Jump to content

Menu

COVID - Getting Past the Anger or Embrace it?


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Amy Gen said:

I think you are right. We are in California and even though my friends might hold differing views, everyone has to follow masking and social distancing and quarantining protocols or our activities will be shut down. 
 

I’m sitting in the parking lot watching teenagers ride their bikes around me and everyone has on a mask as well as a helmet. Now what goes on in private homes may be different, but since everyone conforms at activities, no one gets left out. 
 

I imagine things might be a little different if I still lived in Texas. 

Yeah...the idea of people in masks outside riding bikes is...unheard of here. 

Daily I am invited to unmasked group events for homeschoolers, or see photos of events I could have gone o that are again, unmasked, indoors, shared food, etc. 

A good day is when someone in an indoor space pulls their mask back on when I approach. A bad day was when I got screamed at in the check out for asking someone only a few feet away to put a mask on or at least stop talking on the phone (since talking spreads more germs) while standing so close to me, unmasked. 

I'm not trying to win minds, I'm trying to keep myself and my family alive. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

WRT mask wearing, I think we all understand well that the risks of transmission are pretty low at the grocery store, etc. When risks are low, expensive and difficult risk mitigation techniques are unwarranted. But when risks are low and something that reduces risk is easy and cheap, then it's warranted. 

This is a bit of a bunny trail, but it would be really interesting to me to know if curbside pickup has made the rest of the grocery shoppers demonstrably safer or if the numbers of people ordering online is too low to make a difference. It's a low-cost convenience rather than a formal mitigation strategy, but I wonder if we really have been able to quantify what some of these voluntary measures have done to make things better for others. I do it for my own safety, but I am cognizant that not getting sick is a net bonus to others as well (including my husband's patients, though his being vaxed trumps our carefulness at this point). 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, klmama said:

I have yet to see anyone change their minds because someone insulted and ridiculed them. 

I've rarely seen people change their minds, period, unless they had minds ready to be changed 😉 . But yes, ridicule certainly isn't worthwhile and it's not good for the person indulging in it, either. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

This is an utterly absurd analogy.

Are tens of millions of Americans currently insisting that drunk driving is perfectly acceptable and not dangerous at all?

Are tens of millions of Americans insisting that drunk driving laws infringe on their God-given right to drive drunk, and everyone who fears drunk drivers are idiots and "sheeple"?

Did we have a president telling people that drunk driving is no big deal and they should "liberate" states that try to crack down on it?

Did drunk drivers kill half a million Americans last year?

Corraleno, you also rock. ❤️ 

What would I do without the rational, intelligent, informed discussion here? Seriously, where I live, it's like finding a pocket of air under water.

I love you guys. 

 

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Amy Gen said:

I imagine things might be a little different if I still lived in Texas. 

I've given up on Texas. We plan to move.   

I've said all that I care to about the pandemic and the response to it here. I know that nothing I say will change anyone's mind or perspective.  Likewise, nothing that the anti-vaxxer, anti-masker crowd says will change my mind.  I don't even bother to listen to them anymore.  I used to want to change their minds and get them to see my point of view. Now I just can't be bothered. My energy and care is better spent on other people.  

  • Like 7
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Yeah...the idea of people in masks outside riding bikes is...unheard of here. 

Daily I am invited to unmasked group events for homeschoolers, or see photos of events I could have gone o that are again, unmasked, indoors, shared food, etc. 

A good day is when someone in an indoor space pulls their mask back on when I approach. A bad day was when I got screamed at in the check out for asking someone only a few feet away to put a mask on or at least stop talking on the phone (since talking spreads more germs) while standing so close to me, unmasked. 

I'm not trying to win minds, I'm trying to keep myself and my family alive. 

Sounds like Arizona where our governor just removed all mask and social distancing mandates today. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand disagreements. What I can no longer tolerate is the emotionally manipulative language about this. 

Say, "I don't think the science supports the need to wear masks," or "the survival rate for COVID is very high so shut downs are unwarranted." I may disagree but that's life. 

Don't use emotionally manipulative language like, "why are you so scared?" or "faith not fear," etc. 

