Camlorn, I've tried the mask before, and there is no way I'll ever wear one again, not for anyone who would force me to do so against my will at any rate. It is scientifically proven that they will not prevent the spread of this thing just as they were not effective in preventing the spread of other viruses. If there weren't so many double-standards that are there in plain sight, I could be convinced to wear one. However, until these double-standards no longer exist, I'll continue to object. Yes, those masks to hold the droplets to some extent, but you also have to remember that you're going to be breathing in your own CO2 while wearing these things, and it is scientifically proven that this will be very unhealthy over time. That's another reason why I object. I just don't get why people do not understand this. It's scientific evidence, and yet is dismissed in the name of holding to a narrative that doesn't even make any sense.

I know, that what I've been thinking lately whenever I tune into the news.

Canlorn, nice post. I wanted someone else to comment on how Accman is having to backpedal all the time so that it didn't look like a personal issue. It isn't. Seriously. I've been just as ferocious with plenty of other people.

You're tired of being guilt-tripped, Accman? Tough luck. I'm not even close to being tired of using logic and social disapproval to demolish your anti-mask stances. If you're tired of being guilt-tripped, maybe it's because deep down in your heart, you know that your actions might actually lead to someone dying, and you don't want to say that you're okay with that. Maybe you have a scrap of conscience that is actually railing against the lunacy you're spreading because you really do care about other people. If that's the case, for christ's sake let it loose; I'd love to see it. If it means you have to backpedal again, I'd actually be able to greet it with some sympathy. But I think at this point you're simply too committed to your own narrative to even consider anyone else. Remember, I'm no longer interested in convincing you that you're wrong; I know you're wrong, and your unwillingness to face facts isn't my problem because I'm not in close physical proximity to you, so you don't represent a physical threat to my safety or to the safety of those I care about. Keep those antacids handy though; you might need them.

You have three choices, as I see it:
1. Go quiet, save whatever shreds of your dignity remain, and slink into anonymity until everyone forgets the colossal idiocy of much of what you've been saying on this subject
2. Flat-out admit that you've been wrong, and that your personal bias is preventing you from assessing the situation with a clear perspective
3. Maintain what you're saying, and continue to build the case against yourself every time you post

Enes, I generally agree with your assessment. We've made it mandatory to wear a mask in all public indoor spaces and in public transit (buses, trains, cabs), and I have no trouble helping to do my part to keep others safe. I'd rather be a little uncomfortable for a short while than have to worry that I might get my partner's eight-year-old son sick by not taking precautions. I couldn't live with myself if I ended up killing him, even if it was the virus that did the work.

What really blows my mind is that Americans aren't freaking out about, say, having to wear shoes in a restaurant, even though a lack of shoes doesn't actually represent a health risk to anyone. You're okay with that, but you're somehow not okay with wearing a face covering for awhile during public exposure? Like I say, it's been politicized out of all sensibility. But I'll boil down a few important facts.

1. America has one of the highest per-capita rates of Covid-19 infection in the world
2. America is the only country where the refusal to wear masks has been so highly politicized; people are refusing in lots of other countries, but only in the United States is it so polarized
3. The wearing of masks does not eliminate Covid-19 transmission, but in virtually all areas where mandatory mask-wearing is enforced, the numbers don't lie; it's effective in slowing the spread
4. If you refuse to wear a mask, you are at a greater chance of catching and spreading Covid-19
5. many Americans, perhaps galvanized by the GOP, are refusing to wear masks
6. math doesn't lie

Just remember this, folks, if you think this man is a trustworthy source of information. He's tacitly okay with people dying because wearing masks is uncomfortable. He shouldn't have to wear one because...well, because. Science is only relevant when it's convenient, and experts aren't experts because they have to drink water, and that means lowering their masks. Is this really a man anyone should be taking seriously? Me, I say no.

I agree with wearing masks in all public indoor places, with respect to people's homes. I'm just clarifying because I saw a petition that said require masks universally and I thought the petition was far too vague (plus, I don't want people to get the idea that they'd then need to wear masks in homes). And yes, that's not a conclusion everyone will come to, but its good to clear that up for those who need it, especially when your making something into a law. Hey, why can't us American's borrow from Canada? They've done some pretty good actions at combating COVID to my knowledge...

We still have our issues with Covid, and the re-opening has led to a spike in cases in some places. We're not out of the woods yet, by any means. But yeah, in general, us Canadians are more willing to listen to reason because it's not so politically charged and because...well, we're by and large a group of people who want to help one another. Most of us see mask-wearing as annoying, inconvenient as hell, but worth doing because it'll lower the spread, and thus in the end keep more people safe while we struggle to come up with a vaccine or better treatments.

