CDC removing mask mandate what will you do with dc under 12

[happi duck]

33 minutes ago, SKL said:

I was gonna say ... this thread brings up a side topic of how many people we believe are shameless liars in the USA.  I personally would never lie about this kind of thing regardless of my feelings about masking.  My whole family is like this.  I can't speak for everyone in the USA, but I think the assumption that everyone is gonna fake it just because they can is not valid.  It probably is true for some, but I don't know how many.

India is really not comparable at all for many reasons.  A few that come to mind easily:

1) They aren't anywhere close to where we are on vaccinations.

2) The Indian lifestyle / culture involves a lot less personal space compared to the USA.  Not only is it culturally normal to be in each other's faces, but they have a lot less space geographically, not to mention limited modern ventilation etc.

3) The poverty level is such that for a large % of the population, there's no way to distribute adequate health information, and no way for the individuals to afford the measures we consider ridiculously easy.

(I'll edit my op to clarify also.)

What I meant about India was that they thought they had done well and then opened up for big events and then ended up where they are now.

Regarding liars, yes, I fully expect that covid deniers and antivax people will just skip wearing masks.  They think it's all overblown and won't care.  No one will be asking at the door they'll just walk in unmasked no blatant lying needed.  (There will be unvaccinated people who keep masking.  I don't think they'll all stop masking.)

[kokotg]

46 minutes ago, SKL said:

I was gonna say ... this thread brings up a side topic of how many people we believe are shameless liars in the USA.  I personally would never lie about this kind of thing regardless of my feelings about masking.  My whole family is like this.  I can't speak for everyone in the USA, but I think the assumption that everyone is gonna fake it just because they can is not valid.  It probably is true for some, but I don't know how many.

 

 

58 minutes ago, SKL said:

 

Do you think the CDC didn't weigh the risk of young kids being exposed to unmasked sick people before they made their latest announcement?  It is pretty clear that the risk to young kids is very low even if some of the maskless people have Covid.  From a public health perspective, there's no need to make everyone mask, whether or not they are vaccinated, to protect little kids from this virus.  If you feel differently on an individual basis, there are various options available to you.

So you think that we're all being too cynical and that people won't lie about their vaccination status so they can shed their masks and also that the CDC has already taken into account that lots of people will lie about their vaccination status so they can shed their masks? 

[Matryoshka]

Can I just also say that I am so.freaking.sick.and.tired of the *same* people who downplay Covid risks and pooh-pooh masks and call those of us who are cautious 'living in fear' are now straight-up terrified of what has been shown, after millions of doses, to be safe and effective. 

Imaginary long-term side effects? Mark of the beast?  The vaccine somehow spreading disease or causing infertility by some fantastical nonexistent method compared to the actual virus which is busily mutating in unvaccinated populations? Holy moly. Stop living in fear! 

[SKL]

25 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

My kids are definitely the population you're talking about. They have a genetic predisposition to seizures (from infancy).  They all spent the first two years of their lives on anti-seizure meds. One of mine has a medically documented reaction of multiple seizures after a vaccine. Not all vaccines have the same seizure risks. I have not even heard of any reports of that from this vax.

My point was that your kids are not young kids waiting for the vax currently under development if they're already vaxed.

As for my personal experience, I have a relative who has lifelong epilepsy that developed during a post-vax time frame of 1.5 years during which she was sick for months on end and then developed seizures.  I have done research and learned that epilepsy is just one of the neurological disorders that certain vaxes are known to cause in some recipients.

My comment about epilepsy (as an example) was in response to another poster's assertion that we do not know of any long-term side effects from vaccinations.  That is simply untrue.  Parents clamoring for this vax for their young children, before it's even tested, even while claiming to worry about their kids getting Covid, are being irrational IMO.

[SKL]

19 minutes ago, KSera said:

That’s not what the CDC said, though. They were weighing the risk of kids being exposed to VACCINATED people without masks,  not to unvaccinated. Your statement there reinforces what people are concerned about though, that people are going to think it means they are free to expose others even if they aren’t vaccinated. I no you have been vaccinated, and you said you wouldn’t lie about it, which is encouraging to hear, but what you say above is how it seems a lot of people are interpreting it.

