1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I want everyone to be able to simply their better judgment, stop seeing this as black-and-white, and at least mask up in high-risk scenarios during times of high transmission.

Most people don't have the same risk factors.

5 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

So you agree the aforementioned mandate is stupid and shouldn't be executed? Because it didnt sound that way from your posts concerning the matter.

 

I think that a mandate at this time can be justified, especially in a major metropolitan area. I also think that any mandate should probably be specifying a type/quality of mask, but I also realize that in our insane political environment, it will just be another thing that people b**ch about and resist so it's basically a nonstarter.

1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I'm not sure what the relative effectiveness is, but what I do know is that the insistence that any mask other than a KN95/N95 is "worthless" is heavily overstated. If everyone is masking, regardless of the variety of mask used, it is still going to have a positive impact on reducing trasnmission.

With the current numbers and what I know about the versions of the virus going around, it doesn't make any sense to have a "wear whatever mask" mandate anywhere right now. But again, I tend to walk the middle, common sense path when regarding these issues. 

You extremist freaks can fight it out. I'm out, these swedish meatballs I made are F'ing delicious, even leftover.

2 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

With the current numbers and what I know about the versions of the virus going around, it doesn't make any sense to have a "wear whatever mask" mandate anywhere right now. But again, I tend to walk the middle, common sense path when regarding these issues. 

You extremist freaks can fight it out. I'm out, these swedish meatballs I made are F'ing delicious, even leftover.

 

Just bear this out in reality. We can't even enforce a basic mask mandate, how the hell would we enforce a mask-specific one?

17 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I actually didn't "advocate" mandating anything. I simply said that wearing a mask is the right thing to do in this environment.

What environment exactly? you are starting to come of as the crazy guy in the middle of town on a soapbox screaming the end of times is coming, there are 40 people hospitalized with covid in the city which is a drop from last week I think, there are no signs of a massive surge. I admit I am hardcore anti mask so if you don't listen to me listen to  others more middle of teh road on the issue trying to talk sense to you

12 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Just bear this out in reality. We can't even enforce a basic mask mandate, how the hell would we enforce a mask-specific one?

If both are impossible to enforce (your words), why choose the ineffective route? Seems stupid, like I have been saying for the last half dozen posts. Mandating useless masks every time there is a slight uptick on any metric the choose to use at the time is akin to the boy who cried wolf. If it gets really bad like it was 12 to 18 months ago nobody is going to pay attention to the warnings because you want to jump the gun at every bump in a chart.

4 hours ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

What environment exactly? you are starting to come of as the crazy guy in the middle of town on a soapbox screaming the end of times is coming, there are 40 people hospitalized with covid in the city which is a drop from last week I think, there are no signs of a massive surge. I admit I am hardcore anti mask so if you don't listen to me listen to  others more middle of teh road on the issue trying to talk sense to you

 

My position is middle-of-the-road and the current position of medical professionals. Mask up when things are trending negatively and feel free to go maskless when the trends are positive. Considering this to be "radical" just shows how hopelessly ignorant we are as a society.

5 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

If both are impossible to enforce (your words), why choose the ineffective route? Seems stupid, like I have been saying for the last half dozen posts. Mandating useless masks every time there is a slight uptick on any metric the choose to use at the time is akin to the boy who cried wolf. If it gets really bad lime it was 12 to 18 months ago nobody is going to pay attention to the warnings because you want to jump the gun at every bump in a chart.

 

I think the real point is that it's still early in the game, and...it's just a f***ing mask.

4 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

My position is middle-of-the road and the current position of medical professionals. Mask up when things are trending negatively and feel free to go maskless when the trends are positive. Considering this to be "radical" just shows how hopelessly ignorant we are as a society.

Oh you mean act exactly how Asia and Africa and other pandemic prone societies have been doing for decades?  Now that would be just silly, wouldn't it?

2 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

My position is middle-of-the road and the current position of medical professionals. Mask up when things are trending negatively and feel free to go maskless when the trends are positive. Considering this to be "radical" just shows how hopelessly ignorant we are as a society.