Don't tell me, "my body, my choice" about masks and then insist that abortion should be illegal. Literally...I know pro-life people who literally say, "my body, my choice." about masks. Are they that not stupid to not see that they are using the same language as people who believe abortion should be legal? 

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kokotg said:

Exactly! If my neighbors were throwing parties and actively encouraging everyone to drive home drunk after (like how they had a xmas party and put "masks and social distancing discouraged" on the invitation)...and there were lots of similar examples around me, then YES I would absolutely be angry about it. 

Yep, every time I see people racing through neighborhoods with kids walking and riding bikes and dog walkers I once again have to deal with my anger issues. What makes it maddening is when they run over a child they won't go to prison and will claim it was an accident when it was very much a choice to risk killing someone and it ought to come with a prison sentence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the culture in general militates toward cutting people off.  So because of that I take unusual cautions before doing so.  It's SUCH an impetus that I want to slow myself down and question it when I feel that impulse.  I ask myself, is this stance making this person valueless to me?  Or actually dangerous to me?  If the answer is valueless, then I feel like I need to restrain myself, because it's just not right to think of people that way.  If it's dangerous, then that's another story.

But then again, I am unusual in that I have always had a combo of very strong views on things and yet a big variety of views among my friends.  So there you go.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SKL said:

I will say, though, that some people who are pro-SD / pro-vax have left me unimpressed also, with the way they are blind to bias that is obvious to me, read plain language as if it says something else, assume the personality and intentions of people they have never met and know practically nothing about, etc.  This includes quite a few people who think themselves intellectually and/or morally superior to those we are dissing in threads like this.

I really wish we didn't have hatefests like this, especially since there is often a lack of analytical thinking on both sides.  When so many people team up like this, they encourage each other to believe they are right without question.  But questioning is not a bad thing.

I think "anger" in this context is really the after-effect of fear.  People who are afraid are not at their best intellectually.

I'm not saying I'm right about everything either.  I just think intentionally encouraging more division is another ill we will have to deal with.

Most of us here seem to embrace diversity of almost everything except thought.  That is not high level thinking IMO.

Nonsense.  Saying that there is actual demonstrable scientific facts about this virus is not engaging in a hatefest.  Supporting a very low bar of mitigation factors (masking and social distancing and limiting the numbers of people getting together) is not being fearful.  It's being wise.  And making wise choices takes away fear.  Yes, people can still be infected despite those mitigation factors but fortunately I live in a state where (at least in my area of the state) many have accepted and followed those guidelines and we've done very well as a state.  Encouraging people to be foolish is not a virtue. 

  • Like 15
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Seasider too said:

@Ordinary Shoesthat Matt Walsh tweet.... so, so awful. Arrogant and mean. I am beyond sad that he calls himself a spokesman for the Christian faith. 

Yes. If one truly doesn’t believe in mask wearing and one wants to be kind to others who do, you offer to step off the elevator and go up later. 
 

I had covid in December and I’ve still masked, for no other reason than to ease the minds of those around me.

it’s the Christian thing to do in my opinion.

  • Like 15
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

To me, the culture in general militates toward cutting people off.  So because of that I take unusual cautions before doing so.  It's SUCH an impetus that I want to slow myself down and question it when I feel that impulse.  I ask myself, is this stance making this person valueless to me?  Or actually dangerous to me?  If the answer is valueless, then I feel like I need to restrain myself, because it's just not right to think of people that way.  If it's dangerous, then that's another story.

 

In this case, isn't it clear that if someone is talking about cutting someone off because they don't believe they've taken covid seriously enough that it IS because they consider that attitude dangerous (to themselves or at least to other people)?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how you can react to something like this without anger. These people literally reject germ theory!!! 

How many people do we know in HSing circles who sound like this woman? Who believe the nonsense she spouts? 

Note the manipulative language that is always present with people like this:

Quote

Jillian recalls Brogan saying that because she was such a powerful “manifestor” her beliefs were causing her symptoms to appear to worsen. She also recalls Brogan speculating that Jillian was not old or mature enough to do the necessary work.