Well, first of all, I'm not so sure the CDC didn't consider the possibility that some of those who would quit masking would be non-vaxed people.  They are not stupid after all.

And secondly, you mistranslated my clear language.  I said "even if some of the maskless people have Covid."  Since the vaccines are not 100% effective to prevent people from catching Covid, as we all know, there are vaccinated people who are walking around with Covid.  With the new rules, they will probably stop masking, because they don't know they have Covid.  And I have to believe the CDC took that into account when they made their announcement.  If you don't believe that, then why do you trust the CDC on anything?

[Matryoshka]

5 minutes ago, SKL said:

My point was that your kids are not young kids waiting for the vax currently under development if they're already vaxed.

As for my personal experience, I have a relative who has lifelong epilepsy that developed during a post-vax time frame of 1.5 years during which she was sick for months on end and then developed seizures.  I have done research and learned that epilepsy is just one of the neurological disorders that certain vaxes are known to cause in some recipients.

My comment about epilepsy (as an example) was in response to another poster's assertion that we do not know of any long-term side effects from vaccinations.  That is simply untrue.  Parents clamoring for this vax for their young children, before it's even tested, even while claiming to worry about their kids getting Covid, are being irrational IMO.

Lots of people develop seizure disorders later in life.  Yes, there are documented seizure responses to vaxes, BUT they show up within a short time frame - weeks -  not 1.5 years later.   This is not a thing.   Sorry about your relative, but I'm not buying it had anything to do with any vaccine.

[SKL]

28 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

Can I just also say that I am so.freaking.sick.and.tired of the *same* people who downplay Covid risks and pooh-pooh masks and call those of us who are cautious 'living in fear' are now straight-up terrified of what has been shown, after millions of doses, to be safe and effective. 

Imaginary long-term side effects? Mark of the beast?  The vaccine somehow spreading disease or causing infertility by some fantastical nonexistent method compared to the actual virus which is busily mutating in unvaccinated populations? Holy moly. Stop living in fear! 

If you hate reading what people here say, maybe you shouldn't read these threads.  Also, maybe some of us are sick of having our words twisted.

If you're talking about me, let me correct a few things.

I am only talking about Covid risks to young children (under 12).  That is, after all, what this thread is supposed to be about.

As for the vax, I am only talking about risks to young children (under 12).

If you think that it's a great idea to give a 2yo the same vax I received, without a hell of a lot of testing, then I don't know what to say to you.  You can't even give a 2yo a freaking Tylenol tablet.  There is a serious lack of rationality here.

Edited May 16, 2021 by SKL

[Terabith]

4 minutes ago, SKL said:

Well, first of all, I'm not so sure the CDC didn't consider the possibility that some of those who would quit masking would be non-vaxed people.  They are not stupid after all.

And secondly, you mistranslated my clear language.  I said "even if some of the maskless people have Covid."  Since the vaccines are not 100% effective to prevent people from catching Covid, as we all know, there are vaccinated people who are walking around with Covid.  With the new rules, they will probably stop masking, because they don't know they have Covid.  And I have to believe the CDC took that into account when they made their announcement.  If you don't believe that, then why do you trust the CDC on anything?

Honestly, at this point, my trust of the CDC is pretty much nonexistent.  They're not following the science.  

[Matryoshka]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

If you hate reading what people here say, maybe you shouldn't read these threads.  Also, maybe some of us are sick of having our words twisted.

If you're talking about me, let me correct a few things.

I am only talking about Covid risks to young children (under 12).  That is, after all, what this thread is supposed to be about.

As for the vax, I am only talking about risks to young children (under 12).

If you think that it's a great idea to give a 2yo the same vax I received, without a hell of a lot of testing, then I don't know what to say to you.  You can't even give a 2yo a freaking Tylenol.  There is a serious lack of rationality here.

They are testing it. That's why it's not available yet.