Akman, what you fail to realize, if that if people followed mask guidelines, and actually used them, there wouldn't be spikes of cases, and there wouldn't be a need for another lockdown. Right now in some states with the crazy numbers, lockdown appears to become more and more likely.
And ethin, I absolutely didn't advocate people wear masks in there homes, maybe when  outsiders visit it might make sense, but a home is not a public space.

Okay, so what will we say to all of this when these regulations are likely still in place after the next three to six months? How long are we to put up with this crap? It was originally for a couple weeks when this began, and I knew right then that it would go much longer than that. They said May, and I was not surprised to learn that in many areas lock-downs would be extended until the middle of the summer. Now, lo and behold, we start to open things up and there is, as we all knew there would be, a spike in cases. So, how long do we go back into lock-down this time? We can't keep playing with people's lives like this. Am I motivated by personal loss? Hell yes, I am. Any self-respecting person who just wants to provide for their family should be fuming at this point. I wonder, if this goes on for a great deal longer, then how are people going to work this stuff out? There are only going to be so many stimulus packages that can go out.

I'd also like to know one other thing. If capitalism is so messed up, and I'll grant that it has been hijacked by corporations, what is the solution then. You can't make me believe that the communist socialist approach works as we have way too many examples from throughout world history that show it does not work. I remember all too well the bailouts that happened you spoke of Jade, and I remember not being very pleased to hear about them. I have never once asked for a bailout. If money was offered, such as in the case of the stimulus packages, I obviously was grateful and accepted it. However, I would not expect someone to come along and bail me out. I know we need things to be as safe as possible, but we need to start weighing just how much that's going to cost. there really is nothing that is going to "flatten the curve" to the extent people would like. that's just not the way these things work. If people would just research the idea of herd immunity, they'd find that it is a scientific process we've seen many times before and has usually been what eventually eliminated a virus. Sweden took that approach, and they're doing much better now because of it. Now, the number would look different in a bigger country like the United States, but it would play out the same way in the end.

Okay...so no, no, and no.

First of all, lockdowns aren't really what's being put on the table right now. It's the wearing of masks. Stop deflecting.

Full lockdowns are crippling, but part of the reason they needed to happen was because of the disastrous early handling of this virus. Part of that was the CDC saying early on that the general public probably didn't need to wear masks. This was a huge mistake. Part of it, especially in America, was Trump's handling of the situation, which can best be described as an absolute fucking train wreck. Obviously we aren't in a position right now to maintain full lockdowns for years; that is not something anyone here has suggested, and to my knowledge isn't something any sane person is attempting to push, either. So lockdowns...take them off the table. This is not a permanent solution to this problem, nobody said it was, so stop using fear. If numbers spike too high, then it may become necessary again, in short and controlled fashion, to close things down. Yes, that's going to suck. But do you know how you, and everyone else, can help that to not happen, or to happen further up the road and with smaller impact? Three guesses, and the first two don't count.

Now, very conveniently, back to masks.

If you stop and think about this, you'll realize that people (you included) wearing masks is actually in everyone's self-interest. Here's why.

1. People wearing masks allow most businesses to work at moderate or near-full capacity.
2. Open businesses with clients and staff wearing masks means a quicker fix to the economy
3. A quicker fix to the economy pretty much voids all your worries about "ohmygod where does the money come from?", because it re-establishes as much as the status quo as is reasonable. No, it's not a perfect solution for anyone, but I hope you agree that it beats the snot out of full lockdown, and also beats the snot out of everyone going back to full normal.

What you're saying right now, Accman, looks a bit like this:
Officials: We're in a pandemic. Everybody lock down.
Accman: Oh god, I'm going to lose my livelihood! This sucks! I want everything to go back to normal!
Officials: Everyone is suffering. Oh by the way, we're going to start things going back to normal, but please, if you go out, wear a mask.
Accman: I want things to go back to normal! I don't want to wear a mask!
Officials: We aren't ready to risk everyone's lives yet, but we realize lockdowns are tough. Will you please just wear a mask?
Accman: I want to smell things, damn it! I don't want to have to keep other people safe! Why can't we just get this herd immunity train started?
Officials: Okay, since you won't play nice when we asked you to, we're going to make it law. Obey the law, or face consequences.
Accman: How dare you suggest I accept consequences for my actions! It's not enough that you're re-opening things. You have to let us go all the way back to normal because this mask ended my whole career! And because it ended my career, I can't be rational about what I do to actually help the rest of America get back to normal.

Okay, now let's move on.