Inside Kelly Brogan's COVID-Denying, Vax-Resistant Conspiracy Machine

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Corraleno said:

That argument does not even have the substance and weight of a "straw man," it's like some kind of logical balloon animal — nothing but air twisted into weird shapes.

 

Oh man, you get some kind of prize for that imagery! 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SKL said:

One of the scientific, revered info sources came out with the statement that asymptomatic spread was relatively rare or something like that, months ago.  I have to leave for a meeting, so I won't look it up.  But it was all over national news, so you probably heard it too.

If it's been debunked since then, OK, but that just shows how rapidly the "facts" change, and they are likely to change several more times before this is over.

Household secondary attack rates were increased from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) than from asymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%),

Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis | Global Health | JAMA Network Open | JAMA Network  (December 2020).

This would suggest that asymptomatic spread is relatively rare.  Because these measures are for spread within a household from an asymptomatic case (where there would likely be repeated and extensive contact), I would think that the spread from an asymptomatic case in the grocery store or some similar place would be low.  

The 18% symptomatic spread appears to be in line with the numbers that 80% of cases dot spread to another person.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

I would like to suggest that for many pro life people abortion isn't about the body of the woman at all. 

That’s really twisted, given that it is literally ONLY the woman’s body that’s involved (beyond the moment of conception), but cognitive dissonance is a very convenient thing when pregnancy and childbirth are considered irrelevant but wearing a paper mask in public is just TOO MUCH. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

That’s really twisted, given that it is literally ONLY the woman’s body that’s involved (beyond the moment of conception), but cognitive dissonance is a very convenient thing when pregnancy and childbirth are considered irrelevant but wearing a paper mask in public is just TOO MUCH. 

I think she means that to pro-life people, it's about the fetus (or baby, or whatever you want to call the newly developing organism.) 

If you think the life of a fetus is worth protecting, you would come down on a different side of this if you do not think the organism is worthy of protection. Personally, I see a lot of gray area in the abortion debate, and a lot of unhelpful slogans. (I do think it's possible to feel like you have moral clarity on this question, like @MercyA does, but then her stance comes straight out of her values. A lot of slogans I hear about this are not, in fact, direct consequences of values.) 

Edited by Not_a_Number
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, happysmileylady said:

Not to take the thread too far off topic

But genuinely, many pro life folks believe there is 100% a second body involvedIn there minds, there are literally actually two separate bodies involved, 100% from the moment of conception to the moment of birth.  You might disagree, as do I, but that's literally the actual perspective that the argument comes from.  And therefore....it's twisted to think of it as literally ONLY the woman's body, from that perspective.  

LOL. Yes. It's not only the mother's heart beating just three weeks after conception, just one week after she likely missed her period. Separate DNA, sometimes a different sex, sometimes a different blood type. Literally there *is* another body, hiccuping, stretching, sucking her thumb in the first trimester.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

That’s really twisted, given that it is literally ONLY the woman’s body that’s involved (beyond the moment of conception), but cognitive dissonance is a very convenient thing when pregnancy and childbirth are considered irrelevant but wearing a paper mask in public is just TOO MUCH. 

Even though I disagree with your stance on abortion, I 100% support the sentiment you've expressed here. It is an absolute contradiction of supposed pro-life values and absolute shameful hypocrisy for "pro-life" people not to mask. 

Edited by MercyA
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, happysmileylady said:

Mercy...

I am genuinely wondering if you can explain how you personally reconcile respecting a person who has a pro choice belief, with your personal beliefs about being pro choice?  I am hoping you don't feel like I am calling you out specifically but since you seem to interact extremely respectfully to those who otherwise have a very opposite stance on abortion, and it involves such high stakes, I think your ability differentiate might bring an interesting thought process to the discussion.  