[Terabith]

Just now, SKL said:

If you hate reading what people here say, maybe you shouldn't read these threads.  Also, maybe some of us are sick of having our words twisted.

If you're talking about me, let me correct a few things.

I am only talking about Covid risks to young children (under 12).  That is, after all, what this thread is supposed to be about.

As for the vax, I am only talking about risks to young children (under 12).

If you think that it's a great idea to give a 2yo the same vax I received, without a hell of a lot of testing, then I don't know what to say to you.  You can't even give a 2yo a freaking Tylenol.  There is a serious lack of rationality here.

But the whole point of the trials with kids is to discover what dosage they SHOULD give them.  They're testing a number of different dosages.  

[Sdel]

21 minutes ago, KSera said:

That does change things significantly if that was your calculus. What about for other people who were invested in not catching it? Those are the people masks would be for protecting, all the more if you fully expected you would indeed catch it. Or maybe you stayed home all the time so you wouldn’t pass it to anyone else.  

The same calculation went into masking....not worth twisting ourselves into an emotional knots over that either. We don’t think they do anything and we don’t care if anyone else thinks they do, and it most certainly wasn’t anything ever worth having a fight over.  If where we were wanted them we certainly didn’t care enough to argue about it....if they didn’t, we were fine to ditch the mask.

[SKL]

1 minute ago, Matryoshka said:

They are testing it. That's why it's not available yet.

Yeah, I know, but certain people here, who claim to be worried about unknown Covid effects on little kids, are also the same people who said they would be willing to get their little kids vaxed right now.  Presumably with the vaxes as they currently exist.

This is just not rational thinking.

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, SKL said:

  You can't even give a 2yo a freaking Tylenol.  There is a serious lack of rationality here.

Not for anything, but what? Did something change so that you can’t give infants Tylenol anymore? I avoided it for the most part, but they literally sell infant Tylenol for ages 6 months and up. You can call your doctor to get dosing for under 6 months old. 
 

But that’s obviously irrelevant to the rest of the conversation. 

[Matryoshka]

5 minutes ago, SKL said:

Yeah, I know, but certain people here, who claim to be worried about unknown Covid effects on little kids, are also the same people who said they would be willing to get their little kids vaxed right now.  Presumably with the vaxes as they currently exist.

This is just not rational thinking.

I think people have said as soon as it's available. And even with it being a lower risk disease in young kids, Covid the disease has still had more documented side-effects, including long-term ones and deaths, in young kids than the vaccine has shown in any population thus far. It's not very rational thinking that this extremely safe vaccine, tested and with dosing optimization for younger kids, will suddenly morph into being more dangerous than the disease itself.

Edited May 16, 2021 by Matryoshka

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

I think people have said as soon as it's available. And even with it being a lower risk disease in young kids, Covid the disease has still had more documented side-effects, including long-term ones and deaths, in young kids than the vaccine has shown in any population thus far. It's not very rational thinking that this extremely safe vaccine, tested and with dosing optimization for younger kids, will suddenly morph into being more dangerous than the disease itself.

I didn't say it would.  I said I hope parents are going to apply the same risk analysis to the vax as they are applying to Covid for this young age group.

[SoCal_Bear]

On the topic of lying...this was an interesting piece in USA Today.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/05/15/new-mask-rules-trust-americans-honest-vaccine-status/5107686001/

[Not_a_Number]

1 hour ago, Sdel said:

Well, my husband still attends all the almost non-existent currently COVID stuff and we haven’t had symptoms again.  It seems like our real life experience is matching exactly what is being suggested the vaccines do, don’t keep you from getting it but lessens the symptoms.  I’ve always expected it to act like the flu and I’ve always expected it to become endemic.

Got it.

How long do you figure you’ll be immune for? 

[ktgrok]

44 minutes ago, SKL said:

 

As for my personal experience, I have a relative who has lifelong epilepsy that developed during a post-vax time frame of 1.5 years during which she was sick for months on end and then developed seizures.  I have done research and learned that epilepsy is just one of the neurological disorders that certain vaxes are known to cause in some recipients.

