Jump to content
270soft Forum

Biden flip flops on National Mask Mandate


Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, MysteryKnight said:

In places with little cases, it makes sense to still require them because in case the virus does get introduced into the community, if you already had universal mask wearing, the chances of continued spread reduce considerably.

I find this sentence the most interesting in your response. As you may know, the flu sometimes isn't confined to just the 'flu-season'. Similarly, the common cold can lead to bronchitis or pneumonia in certain individuals, which in turn can lead to them dying. Given the sentence above, would you support year-round mask mandates to slow the spread of the flu and common cold?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Why do you think this? There are various regions that have had mask mandates, and then rises in cases.

Perhaps I should rephrase what I said, I don't think mandating goggles would do much more to stop the spread on top of masks. Places that have mask mandates still have problems though, largely in part, because of parties and gatherings being held where masks are not being worn. When dining, masks are not worn, family and friend gatherings/parties do not have masks being worn, there is no way to enforce that. But without mask mandates, I don't doubt cases would be much higher. 

5 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

I find this sentence the most interesting in your response. As you may know, the flu sometimes isn't confined to just the 'flu-season'. Similarly, the common cold can lead to bronchitis or pneumonia in certain individuals, which in turn can lead to them dying. Given the sentence above, would you support year-round mask mandates to slow the spread of the flu and common cold?

True, but flu season is when it is most rampant in communities (why else would they call it flu season?). We have seen that clearly the warm weather did not lead to covid to go away unlike what happens with the flu. It doesn't seem necessary to mandate masks in months where transmission of the cold and flu are rare. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MysteryKnight said:

largely in part, because of parties and gatherings being held where masks are not being worn

How do you know this?

 

1 minute ago, MysteryKnight said:

It doesn't seem necessary to mandate masks in months where transmission of the cold and flu are rare. 

Even though people will die as a consequence of that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

That doesn't sound sufficient to me. Rise in cases in regions with mask mandates while colleges were closed.

You aren't making sense. I don't get how that has anything to do with the rise of cases once school opened (which is when parties started)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hestia11 said:

You aren't making sense. I don't get how that has anything to do with the rise of cases once school opened (which is when parties started)

I'll make it a little more clear.

Mask mandates + no college = rising cases.

So college parties aren't the cause of rising cases in various regions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

I'll make it a little more clear.

Mask mandates + no college = rising cases.

So college parties aren't the cause of rising cases in various regions.

That is just flatly incorrect. Here in Iowa, Iowa City and Ames both rose drastically in the number of cases (upwards of 50% positive rates and hundreds of cases!) and had been relatively quiet all throughout the pandemic til now. 

If you're talking about statewide rising cases because of it, that could be different, but on a local level what you're saying is just plain wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hestia11 said:

That is just flatly incorrect. Here in Iowa, Iowa City and Ames both rose drastically in the number of cases (upwards of 50% positive rates and hundreds of cases!) and had been relatively quiet all throughout the pandemic til now. 

If you're talking about statewide rising cases because of it, that could be different, but on a local level what you're saying is just plain wrong.

Yes, so you're claiming the rise in cases is significantly due to college. That may be so. But there are regions with mask mandates, college isn't in session, and they have rises in rates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

Yes, so you're claiming the rise in cases is significantly due to college. That may be so. But there are regions with mask mandates, college isn't in session, and they have rises in rates.

There can be rises for multiple reasons, but due to college without a mask mandate, the rise was astronomical compared to other areas of the state. Iowa City, with a pop (est- 75k) was having a much higher both number of cases and percentages than Des Moines (pop est -215k). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

Although this is interesting. The claim here seems to be "We need mask mandates!" AND "Mask mandates don't work because of non-compliance!"

That's the obvious problem, yes. The problem is bars weren't enforcing the mask mandate of the city, which allowed students basically to use them as entry passes and then forget about them.

 

Just now, admin_270 said:

OK, you don't even have a mask mandate, so how is this relevant to the argument re mask mandates?

Iowa City and Ames do have mask mandates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hestia11 said:

That's the obvious problem, yes. The problem is bars weren't enforcing the mask mandate of the city, which allowed students basically to use them as entry passes and then forget about them.

 

Iowa City and Ames do have mask mandates.

The state, yes, as a whole does not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

Iowa City *does* have a mask mandate? Then how do these 2 comments fit together?

The state does not have one - so if they literally just go out of city boundaries, they don't have to adhere to it anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hestia11 said:

The state does not have one - so if they literally just go out of city boundaries, they don't have to adhere to it anymore.

Aha! So you're saying they are having get togethers without masks, one way or the other, and this is contributing to a rise in cases. I don't doubt this is true.

But it also doesn't seem to address what I'm saying. I'm not doubting that more get togethers are going to be more likely to spread flu, colds, or COVID-19.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Although this is interesting. The claim here seems to be "We need mask mandates!" AND "Mask mandates don't work because of non-compliance!"

You can't enforce people to wear a mask in their own house, where many parties and gatherings are being held. And you also can't require them to wear one out in restaurants, where a lot of spread also occurs. If you didn't require masks for people going to stores, or any other places indoors or within close proximity with others, then we would see a lot more cases than we do now. That has been evident in several analysis's and studies 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MysteryKnight said:

You can't enforce people to wear a mask in their own house, where many parties and gatherings are being held. And you also can't require them to wear one out in restaurants, where a lot of spread also occurs. If you didn't require masks for people going to stores, or any other places indoors or within close proximity with others, then we would see a lot more cases than we do now. That has been evident in several analysis's and studies 

OK, thanks for this. It sounds to me like you're now claiming masks slow the spread (not that they're sufficient to cause an absolute decrease), and so we're just at a question of 'what's the evidence masks slow the spread and how much?' It's an interesting question - I would be quite happy if robust evidence emerged that they do make a big difference in the right direction.

However, it seems obvious to me that not being able to see someone's face in most social interactions is a significant cost. It's especially important in learning environments with young kids, but in general humans are social animals that require a sense of connection - and masks detract from this. So I start from the premise that mask wearing inflicts an obvious cost on society. The question to me then is what, if any, benefits there are.

For a summary of some of the evidence that suggests masks don't do much to slow the spread, here's a decent thread.

https://twitter.com/yinonw/status/1303793597595090944

 

Link to post
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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...