[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by Bucco

“The change in guidance was driven by the delta variant's higher transmissibility and new evidence from the CDC that in rare cases, fully vaccinated individuals who get infected with the variant can spread the virus just as easily as unvaccinated people.

"This new science is worrisome and unfortunately warrants an update to our recommendations," CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said Tuesday in a news briefing.”

Experts back CDC change on masks as delta variant spreads

“The change was met with relief from experts who said masking up again is essential to combat the highly contagious delta variant.”

How RARE is RARE? I need an answer to that before I start masking up again in indoor public spaces when there is no sign posted or when it is only recommended.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Well, yes, the delta variant has changed the playing field.
However, the person who keeps posting that the vaccinated have HIGHER viral loads than the unvaccinated is plain wrong. The CDC termed the viral loads "indistinguishable" in each group. Not HIGHER. But regardless, that does not prove anything about transmissibility. And it certainly does not address transmissibility from one vaccinated person to another, which IMHO must be quite rare. And that's why making the vaccinated go back to masking is pretty much nonsense. As far as the CDC director goes, she is looking not just at the science, but the politics as well.

So, basically, the vaccinated are being asked to wear masks to protect those who refuse to be vaccinated. If that is what this is all about, I'm NOT on board with this new guidance for everyone to mask up indoors. Anti-vaxxers and hesitant vaxxers be damned and live or die with your own decision to not get the vaccine.

Those people who are unable to get vaccinated or are not eligible for vaccines should be either staying in their homes or wearing N95 masks when out and about. They need to protect themselves. Don't expect vaccinated people protect them forever by mask wearing. Sorry, I'm just not going to do that. I honestly feel I'm already doing a lot of protecting of others just by being vaccinated. That has not changed.

You know I was the mask queen and a proponent of masking BEFORE the advent of these life saving vaccines. My mask stance is changed now.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by coffeebean

Sad to say but it is only going to get worse when everyone will be required to mask up indoors. I still do not buy the fact that vaccinated people can spread this virus at any rate that would prompt the need for them to mask up. What happened to the claim that the viral load in a vaccinated person is not enough to be contagious to others. Has this Delta variant changed all that? I'm so dismayed.

Yes exactly, the viral load IS 1,000 times for the Delta variant versus the 2 prior variants in the US There is also a Columbia variant in South Florida, which I don't know how its viral load measures up? The overall problem IS that the CV situation IS NOT over and is NOT unchanging. It is in FLUX! And we humans have more mental INERTIA than the VIRUS has the ability to MUTATE. We humans need to become more flexible mentally as a society or we may go extinct before the VIRUS is brought under control.

And to prove that I am NOT exaggerating, I hope everyone realizes that we could have eliminated the problem of CV with only 300,000 US deaths if ONLY we believed in SCIENCE. We NEEDED a 95% vaccination rate. We missed that boat to NO masks, more freedom, happiness, and a stronger America.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by coffeebean

So, basically, the vaccinated are being asked to wear masks to protect those who refuse to be vaccinated. If that is what this is all about, I'm NOT on board with this new guidance for everyone to mask up indoors. Anti-vaxxers and hesitant vaxxers be damned and live or die with your own decision to not get the vaccine.

Those people who are unable to get vaccinated or are not eligible for vaccines should be either staying in their homes or wearing N95 masks when out and about. They need to protect themselves. Don't expect vaccinated people protect them forever by mask wearing. Sorry, I'm just not going to do that. I honestly feel I'm already doing a lot of protecting of others just by being vaccinated. That has not changed.

You know I was the mask queen and a proponent of masking BEFORE the advent of these life saving vaccines. My mask stance is changed now.

Unfortunately, that decision is up to the powers to be, and they likely have a political agenda as well as a medical one.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Best guess-----to make wearing a mask enforceable. Clearly, the unvaccinated are not following the recommendation to wear a mask, and can easily hide in a group that is 1/2 masked and 1/2 unmasked. Even at shows here in the Villages, where 7-800 are attending at the Savannah Center, only a dozen or so are masked. While we do have a pretty high percentage of vaccinated persons, I doubt it is 98% so even here the unvaccinated are going without masks. Which I suppose makes sense since anyone who doesn't want the vaccine is unlikely to voluntarily wear a mask if they can get away with it.

If they make a recommendation for all to mask, it makes the persons without a mask obvious. Of course that means that the vaccinated are being unnecessarily "punished" because of the actions of the anti-vaxxers.