 

So relative got a vaccine. Was fine for a year and a half after the vaccine. Then developed epilepsy, which you say was caused by that vaccine 1.5 yrs ago? And the proof of that is??? 

34 minutes ago, SKL said:

 

If you think that it's a great idea to give a 2yo the same vax I received, without a hell of a lot of testing, then I don't know what to say to you.  You can't even give a 2yo a freaking Tylenol tablet.  There is a serious lack of rationality here.

No, but a vaccine that testing shows is the right dose for a 2 yr old yes. And I did give my 2 yr olds tylenol when needed - comes in handy droppers even. 

[Matryoshka]

21 minutes ago, SKL said:

I didn't say it would.  I said I hope parents are going to apply the same risk analysis to the vax as they are applying to Covid for this young age group.

Why wouldn't they?  Why are you even worried about this?  There is no evidence whatsoever that the vax will have nefarious side-effects.

Considering that my kids are not fully vaxed and I carefully weighed the risks of each and every vax they took against the risk of the particular disease it was for, I'm an odd one for you to be arguing this with.  Looking at this particular disease vs. vax, the risk/benefits of disease vs vaccine isn't even a contest - unless the trials for younger kids show something utterly surprising and unexpected - but there's absolutely no reason at all to think that they would.

[SKL]

5 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

So relative got a vaccine. Was fine for a year and a half after the vaccine. Then developed epilepsy, which you say was caused by that vaccine 1.5 yrs ago? And the proof of that is???

Again you are mistranslating my words.

The point is that yes there are long-term effects of existing vaccines (not just my personal experience - that just was an example - there is plenty of documented evidence for those interested in facts), so please don't make false assertions about that.

[Sdel]

7 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Got it.

How long do you figure you’ll be immune for? 

Don’t know....we have single digit hospitalizations right now and our news hasn’t bothered to report numbers in a while.......

[Not_a_Number]

By the way, speaking of young kids who've had to stay home for a year... this is totally anecdotal, but here's our experience.

We pulled our kids out of ALL activities when the pandemic started more than a year ago. DD8 has kept in touch with her friends via Zoom and DD5 (who wasn't even 4 back then) has not. They spent all of their in-person time with our nuclear family and also their grandparents and aunt and uncle and two teeny cousins. (We had a pandemic pod.) It's honestly been a lovely family bonding time. 

Since we're going to be more open this summer, I finally took them to a playground and some playdates in NYC about a week ago. 

Guess what? They were TOTALLY fine. DD8 played with her good friend who she'd only seen on Zoom for a year for 3 hours. They had a lovely game collecting rocks and pretending something or another in which they included DD5. Then they were preparing to ambush some friends who were going to meet them later (who never showed up, which may have been for the best...) 

DD5 did follow some kids around at the playground saying "Do you want to be my friend?" over and over again, lol... but she also played very nicely with a few kids and reported that some kids did, indeed, want to be her friend 😉 . 

My kids are relatively neurotypical so I can't vouch that this is what would happen with every single kid. But I'll say that my experience has been that preschoolers are FINE being just with their family for a year and that 8-year-olds can maintain their friendships online. 

Edited May 16, 2021 by Not_a_Number

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Sdel said:

Don’t know....we have single digit hospitalizations right now and our news hasn’t bothered to report numbers in a while.......

Ah OK. So you figure it's done, or do you think it'll come in waves? 

I do wish we knew how long immunity lasted -- either from the vaccines or from COVID itself. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

Again you are mistranslating my words.

The point is that yes there are long-term effects of existing vaccines (not just my personal experience - that just was an example - there is plenty of documented evidence for those interested in facts), so please don't make false assertions about that.

There is plenty of documented evidence of extremely rare long-term effects. There's no evidence I know of of long-term effects that happen anywhere near 1% of the time.  

[ktgrok]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

Again you are mistranslating my words.

The point is that yes there are long-term effects of existing vaccines (not just my personal experience - that just was an example - there is plenty of documented evidence for those interested in facts), so please don't make false assertions about that.