Great so since hospitalizations are trending down you advocate no masks, good to know thanks

12 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I think the real point is that it's still early in the game, and...it's just a f***ing mask.

If you were a seismologist you would have people hiding under their dining room tables multiple times a day, every time that needle bounced up. 

This is an example of a negative trend, this according to rocker would be hazmat suit level of a negative outlook

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Bang up first inning. Defense stinks, Suarez wasn’t good and the bats continued the trend from yesterday. 

3 hours ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

New York is the main state with big increase in numbers ,everywhere else is up and down but hospitalizations not even close to January

It's a lagging indicator by a couple weeks but it's true that they aren't close now and won't be anytime soon. My guess is we got hit with BA.1 hard enough that it's really limited the potential for BA.2 to find susceptible hosts.

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I'm not sure what the relative effectiveness is, but what I do know is that the insistence that any mask other than a KN95/N95 is "worthless" is heavily overstated. If everyone is masking, regardless of the variety of mask used, it is still going to have a positive impact on reducing trasnmission.

I agree that the "cloth masks are useless" claims are overstated. If you're trying to protect yourself, yes cloth masks aren't very effective, but if we're talking about the infected person wearing one, then they are far from useless.

As for the mandate, I don't know what the numbers look like in Philly and I'm not even sure what can be used as a viable metric since we have nothing comparable to use as a benchmark now that at-home testing is so ubiquitous, but if positivity rate is 3%, that seems low enough that going to back a mask mandate does seem a bit trigger happy. Could be that they are using other data to inform their decision like wastewater surveillance or trends in settings where daily/weekly testing is mandated. Would be curious to see what that looks like if they are tracking things like that.

1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said:

I don't know what the numbers look like in Philly and I'm not even sure what can be used as a viable metric since we have nothing comparable to use as a benchmark now that at-home testing is so ubiquitous, but if positivity rate is 3%, that seems low enough that going to back a mask mandate does seem a bit trigger happy. Could be that they are using other data to inform their decision like wastewater surveillance or trends in settings where daily/weekly testing is mandated. Would be curious to see if what that looks like if they are tracking things like that.

They are just basing it on their outdated guidance, they pretty much said so today

1 minute ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

They are just basing it on their outdated guidance, they pretty much said so today

I have no idea what that means. What are the actual metrics?

1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said:

I have no idea what that means. What are the actual metrics?

 

 

https://www.phila.gov/programs/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/guidance/covid-19-response-levels/

2 minutes ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

 

 

https://www.phila.gov/programs/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/guidance/covid-19-response-levels/

Hmm, yeah the week-over-week increase criteria is a bit prone to jitter when the numbers are so low for a small sample size like a city. Even state-wide, I'm not sure something like that makes sense. At least not without also factoring in positivity rate somehow.

Most of us aren’t anti-mask. We’re anti-stupid. Cloth masks aren’t very effective, and freaking out over weekly percentage increases on small nominal numbers is just idiotic. 

53 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Most of us aren’t anti-mask. We’re anti-stupid. Cloth masks aren’t very effective, and freaking out over weekly percentage increases on small nominal numbers is just idiotic. 

 

No need to freak out. Panic is never good. However, it would be well-advised at this stage to return to masking when there is the appearance of an oncoming wave. We still don't really know what we're dealing with, and an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure...

@Procus, I’m pretty sure when Vikas said "We’re anti-stupid” he wasn’t talking about you. 

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

@Procus, I’m pretty sure when Vikas said "We’re anti-stupid” he wasn’t talking about you. 

And you imply that YOU are not stupid? 

9 hours ago, vikas83 said:

Most of us aren’t anti-mask. We’re anti-stupid. Cloth masks aren’t very effective, and freaking out over weekly percentage increases on small nominal numbers is just idiotic. 

You seem to have a way of summing up what I'm thinking in one or two sentences.

No gay. Can we still say that? 

8 hours ago, Procus said:

And you imply that YOU are not stupid? 

15 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Yep.  But some people like to be lead around like sheep.  

 

 

 

Some sheep prefer red caps.