That's an interesting question 🙂 . 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Plum said:

Let’s face it, no one has gotten this 100% right. This is a novel virus and there have been plenty of mistakes and missteps long the way. I found this NYT article enlightening as to how we perceive Covid 

The mistakes people make

More than one-third of Republican voters, for example, said that people without Covid symptoms could not spread the virus. Similar shares said that Covid was killing fewer people than either the seasonal flu or vehicle crashes. All of those beliefs are wrong, and badly so. Asymptomatic spread is a major source of transmission, and Covid has killed about 15 times more Americans than either the flu or vehicle crashes do in a typical year.

Democrats, on the other hand, are more likely to exaggerate the severity of Covid. When asked how often Covid patients had to be hospitalized, a very large share of Democratic voters said that at least 20 percent did. The actual hospitalization rate is between 1 percent and 5 percent.

Democrats are also more likely to exaggerate Covid’s toll on young people and to believe that children account for a meaningful share of deaths. In reality, Americans under 18 account for only 0.04 percent of Covid deaths.

It’s true that some of these misperceptions reflect the fact that most people are not epidemiologists and that estimating medical statistics is difficult. Still, the errors do have a connection to real-world behavior, Rothwell told me.

 

3E432CCA-CFEE-4613-A044-C184F086AC63.png

So no one has gotten it 100% correct? What does that mean to the discussion? 

When we're speculating and making assumptions and the "cost" here is wearing a small piece of cloth on your face, does it matter that we're speculating? 

No one is suggesting an onerous burden here. 

The shutdowns can be onerous. Wearing a mask is not. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Sounds like Arizona where our governor just removed all mask and social distancing mandates today. 

 

well, in Florida we NEVER have had a statewide mandate. Some counties have a mandate, but not the state. And many months ago Desantis made it so that the counties can't enforce their own mandates anymore. 

16 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Household secondary attack rates were increased from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) than from asymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%),

Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis | Global Health | JAMA Network Open | JAMA Network  (December 2020).

This would suggest that asymptomatic spread is relatively rare.  Because these measures are for spread within a household from an asymptomatic case (where there would likely be repeated and extensive contact), I would think that the spread from an asymptomatic case in the grocery store or some similar place would be low.  

The 18% symptomatic spread appears to be in line with the numbers that 80% of cases dot spread to another person.  

Right, but that is asymptomatic, not PREsymptomatic. PREsymptomatic people can spread it without having symptoms at the time. And you don't know if you are pre symptomatic or asymptomatic until it is too late. 

4 minutes ago, Plum said:

Let’s face it, no one has gotten this 100% right. This is a novel virus and there have been plenty of mistakes and missteps long the way. I found this NYT article enlightening as to how we perceive Covid . I’m not angry at people for questioning authority,  that’s kind of an American tradition. 

The mistakes people make

More than one-third of Republican voters, for example, said that people without Covid symptoms could not spread the virus. Similar shares said that Covid was killing fewer people than either the seasonal flu or vehicle crashes. All of those beliefs are wrong, and badly so. Asymptomatic spread is a major source of transmission, and Covid has killed about 15 times more Americans than either the flu or vehicle crashes do in a typical year.

Democrats, on the other hand, are more likely to exaggerate the severity of Covid. When asked how often Covid patients had to be hospitalized, a very large share of Democratic voters said that at least 20 percent did. The actual hospitalization rate is between 1 percent and 5 percent.

Democrats are also more likely to exaggerate Covid’s toll on young people and to believe that children account for a meaningful share of deaths. In reality, Americans under 18 account for only 0.04 percent of Covid deaths.

It’s true that some of these misperceptions reflect the fact that most people are not epidemiologists and that estimating medical statistics is difficult. Still, the errors do have a connection to real-world behavior, Rothwell told me.

 

3E432CCA-CFEE-4613-A044-C184F086AC63.png

Well, hospitalization rates vary by place, so it may be someone's perspective in their area colors this. Ours in Florida is higher than what that article says...or it was last time I could actually find that data. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

 

But wearing a mask is far easier than not driving drunk. Not driving drunk requires pre-planning and perhaps paying for an Uber ride. You have to pre-plan because sometimes when you've had too much to drink you're not a good judge of whether you should drive. Sometimes someone has to agree not to drink to be the designated driver. Wearing a small mask over your face is so much easier than that. 