Ok, but I'm trying to understand your example. Or any documentation of side effects that have zero effect for a year or years,  then show up, but are actually linked to the vaccine. 

[ktgrok]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Ah OK. So you figure it's done, or do you think it'll come in waves? 

I do wish we knew how long immunity lasted -- either from the vaccines or from COVID itself. 

And even then, those long term effects start soon after the vaccine - the vaccine doesn't lay dormant and then kick in years down the road. 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, ktgrok said:

And even then, those long term effects start soon after the vaccine - the vaccine doesn't lay dormant and then kick in years down the road. 

Wrong quote? 

[Sdel]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

Ah OK. So you figure it's done, or do you think it'll come in waves? 

I do wish we knew how long immunity lasted -- either from the vaccines or from COVID itself. 

I’m not going to pretend I have a crystal ball.  I’m just going to deal with it when whatever happens comes and not make myself sick worrying about it in the meantime.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Sdel said:

I’m not going to pretend I have a crystal ball.  I’m just going to deal with it when whatever happens comes and not make myself sick worrying about it in the meantime.

OK. Got it. So you think that it's basically worth treating it like a cold -- it's here, it's going to stay here, and there's nothing to be done. 

I actually kind of felt like this in February 2020, to be honest. I felt like there was no way it wasn't going to become endemic. 

[Sdel]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

OK. Got it. So you think that it's basically worth treating it like a cold -- it's here, it's going to stay here, and there's nothing to be done. 

I actually kind of felt like this in February 2020, to be honest. I felt like there was no way it wasn't going to become endemic. 

It technically is a cold....

[SKL]

7 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

Why wouldn't they?  Why are you even worried about this?  There is no evidence whatsoever that the vax will have nefarious side-effects.

Considering that my kids are not fully vaxed and I carefully weighed the risks of each and every vax they took against the risk of the particular disease it was for, I'm an odd one for you to be arguing this with.  Looking at this particular disease vs. vax, the risk/benefits of disease vs vaccine isn't even a contest - unless the trials for younger kids show something utterly surprising and unexpected - but there's absolutely no reason at all to think that they would.

I wasn't arguing with you, I just made a statement based on various comments I have seen here, and then people started twisting my words.  For whatever reason, you decided to respond to my initial comment which did not address you personally.

I saw multiple people say they are ready to get their little kids vaxed right now (not in this thread but in another concurrent one).  Some of these same people are displaying a much higher level of caution about possible unknown effects of something that has been in our population for nearly 1.5 years.  I really believe some people are not weighing things rationally.  Just an observation.

But maybe they didn't really mean it when they said they were ready to vax their little kids.  Maybe when the vax actually becomes available to little kids, when it comes to actually injecting it into their kids, they'll give it a bit more thought.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Sdel said:

It technically is a cold....

I don't think "cold" is very well-defined. What do you mean by that? 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

I wasn't arguing with you, I just made a statement based on various comments I have seen here, and then people started twisting my words.  For whatever reason, you decided to respond to my initial comment which did not address you personally.

I saw multiple people say they are ready to get their little kids vaxed right now (not in this thread but in another concurrent one).  Some of these same people are displaying a much higher level of caution about possible unknown effects of something that has been in our population for nearly 1.5 years.  I really believe some people are not weighing things rationally.  Just an observation.

But maybe they didn't really mean it when they said they were ready to vax their little kids.  Maybe when the vax actually becomes available to little kids, when it comes to actually injecting it into their kids, they'll give it a bit more thought.

I'd like the trials to be done before we vaccinate, obviously. I wouldn't do it RIGHT NOW. I just wish it was already tested. 

The thing is that something has been in our population for 1.5 years and we know that it DOES sometimes have serious effects. We've observed them. We don't know the exact rates, but if we ran a pediatric trial in which we infected every single person with COVID, the safety profile would NOT be good. It would never get approved. 

[SKL]

4 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I'd like the trials to be done before we vaccinate, obviously. I wouldn't do it RIGHT NOW. I just wish it was already tested. 