Yes, the vaccinated are being "punished" by the UNvaccinated! That could be shouted from the rooftops. And it may be TOO late. The VIRUS never stops. It may be mutating as we speak right here among the UNvaccinated of TV Land into a NEW variant that NO vaccine can stop. Why are we heaping SO MANY burdens on our young children? Clearly, the rewards for taking the vaccine VASTLY outweigh any small risk.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by coffeebean

How RARE is RARE? I need an answer to that before I start masking up again in indoor public spaces when there is no sign posted or when it is only recommended.

I have noticed that Florida sometimes does not follow Science.

[tuccillo]

This is nonsense. Only recently, 12 year and older were eligible for vaccination. Before that, the age cut off was 18 years old. About 25% of the US population is 18 or younger. You used the past tense (needed) - that was never going to happen with about 25% of the population ineligible to take the vaccination.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

We NEEDED a 95% vaccination rate. We missed that boat to NO masks, more freedom, happiness, and a stronger America.

[tuccillo]

I love it when non scientists, such as yourself, talk about science.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I have noticed that Florida sometimes does not follow Science.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Yes, the vaccinated are being "punished" by the UNvaccinated! That could be shouted from the rooftops. And it may be TOO late. The VIRUS never stops. It may be mutating as we speak right here among the UNvaccinated of TV Land into a NEW variant that NO vaccine can stop. Why are we heaping SO MANY burdens on our young children? Clearly, the rewards for taking the vaccine VASTLY outweigh any small risk.

In today’s world, worrying, caring, or planning for any Future takes a back seat to immediate “win” and satisfaction.

We have become a country of “showing everyone how “strong” we are”. The future consequences do not seem to matter.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Unfortunately, that decision is up to the powers to be, and they likely have a political agenda as well as a medical one.

Sad face.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

This is nonsense. Only recently, 12 year and older were eligible for vaccination. Before that, the age cut off was 18 years old. About 25% of the US population is 18 or younger. You used the past tense (needed) - that was never going to happen with about 25% of the population ineligible to take the vaccination.

"Recently" is subjective. The age minimum was changed on May 12. Parents have had well over two months to get their teenage kids vaccinated. In cities and suburbs, there's really no excuse not to. In rural areas there might be more difficulty getting TO a vaccine site, since there's no pharmacy just down the street. But then, in rural areas, there are fewer people. The vast majority of the American population resides in cities and suburbs. And THOSE folks have easy access to vaccines.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by coffeebean

Sad face.

You folks keep speaking to the subject that we are not to speak of, but remember......the Federal government can do nothing except wit those governed directly by federal, airports, etc. this they have done, and word is will step up further by requiring vaccines at federal level.

The goal on vaccinations was to be July 4, 24 days ago, and not sure what else they are to do.

Already many states have said there will be no cooperation, and on the federal level, suits are already in the mill.

While the anti government folks simply complain loudly and are pretty solid in stating their objection to anything that might contribute to slowing or stopping......

The only folks left to blame are the unvaccinated.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Bucco

You folks keep speaking to the subject that we are not to speak of, but remember......the Federal government can do nothing except wit those governed directly by federal, airports, etc. this they have done, and word is will step up further by requiring vaccines at federal level.

The goal on vaccinations was to be July 4, 24 days ago, and not sure what else they are to do.

Already many states have said there will be no cooperation, and on the federal level, suits are already in the mill.

While the anti government folks simply complain loudly and are pretty solid in stating their objection to anything that might contribute to slowing or stopping......

The only folks left to blame are the unvaccinated.

True

[tuccillo]

Try to stay on point. I was referring to the comment that we needed to be at 95% vaccinated. I have no idea what time frame he was referring to with the word "needed". As I already pointed out, that was not a possibility, regardless of the timeframe. May was 2 months ago - certainly within the timeframe of "needed" ??? Those under 12 are still not eligible and make up about 14% of the population. The poster I was responding to regularly states all kinds of nonsense. Got it now?

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

"Recently" is subjective. The age minimum was changed on May 12. Parents have had well over two months to get their teenage kids vaccinated. In cities and suburbs, there's really no excuse not to. In rural areas there might be more difficulty getting TO a vaccine site, since there's no pharmacy just down the street. But then, in rural areas, there are fewer people. The vast majority of the American population resides in cities and suburbs. And THOSE folks have easy access to vaccines.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

Try to stay on point. I was referring to the comment that we needed to be at 95% vaccinated. I have no idea what time frame he was referring to with the word "needed". As I already pointed out, that was not a possibility, regardless of the timeframe. May was 2 months ago - certainly within the timeframe of "needed" ??? Those under 12 are still not eligible and make up about 14% of the population. The poster I was responding to regular states all kinds of nonsense. Got it now?

Can you provide a link for that 95% number? I believe that was the requirement for Measles, it is an extremely contagious disease. I have not heard a percentage for COVID-19 yet. I think the numbers are still being crunched. If you have a source, I would seriously be interested in it.