 

Psychologically I think these are very different situations.  If I choose to drink and I choose to drive, I am actively engaged in making a choice to participate in behavior that puts other people at risk.  I am going from no risk of injuring someone else from my drunk driving to a positive risk of injuring someone when I make that choice.  The change in risk is directly related to my choice.

We know from the behavioral pscyhology/finance literature that people react differently to risk reduction than to an equivalent increase in risk.  

People see that walking around breathing as they have done all of their life as the norm.  It is a risk reduction decision to wear a mask.  Not a risk increasing decision not to wear a mask. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Plum said:

Democrats, on the other hand, are more likely to exaggerate the severity of Covid. When asked how often Covid patients had to be hospitalized, a very large share of Democratic voters said that at least 20 percent did. The actual hospitalization rate is between 1 percent and 5 percent.

The early stats from the CDC did show hospitalization rates of around 20% (e.g. this report showed 40% hospitalization for PCR-positive patients with underlying conditions and 9% for those without underlying conditions), so people may be remembering those stats without knowing they had been revised. I assume the high percentages early in the pandemic were likely due to the lack of testing, so only the most severe cases were getting diagnosed.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, kokotg said:

In this case, isn't it clear that if someone is talking about cutting someone off because they don't believe they've taken covid seriously enough that it IS because they consider that attitude dangerous (to themselves or at least to other people)?

Kind of orthogonal to what I said.  Not going there.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Well, hospitalization rates vary by place, so it may be someone's perspective in their area colors this. Ours in Florida is higher than what that article says...or it was last time I could actually find that data. 

I'll say that those "type errors" seem about right to me. Lots of liberals I've spoken to do seem to think hospitalization and death rates are higher for younger people than they actually are. That being said, I think those errors don't lead to bad behaviors in a way that the opposite errors do. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

 

Right, but that is asymptomatic, not PREsymptomatic. PREsymptomatic people can spread it without having symptoms at the time. And you don't know if you are pre symptomatic or asymptomatic until it is too late. 

 

What I quoted was from the article summary.  Within the article and statistical tables it is reported that this statistic is from asymptomatic and presymptomatic index cases.  Given that symptomatic spread in the household was 18%, and that asymptomatic and presymptomatic spread appeared MUCH less, despite repeated close contact, I can see how a reasonable person who is up-to-date on the research can draw a conclusion that the chance that they are asymptomatic or presymptomatic is small and that, even if they are, the chance of spreading COVID to someone they pass in a store or similar situation is small--making it unlikely that the situation will occur.  

"Estimated mean household secondary attack rate from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) was significantly higher than from asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%; P < .001), although there were few studies in the latter group. These findings are consistent with other household studies28,70 reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited role in household transmission"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carol in Cal. said:

To me, the culture in general militates toward cutting people off.  So because of that I take unusual cautions before doing so.  It's SUCH an impetus that I want to slow myself down and question it when I feel that impulse.  I ask myself, is this stance making this person valueless to me?  Or actually dangerous to me?  If the answer is valueless, then I feel like I need to restrain myself, because it's just not right to think of people that way.  If it's dangerous, then that's another story.

But then again, I am unusual in that I have always had a combo of very strong views on things and yet a big variety of views among my friends.  So there you go.

More than 500,000 Americans dead (so far) and there is a question in your mind over whether risky Covid spreading behavior is dangerous?

My personal predisposition militates against cutting people off. I'm very forgiving of most things.

But not recklessly endangering other people's lives because one is an assh***.

Those folks are gone.

Separates the sheep from the goats in my book.

Bill

Edited by Spy Car
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Psychologically I think these are very different situations.  If I choose to drink and I choose to drive, I am actively engaged in making a choice to participate in behavior that puts other people at risk.  I am going from no risk of injuring someone else from my drunk driving to a positive risk of injuring someone when I make that choice.  The change in risk is directly related to my choice.

We know from the behavioral pscyhology/finance literature that people react differently to risk reduction than to an equivalent increase in risk.  

People see that walking around breathing as they have done all of their life as the norm.  It is a risk reduction decision to wear a mask.  Not a risk increasing decision not to wear a mask. 