The thing is that something has been in our population for 1.5 years and we know that it DOES sometimes have serious effects. We've observed them. We don't know the exact rates, but if we ran a pediatric trial in which we infected every single person with COVID, the safety profile would NOT be good. It would never get approved. 

But there have been many kids who have had Covid already, and very few serious effects in young kids.  Also, with the rates falling, we have reason to believe this will also reduce cases among young kids, making their objective risk even lower.  The CDC and lots of parents have decided that the risk no longer justifies the costs of making everyone in the USA mask all summer long.

You may have a lower risk tolerance than average.  In that case, you are free to make decisions for your family that are more cautious than what the law requires.

Question - do you think the mask mandates for vaxed people should be lifted on the day your children are able to be "fully vaccinated"?  Or should it wait longer, given that many parents won't be willing to vax right away if ever?

[HeartString]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

Yeah, I know, but certain people here, who claim to be worried about unknown Covid effects on little kids, are also the same people who said they would be willing to get their little kids vaxed right now.  Presumably with the vaxes as they currently exist.

This is just not rational thinking.

I think the whole "assuming it has been tested and shown safe and effective" part is implicit.  Assuming other wise seems like an intentional , willfully created straw man.

[SKL]

9 minutes ago, HeartString said:

I think the whole "assuming it has been tested and shown safe and effective" part is implicit.  Assuming other wise seems like an intentional , willfully created straw man.

Maybe, but there is still a disconnect between demanding more than 1.5 years' data on kiddy Covid vs. basically ignoring any possibility of long-term effects from the kiddy vax.

[HeartString]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

Maybe, but there is still a disconnect between demanding more than 1.5 years' data on kiddy Covid vs. basically ignoring any possibility of long-term effects from the kiddy vax.

I don't actually disagree with that. All of the adults in our house are vaccinated and I was planning on waiting for more data to come out before getting my 12 year old vaccinated.  We didn't know about the rare blood clot thing with J&J until millions of people had been vaccinated, so I was planning on waiting until Aug before vaccinating him, because we have a really low risk profile until Co-op starts in Sept.  The CDC/no more masking thing is forcing me to re-do that thinking. I'm not sure what we'll do now, we're thinking about it.  I definitely think kids need a different thought process than adults do.   

Which is why I think setting up fake arguments, like that people want to just give 2 year olds the same dose as a grown man, today, with no testing, is unnecessary hyperbole that just confuses the whole discussion.  They are currently testing dosing specifically on under 12s, which has been pointed out at least 3 times in this very thread.  Literally no one is saying lets just vax the babies right now with what we have.

There are actual discussions to be had here without all of that. 

So far the only side effect I've heard about with the Pfiser or Moderan MRNA vax is the feeling cruddy for a couple of days.  The only other one I've heard is silly, goal-post moving, unproven crap about it causing infertility.  The J&J ha those rare blood clot issues.  So far the MRNA vaccines look incredibly safe.

 

 

 

 

[SKL]

12 minutes ago, HeartString said:

I don't actually disagree with that. All of the adults in our house are vaccinated and I was planning on waiting for more data to come out before getting my 12 year old vaccinated.  We didn't know about the rare blood clot thing with J&J until millions of people had been vaccinated, so I was planning on waiting until Aug before vaccinating him, because we have a really low risk profile until Co-op starts in Sept.  The CDC/no more masking thing is forcing me to re-do that thinking. I'm not sure what we'll do now, we're thinking about it.  I definitely think kids need a different thought process than adults do.   

Which is why I think setting up fake arguments, like that people want to just give 2 year olds the same dose as a grown man, today, with no testing, is unnecessary hyperbole that just confuses the whole discussion.  They are currently testing dosing specifically on under 12s, which has been pointed out at least 3 times in this very thread.  Literally no one is saying lets just vax the babies right now with what we have.

There are actual discussions to be had here without all of that. 

So far the only side effect I've heard about with the Pfiser or Moderan MRNA vax is the feeling cruddy for a couple of days.  The only other one I've heard is silly, goal-post moving, unproven crap about it causing infertility.  The J&J ha those rare blood clot issues.  So far the MRNA vaccines look incredibly safe.

