said:

I use a KN95 mask against my skin, and a 4 layer cloth mask over that when I go out. I find the KN95 masks look pretty silly, and early last year I had some custom made masks that cover from the bridge of my nose, over my chin, to the top of my neck. The KN95 masks are pretty close to the N95 in terms of effectiveness, and since there is no valve they filter air both inward and outward. The valved N95 masks seem to allow unfiltered air outward from the person wearing them, so I was not keen on those.

You're in a very small minority. I've travelled all over the country during the last year. If I had a dollar for every person I saw taking things to this level (arguably the level they should be at) I might have enough money for an airport beer. 

If I had a dollar for every person I saw wearing a cloth mask, incorrectly, I'd be retired and shopping for beach front property right now.

I'll be the first to admit, I've been playing pretend, I Have a full beard and I wear a mask from the Bellagio Hotel. Because its suede lined and doesn't catch my beard. Its super comfy, even bearable on 4 hour flight. But its completely worthless at preventing the spread of any virus, especially with my facial hair. 

But I'm supposed to feel all great about myself? "Im doing my part?"  BS, its all lip service. 

I don't have kids, I live alone. I quarantined after every trip I took. Because i knew the "prevention measures" I was taking during the trip wouldn't prevent a damn thing. I didnt (and still dont) particularly care about contracting it, but I'm still willing(for now) to be a part of society, wear a mask and get vaccinated. 

[mprach024]

4 minutes ago, rcarlson said:

what is required to demonstrate that people should be free to choose whether to wear masks or not for themselves in your opinion?

For me personally, my opinion is to wear the thing until the public health concern has been abated via either eradication of the virus itself, treatment is available to cause the death rates in EVERYONE to be at level consistent with common flu, vaccination levels or herd immunity are high enough that community spread has stopped.

Just curious, if there was only a .005% chance that today when I walked outside, not wearing a mask could cause someone their life, why would I not wear one?  Is it such a disposition?