The reason why CDC is allowing the vaccinated to stop wearing masks indoors, I'd guess, is based on several things:
1. To give people an incentive to be vaccinated--getting those vaccines into arms seems to be a huge priority for some reason, as cases and deaths are falling off a cliff and therefore the benefit to be gained from vaccination also nosedives.
2. As I have said for a year, the masks do not work (most of them) against aerosol spread. So it makes sense, now that CDC has admitted aerosol spread exists, that indoor masks are coming off, since they did not protect people anyway.
3. Masks are a compliance manuever, a way to demonstrate one goes along with (i.m.o. illogical) edicts. Did CDC find fewer and fewer people were wearing them, and decided to get in front of the trend, before we noticed?
4. There have to be ways to punish the unvaccinated, and this is one.
5. Seems like CDC is not going to impose or finance improved ventilation systems in buildings, although everything else seems to be paid for with federal revenue.
6. It is of great interest that so many are frightened to take the mask off. Why would they think a polyester or cotton mask protects against aerosolized virus?
This phenomenon harkens back to an age old habit. For example, wearing a talisman, such as an amulet used to ward off an evil eye curse. A Saint Christopher's medal. Rosary beads, in some cultures. A rabbit's foot. Tiny metal casts of Thai Buddhist monks are often the substitute for collision insurance in Thai taxis.
Trust the science? We may think we are highly sophisticated, scientific and logical, but scratch the surface and you'll find we remain just as superstitious as our ancestors. We need to believe in a force greater than ourselves, and science seems to have replaced religion for many.
The pity is, science has no 10 Commandments, no rules of good behavior. And the priests of Scientism who have been trashing real science to gain greater power and control over the world, no longer fear the Afterlife. It's a problem.
Case and death numbers were falling off a cliff long before vaccines could have made an impact, but all the credit goes to the vaccines. So much for data-driven anything these days.
ReplyDeleteI predict a new tactic: If the public needs to be controlled in the future for any reason, tests for the next death virus with high cycle thresholds will be deployed; the media complex will swing into high gear to scare the sheep; all movement will be restricted; and a new set of vaccines will be mandated.
Remember, never let a good crisis go to waste.
To give people an incentive to be vaccinated-
ReplyDeleteGreat to see you write this. I agree. It is part of the reason. NYtimes article mentions "OK for no masks in bars, but not on airplanes." as inexplicable.
What about all the institutions requiring VAX. Our local college, airlines for employees... Where does this legally stand now in your opinion?
Apple stores for endless software updates as an example with many other businesses require temperature checks, social distancing, masks, appointments, in much less busy stores and malls, including in states that changed some requirements unrelated to cases without much of any coherent reasons for either before and after some changes. Damn strange in places with everyone spread out as far as layout allows with long lasting lingering effects. If seated in places seatings are typically damn far apart often hundreds of feet in places if space allows. Thus, interactions that may of spontaneously popped up with connections of all sorts reduced to near nothing everywhere including in public parks, beaches, even libraries and any assortment of recreation or places under probability of death larger then 0, no matter how low until 0 or practically near 0 probability and possibility continues with much or some sorts of this?
ReplyDeleteYes, they are using this new policy as a wedge strategy, to pit the "vaccinated" against those who decline. The state of Oregon has announced, for example, new mandates that allow businesses to permit non-mask wearers to enter their premises -- as long as the business verifies the customers' vaccination status. This is getting more and more evil all the time. Yet no one is asking out loud, by what authority can these mandates continue to be imposed, while the health "emergency" is vanishing? I predict the next step in "their" game plan will be to allow a brief taste of normalcy -- then some new and even-more-dangerous "variant" will suddenly be discovered to mandate yet more vaccines, harsher terms of compliance, and ever-diminishing liberties.
ReplyDeleteHopefully, this means the Great Resetters are giving up? Or more likely, there just trying to peer-pressure more people into getting the shot and encourage the passage of vaccine passports in order to enforce this.
ReplyDeleteJust got the following notice when I went to open this site on Firefox:
ReplyDelete***
Deceptive site ahead
Firefox blocked this page because it may trick you into doing something dangerous like installing software or revealing personal information like passwords or credit cards.
Advisory provided by Google Safe Browsing.
***
Please advise on how we can lobby Google to remove this deceptive block.
Well Meryl, they have stepped up the war on info I guess. Just tried to go to your site and got a warning from my browser that it is deceptive and dangerous - same warning across different browsers and search engines. I didn’t get it with Safari for some reason (using Google) but all others including Firefox and Duck Duck Go.
ReplyDeleteI believe there’s a way that you can download your whole blogspot on the off-chance you don’t have backups of your work - it is very valuable.
Odd, but Google Chrome had no such notice just now. (Neither did Safari.) I clicked on the "go to it anyway" (or words to that effect) link in the original notice on Firefox and was able to open the blog. Coming back to it afresh just now, there is no longer any notice on Firefox (hence my need to paraphrase the link text). Perhaps that's just on my account, as I'd clicked on the "go to it anyway" link earlier??
ReplyDeleteRegardless, it's disturbing that someone has flagged this blog as "deceptive." Ironic, too, as it's where I go for the most frank and factual information I can find on this pandemic.
Firefox / Qwant - No issues
ReplyDeleteCorroborating Dr. Chris King's experience, I use the Chrome browser on a Chromebook machine. I've yet to see any "notices" associated with Dr. Nass's blog site.
ReplyDeleteIt is troubling nonetheless. I view her site daily and try to digest her commentary. It offers the most candid and honest information on this disease and its treatment. A refreshing change from the endless drivel we get from mainstream TV and print media. Thank you Dr. Nass. for injecting some reason and critical thinking into our national discourse or should I say, lack of it.
We're supposed to have three layers of protection when it comes to ethics. The Helsinki declaration, The Nuremberg laws and the Hippocratic oath. None of these are actually working right now. Dr. Redfield was pointing something out in his last interview. "There is more than one way to prove something." What was he hinting at. We have treatment and it's called Ivermectin.
ReplyDelete