I think we're mostly on the same page with the above. 

But I also think that people should ask themselves whether they are weighing the risks of kiddy Covid with the same kind of rational thought with which they weigh other risks.

BTW, you bring up an interesting point.  Maybe you aren't the only person who is considering vaccinating your teens earlier due to the lifting of the mask mandate.  And if that's the case, some would argue that's a good thing.

[Sk8ermaiden]

3 hours ago, SKL said:

I was gonna say ... this thread brings up a side topic of how many people we believe are shameless liars in the USA.  I personally would never lie about this kind of thing regardless of my feelings about masking.  My whole family is like this.  I can't speak for everyone in the USA, but I think the assumption that everyone is gonna fake it just because they can is not valid.  It probably is true for some, but I don't know how many.

I live in Texas and the number of people I encounter who will shamelessly lie about this is much higher than the number who will get vaccinated. And I know this because they straight up say it around me. Of course these are the same people who will say masks don't work, because they got Covid - even though they only wore masks (either gaiters or not covering their noses) in the situations where they absolutely HAD but nowhere else, including large parties.

Maybe some people live where they can trust others to do the right thing, but I do not. 

[Matryoshka]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

But I also think that people should ask themselves whether they are weighing the risks of kiddy Covid with the same kind of rational thought with which they weigh other risks.

Asked and answered. Many times. Dead horse. Stop beating.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Sdel said:

It technically is a cold....

Technically it’s a Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. 

[SKL]

3 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

Asked and answered. Many times. Dead horse. Stop beating.

Consider scrolling on by.  You are not my censor and your comment is not adding to the conversation.

[HeartString]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

I think we're mostly on the same page with the above. 

But I also think that people should ask themselves whether they are weighing the risks of kiddy Covid with the same kind of rational thought with which they weigh other risks.

BTW, you bring up an interesting point.  Maybe you aren't the only person who is considering vaccinating your teens earlier due to the lifting of the mask mandate.  And if that's the case, some would argue that's a good thing.

I know I’m trying to weigh it all rationally, so I assume the same if others on this board.  I think some people are making Covid in young ones seem worse than I perceive it, balanced with some people making the vaccine seem worse.  All sides seems to be represented, which makes this a good place to get information and arguments on both sides while I’m weighing things.  
 

It has occurred to me that by considering moving up my sons vax I’m doing exactly what CDC intended and I don’t like that aspect of it. I don’t like feeling like I’m being manipulated.  But that’s not really something to base an important decision on so I’m trying not to dwell on it. Especially because I agree with the overarching goal in general, of more people getting vaccinated. 

[Matryoshka]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

Consider scrolling on by.  You are not my censor and your comment is not adding to the conversation.

Neither is repeating the same question that's already been answered over and over. What the heck do you think you are adding to this conversation?  

[Spy Car]

2 hours ago, SKL said:

My point was that your kids are not young kids waiting for the vax currently under development if they're already vaxed.

As for my personal experience, I have a relative who has lifelong epilepsy that developed during a post-vax time frame of 1.5 years during which she was sick for months on end and then developed seizures.  I have done research and learned that epilepsy is just one of the neurological disorders that certain vaxes are known to cause in some recipients.

My comment about epilepsy (as an example) was in response to another poster's assertion that we do not know of any long-term side effects from vaccinations.  That is simply untrue.  Parents clamoring for this vax for their young children, before it's even tested, even while claiming to worry about their kids getting Covid, are being irrational IMO.

You calling other people "irrational" takes the all-time prize for chutzpah.

You have been an ongoing font of irrational disinformation since the pandemic began.

Bill

 

[hshibley]

I know this thread has unfortunately veered into all the usual topics that are used to obscure COVID threads from their main purpose (masks don’t work, COVID is no big deal, the vaccine is worse than the disease) but I thought I’d update our experience. 