 

 

Considering how common it was to drive drunk 40-50 years ago, I would say at some point it was risk reduction. At one point in time, it was a fairly common thing to do. 😕

Now days that common thing is looking at the our phone while driving, which is socially acceptable even if you kill someone. The thing that changed was whether society deemed it socially acceptable or not.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

More than 500,000 Americans dead (so far) and there is a question in your mind over whether risky Covid spreading behavior is dangerous?

 

See I wasn't even trying to debate whether risky covid spreading behavior IS dangerous or not (although it's pretty obvious from my posts that I believe that it is), I was just questioning asking one's self whether a disagreement over covid precautions  is "dangerous" or not as a useful metric. It seems obvious to me that if you're so upset about someone else's behavior WRT to covid that you're willing to end your relationship with them over it that it is necessarily because you consider their behavior harmful. I mean...what other possible reason could there be? You don't like the way their face looks without a mask?

Edited by kokotg
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

...

Don't tell me, "my body, my choice" about masks and then insist that abortion should be illegal. Literally...I know pro-life people who literally say, "my body, my choice." about masks. Are they that not stupid to not see that they are using the same language as people who believe abortion should be legal? 

 

1) I agree that the manipulative language, name calling, etc. is childish.

2) I think the point about the "my body, my choice" is an attempt to tell liberals that they are hypocrites if they support mask or vax mandates.  So yes, they know "my body, my choice" is pro-abortion language.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'm thinking I'm going to embrace the "I'm a Christian, I don't need to live in fear" slogan the next time someone says they won't vaccinate due to fears of microchips, signs of the devil, or whatever. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kokotg said:

It seems obvious to me that if you're so upset about someone else's behavior WRT to covid that you're willing to end your relationship with them over it that it is necessarily because you consider their behavior harmful. I mean...what other possible reason could there be? 

Other possible reasons include thinking that the other person is selfish, untrustworthy, willfully ignorant, and willing to risk the lives of others rather than inconvenience themselves in even the most trivial way. Who needs friends like that?

Edited by Corraleno
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Corraleno said:

Other possible reasons include thinking that the other person is selfish, untrustworthy, willfully ignorant, and willing to risk the lives of others rather than inconvenience themselves in even the most trivial way. Who needs friends like that?

sure, but that all comes back to believing their behavior is, in fact, dangerous, because it's risking lives. I mean, you can think that THEY don't believe their behavior is dangerous--i.e. they don't believe the science and think half a million deaths in the US have been faked or whatever--but if you're cutting them off then YOU think their behavior is dangerous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a pro life Christian I have been horrified at what passes for Christianity in America. I believe it is what might be called "cultural Christianity". The Puritans were Christians so I must be a Christian right? Let's have some Apple Pie while we are at it. 

There are a lot of debatable things in Christianity but submitting to the needs of others and submitting to the government aren't strange hard to interpret visions or obscure poetic verses. The are plain, simple, direct, unambiguous commands directed at the new testament church many many times. 

 

I can't see how you call yourself a Christian and go directly against Jesus' entire life message and the apostles direct commands to the church. Jesus said, "You will know them by their fruits." I'm certainly happy to have so much revealed though I'm sorry for the suffering that caused it. 

 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just pointing out that I doubt anyone here mad at random, poor, uneducated person who somehow can't get a mask or doesn't understand.   We are mad or were mad at educated middle class people who knowingly don't mask.  I have a friend who happily made dozens of masks and donated them before they were required or anything who has become anti -mask thanks to politics and conspiracy theories.

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, kand said:

Delving into these studies, the study you linked says right in it that they did not have many studies that looked at presymptomatic spread. Reading the details, one of the problems with studying that is that many of the countries where these studies were done remove household contacts to prevent further transmission, so they were in isolation before they had symptoms, and therefore did not have anyone they *could* transmit it to. These authors found a presymptomatic attack rate of 44% and cite a number of other studies with similar attack rates found: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1049-3

 

Yes, all of the studies have problems and all suffer from small sample size.  From what I can undertand the 44% from the Nature article is measuring something very different.  It is measuring  what proportion of known cases were attributed to presymptomatic spread.  That is a very different number than what percent of presymptomatic or asymptomatic cases spawn an additional case.  The 44% is taken from a set of cases where 100% of the people had COVID.  It is not a measure of the chances of getting COVID.  It is a measure of WHEN those people got COVID.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

I didn't say this at all.  Straw man fallacy.