Herd immunity. Sure, it's a thing; let's pretend for a moment that there is complete consensus on its existence and viability. In that light, how would you feel if I said that everyone in the world should be infected with the virus deliberately in order to speed up the acquisition of herd immunity? Yes, that includes you. Yes, that includes your daughter. Yes, that includes your fictional mother who has COPD and diabetes. Everybody. No exceptions. Everyone gets infected. This would kill a whole pile of people, but a whole lot of people would survive, and they would end up hopefully generating antibodies which made future infection far less likely. Are you willing to stand up and say that you think this would be a good way to proceed?
I'm not.
And if you're not, perhaps you'll understand why I'm continually trashing all your arguments. Your "we should all just go back to normal" rhetoric will result in far, far more infections than we can handle. Far, far more people will sicken and die. the toll on the economy will be enormous. The toll on human life will be disastrous. The toll on the medical system will be straight-up ruinous. We're going to eventually get a form of herd immunity anyway. It is going to take years because this virus is quite new in humans, and I promise that trying to deliberately infect everyone isn't worth the cost. And just letting everyone get sick isn't worth the cost either. You think it is, and I guess you're entitled to think this, just as peasants six hundred years ago were entitled to think that the earth was the center of the universe and was a flat disc with an unknowable gulf around it. So you can have your opinion, but the moment you start pretending you have a seat at this table, I'll step in and remind one and all that you don't. Virologists and immunologists - people who have gone to school for the better part of a decade, people who in some cases have spent longer than you've even been on the earth studying this subject, are saying that the appropriate measure at this point is to slow ihe infection rate as much as we can. We've realized that lockdowns forever just aren't feasible, so we switched to the next best thing: masks. They aren't perfect, but remember, kids: 1 is greater than 0. Math doesn't lie. As long as masks have a greater than 0% chance of blocking particles which can transmit the virus - and by definition, they are porous surfaces, which means a great deal of those droplets won't get in or out through those pores - they are a better-than-nothing alternative. Anyone who deliberately goes into public without a mask at this point, and does so because they just want to "get it over with already" is showing arrogance of the highest order. Privilege is what is permitting you the freedom to believe that your right to smell freely is greater than someone else's safety.

This is not true Akman. When I said herd emunity, I was refering to the practice of  deliberately infecting people with the full virus regardless of consiquences to  develop emunity, not vaccination, which in many cases doesn't use  even a live virus, but some viral proteins. And, Jayde is for emunity via infection, there is no concensus that at all that lasting emunity is achieved, so the whole lets infect everyone  and get herd emunity argument is garbage, and is dead on arrival.

I just have one question. What will happen if, like SARS and MERS, we never find a vaccine? Should we never return things to normal and stop wearing masks?

So, you won't accept either form of herd immunity, a scientific process that has worked many, many times before. Do you propose that we continue to put our lives on hold for what could, or might, be? I for one have had it with taking losses just to placate to the fears of everyone else. I have a life to live, a family to provide for, and bills to pay, and I cannot do it while these regulations are in place. That also goes for millions of others who have lost work over this. The numbers of deaths are nowhere near what the experts figured when they started to push this narrative. This has to stop soon, or we're going to have a much bigger problem than this Corona virus to contend with. I applaud those business owners who are opening back up regardless of what the various governors have been telling them to do. Hey, these people have to make a living. They've got their own safety measures in place, so I see no problem with that. Another thing too is that these mandates are not written laws, so there technically is no legal way to enforce them, thank God. Even if there was, I'd still take the stance that I do. If someone really is insistent that I wear a mask, then there going to have to either provide it or purchase it for me because I'm not spending money on something I know I do not need. You'll say I'm selfish, and I say that's a cop-out statement because it's an easy way to get out of considering the other side of things. I have considered the point of view of the folks who are in favor of all these regulations, and, quite frankly, it's like staring at a giant line of machines, all programmed with the same response. "You're selfish" happens to be one of those programmed responses. I am merely choosing not to follow those who promote one thing and then turn around and say that they are somehow exempt from it. I never follow a double-standard. I've been guilty a time or two of bringing one about myself, but I will never follow anyone who would hold me to something expectation and then not be willing to hold themselves to it as well.

All three are strains of the same virus, so no, I think they are very much equally qualifiable. Both were declared pandemics, though on a smaller scale, and both died down eventually. So yes, that question does respectfully remain on the table for me. As for these regulations being the new norm for years to come ifa vaccine isn't found? I'm sorry, but that's extreme. We can't stay like this forever. And this isn't just about mask wearing. There are people who will say that limitted travel, social distancing, and zoom meetings are the best way to go moving forward if no vaccine is found. Seriously? All the pandemics in history, and this is the one we pick to clamp down and shut down the whole world? I'm no means one of the people who refuse to follow regulations point blank, but I do think there is a limit to either extreme. Reopening too soon is a mistake, but equally as bad a mistake is for the world to say that until a vaccine is found, this will be the new norm. We've got through worse pandemics, and those were times before we have the means at our disposal now to survive, whether a vaccine is found or not.