My daughter had her 1st Reconciliation yesterday all the kids were masked about 1/3 of the adults. Where I live if you’re an adult you’ve had ample time to get vaccinated. I assume some of the adults were masking in solidarity with their children. I was. 
Our diocese policy going forward is the unvaccinated will be seated in a separate section masked and socially distant.  We’ll see how that works going forward. I’m Catholic and sometimes I think with priests and bishops being unmarried they don’t think these things through. Basically this section needs to be larger enough for every family with kids under 12.

Publix’s policy is you don’t have to mask if you’re vaccinated. The vast majority of shoppers were masked. 
 

Walmart is the same but I would not assume the same level of compliance. So I will probably just avoid taking her there. I don’t need for her to see large groups of parents/children blatantly lying. 

[Not_a_Number]

6 hours ago, HeartString said:

I know I’m trying to weigh it all rationally, so I assume the same if others on this board.  I think some people are making Covid in young ones seem worse than I perceive it, balanced with some people making the vaccine seem worse.  All sides seems to be represented, which makes this a good place to get information and arguments on both sides while I’m weighing things.  
 

It has occurred to me that by considering moving up my sons vax I’m doing exactly what CDC intended and I don’t like that aspect of it. I don’t like feeling like I’m being manipulated.  But that’s not really something to base an important decision on so I’m trying not to dwell on it. Especially because I agree with the overarching goal in general, of more people getting vaccinated. 

I’m definitely trying to weigh it all rationally. In the best of all possible worlds, I’d like long term data on the vaccine that we simply aren’t going to have.

That being said, I’m seeing that anecdotally, younger people seem to be less affected by the vaccine, which makes me feel better. And I’m planning to watch what happens with the 12-15 group pretty carefully.

As for weighing the vaccine rationally... I certainly think I am, but if someone thinks I’m not, I’d like to hear flaws in my assumptions. I’m not actually expecting 1.5 years of data for COVID in kids — what I’d like to see is something like 3-6 months of data on a large representative sample, preferably with a matched comparison group. We’re going to have that data on the vaccine, because of the trial, but I don’t think we have that data on COVID. 

So, honestly, I feel like I’ll know way more about vaccine safety than I do about COVID safety. If you think I’m wrong, you’ll have to tell me why.

Edited May 16, 2021 by Not_a_Number

[ktgrok]

 

7 hours ago, HeartString said:

 

It has occurred to me that by considering moving up my sons vax I’m doing exactly what CDC intended and I don’t like that aspect of it. I don’t like feeling like I’m being manipulated.  But that’s not really something to base an important decision on so I’m trying not to dwell on it. Especially because I agree with the overarching goal in general, of more people getting vaccinated. 

I find this interesting. Would you choose not to give blood if you found out they were giving out movie tickets, because it is manipulative? I mean, we all manipulate people, for all sorts of reasons. 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, ktgrok said:

I find this interesting. Would you choose not to give blood if you found out they were giving out movie tickets, because it is manipulative? I mean, we all manipulate people, for all sorts of reasons. 

I get that feeling. Feeling manipulated makes me feel contrarian. It definitely leads to "I'll cut off my nose to spite my face" reasoning in me. 

[HeartString]

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

 

I find this interesting. Would you choose not to give blood if you found out they were giving out movie tickets, because it is manipulative? I mean, we all manipulate people, for all sorts of reasons. 

If I thought about it, probably.  I think I'm feeling a bit cranky about it because I feel like *for me* the CDC recommendations are feeling less like a carrot than a stick.  I'm not going to move up the vax date for my son so he can enjoy not being masked (carrot).  I'm thinking about moving it up sooner than I'm comfortable with to protect him from all of the unvaccinated people who are going to lie and start going around unmasked. (stick)  Giving blood to get free movie tickets is all carrot.  Doing something good, getting something good.  I don't like feeling like I'm trying to avoid the stick.  And not masking in stores isn't a huge incentive for me as a vaccinated person either.  I don't love masking, but it doesn't bother me. So the carrot is relatively minor.

 

1 hour ago, Not_a_Number said:

I get that feeling. Feeling manipulated makes me feel contrarian. It definitely leads to "I'll cut off my nose to spite my face" reasoning in me. 

I have a tendency in that direction for sure.