I'm not sure it's fair play to refuse to explain what you meant when asked for clarification and then get upset that you're being misinterpreted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, kand said:

How does this work? I mean that literally. How does someone who doesn't mask take care not to spread a virus that is spread primarily through the air? Unless you mean they stay home and don't go around any other people. I'm also frustrated with people who think they only have to worry about getting older folks sick. I look (relatively) young and healthy, but I have a high risk condition. I also don't want long covid. It bothers me that people think it's their choice to expose me because they don't think it would be a risk for me.

This has been well covered at this point, but this post really threw me. Are there really many people here who DON'T feel angry at drunk drivers?? Of course I do. And I would feel even more so if I had a loved one harmed by one. I haven't to this point, yet I still find their behavior inexcusable, selfish, wrong, and all the other bad words.

I think one of the things about this statistic is the definition of HCW is very broad. When you see statistics of the percentage of doctors declining vaccination, it is much, much lower. Here is a definition as regards HCW eligible for early vaccination: “Health care personnel comprise clinical staff members, including nursing or medical assistants and support staff members (e.g., those who work in food, environmental, and administrative services) (8),”

So sad. Things like this are why my raised-Christian young adults say they no longer like to refer to themselves as Christians. They are now ashamed due to the callous, self-centered, indefensible behavior from so many who loudly claim to be Christian 😢These people have done more to sully the name of Christ than anything else I have seen in my lifetime.

I no longer need to respond to this one now that @Corraleno has done so eloquently with her balloon air animal 😂

For the first part of this, it's not actually true you can't get Covid from walking past an unmasked person in the grocery store. It's not super likely in any one particular case, but there are many documented cases at this point that have happened with very short exposures, even over a distance. Recent case in point is the discovery that one of the New Zealand cases  turned out to be from adjacent hotel doors being opened 50 seconds apart, and the uninfected person breathing air that was left in the hallway from the person who had closed their door 50 seconds earlier. THIS VIRUS IS AIRBORNE.
 

 The second part of this post is so wacky that I don’t know what to say.

How is this all that different from people who insist spreading Covid is not a problem and it's their God Given right not to take precautions to prevent it?

Delving into these studies, the study you linked says right in it that they did not have many studies that looked at presymptomatic spread. Reading the details, one of the problems with studying that is that many of the countries where these studies were done remove household contacts to prevent further transmission, so they were in isolation before they had symptoms, and therefore did not have anyone they *could* transmit it to. These authors found a presymptomatic attack rate of 44% and cite a number of other studies with similar attack rates found: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1049-3

 

I would give this post a standing ovation if I could.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

Other possible reasons include thinking that the other person is selfish, untrustworthy, willfully ignorant, and willing to risk the lives of others rather than inconvenience themselves in even the most trivial way. Who needs friends like that?

Personally, I would have a difficult time with those reasons.  If I don't want to be friends with someone who is willfully ingorant--does that apply to those who are willfully ignorant about handling finances? what consitutes a healthy diet? exercise?  And some of the things the most adamant pro-maskers I know have chosen to do I find trivial and selfish--they may have reduced the risk of spreading COVID some by wearing a mask, but the risk would not have been there if they didn't get a manicure, or a haircut, or go purchase new landscaping materials, or many other things.  

Edited by Bootsie
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carol in Cal. said:

I'm positive it's fair play to expect people to read the actual post.  

Okay, but I read it and it left me befuddled. I dunno...I guess I just don't understand putting something out there on a message board and then balking at explaining yourself. If you're not interested in dialogue then why bother? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

I didn't say this at all.  Straw man fallacy.

Not all all. It is precisely what you suggested.

What other meaning ought someone take away from what you wrote???

You wrote:

I ask myself, is this stance making this person valueless to me?  Or actually dangerous to me?  If the answer is valueless, then I feel like I need to restrain myself, because it's just not right to think of people that way.

In the context of a thread on Covid and how to respond to people who have been reckless about spreading this disease.

Your words. Not mine.

No fallacies on my part. Sorry. That dog won't hunt.

We have more than a half a million dead Americans. The danger isn't in question

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve struggled with it all but I remind myself that I was able to forgive the person who ran a stop sign and killed my dad and brother, so I forgive these people too. Many I know and love haven’t acted like I hoped they would but they will stay in my life, and I will pray they do better. There are definitely reasons I will cut someone out of my life but this just isn’t one. My views have changed over the course of this as well. In the beginning I was way more judgmental and I’m not proud of it.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replies are coming here faster than I can respond, but getting back to the original post...  Yes, I have been very angry.  I'm not an angry person:  I might feel sadness, or disappointment, or be upset in the moment.  But this lingering anger is kind of a new feeling for me.  I don't like it at all, and it doesn't feel good.  I don't think it's good to let it just sit and fester, but I do think it's fine as an alarm.  It's nudging me to wake up, pay attention, work at understanding, take action.  Perhaps, it stems more from a sadness than anything.

For those who are leaders of arrogant, inaccurate claims and are making it political, I have no patience.  I try and just let it go...  I'm still trying.  But people close to me who I care for... I will not give up on them and cut them off.  How can I change their minds if I don't keep up a connection?  I don't mean people who are just casual acquaintances, but people who I've already committed to relationships with, and people who I otherwise respect and love.  I try and find points of intersection, and if the opportunity presents itself, I encourage discussion.  I don't think I could ever just permanently cut them off or say I will never forgive them.  Thank goodness God does not do this with us.

For other people who aren't as close to me but are just simple followers, I work at compassion. It's certainly not always easy.  I do think most people are doing the best that they know how, given who they are, their brains, their upbringing, their circumstances.  I try and remind myself of that.  It helps.

 

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kand said:

I haven’t participated in this part of the discussion, but from the outside I’ll say I think maybe this is a communication/misunderstanding issue. I read your original post several times and wasn’t sure what you were saying, so I just moved on. Maybe if you restate it in other words?

Yeah--I was being totally sincere when I asked for clarification. As someone who will lose friends (or at least friendly acquaintances) to differences of opinion about covid precautions, I can say that it is 100% because I think their behavior is dangerous, and I genuinely do not understand what other reasons I could have. 

ETA: so while I didn't interpret what you said the same way Bill did, I understand why he did interpret it that way. I think that when I'm not getting my point across clearly, it's my responsibility as the writer to try again. Reader based vs. writer based prose and all that. Of course, there are always people who will deliberately misunderstand. But I promise I'm not doing that.

Edited by kokotg
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I think we'll heal by dividing. I know that I'll never trust anyone who took unnecessary risks during the pandemic. We'll be civil but I won't trust them. So I disagree that we'll put our differences behind us and move on. I think it will always be there, underneath the surface. 

Yes, I have tremendous anger at the people who attempted to manipulate others, the "faith not fear-ers." 

 

 

I'd say this is who I feel most anger towards as well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SKL said:

Imagine if the world held us to account permanently for every mistake we made or disagreement we had.  Or am I the only person here who has made mistakes?

In my experience, most of the people who have taken fewer precautions than me have done it because they believed it was scientifically equal or better.  Were their sources always the best, probably not, but is that an unpardonable sin?  In a situation where nobody can honestly be sure who is right, and info sources attack each other with little to no objectivity, IMO it makes no sense to be angry at people for listening to one uncertain source over another uncertain source.

If there are people who would purposely make others sick, they probably would do that regardless of Covid.  I don't have people like that in my life though.

This is about 50/50 my experience (your bolded).  I can handle it a little better when people are misled and sincerely believe it.  But I know a lot of people who say "The government can't tell me what to do" as their only reason.  That one really gets my goat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...