A COVID discussion

[Mad Kudu Buck]

I can't believe I'm living in a time where pathetic cloth masks are forced on the population - masks which do NOT stop the virus, coming or going. Don't people realize that viruses are many times smaller than the pores in the cloth and also escape around the cloth when breathing or talking??

It feels like I've awoken from a coma to a world that has been invaded by hostile aliens, intent on destroying mankind - and nobody seems to notice or care.

Aside from that, nice image of Higgins.

[Pahonu]

I can't believe I'm living in a time where pathetic cloth masks are forced on the population - masks which do NOT stop the virus, coming or going. Don't people realize that viruses are many times smaller than the pores in the cloth and also escape around the cloth when breathing or talking??

It feels like I've awoken from a coma to a world that has been invaded by hostile aliens, intent on destroying mankind - and nobody seems to notice or care.

Aside from that, nice image of Higgins.

Sorry, but I’m going to disagree. Your point about virus size, which is accurate, is only one variable of many involved. There are basically two methods of responding to viral pandemics, pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical. The pharmaceutical obviously includes vaccines, but also any therapeutics that are developed, but those are post-infection. The non-pharmaceutical includes a list of things including quarantining, social distancing, hand washing, and mask wearing.

There are numerous studies showing that each of these, and especially a combination of these, do slow virus transmission. I can provide NIH and CDC links if you’re interested. None of them stop virus transmission completely, but then vaccinations don’t stop transmission completely either, though they are much more effective. The reason for this is largely due to the reduction of viral load transmission when using these methods. It is very possible to be exposed to Covid and test positive, yet not develop symptoms because the viral load was low and the immune system response was adequate. This may be, for example, because the exposure distance was further, or a mask lowered viral load.

It is important to not through out the good while searching for the perfect. Non-pharmaceutical methods absolutely do lower transmission rates. The more of them used, the better. They’re certainly not as effective as a vaccine, but until that vaccination program is complete, the number of covid cases and particularly of severe cases can be lowered. It’s just not as simple as virus size alone.

[Luther's nephew Dobie]

I can't believe I'm living in a time where pathetic cloth masks are forced on the population - masks which do NOT stop the virus, coming or going. Don't people realize that viruses are many times smaller than the pores in the cloth and also escape around the cloth when breathing or talking??

It feels like I've awoken from a coma to a world that has been invaded by hostile aliens, intent on destroying mankind - and nobody seems to notice or care.

Aside from that, nice image of Higgins.

Sorry, but I’m going to disagree. Your point about virus size, which is accurate, is only one variable of many involved. There are basically two methods of responding to viral pandemics, pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical. The pharmaceutical obviously includes vaccines, but also any therapeutics that are developed, but those are post-infection. The non-pharmaceutical includes a list of things including quarantining, social distancing, hand washing, and mask wearing.

There are numerous studies showing that each of these, and especially a combination of these, do slow virus transmission. I can provide NIH and CDC links if you’re interested. None of them stop virus transmission completely, but then vaccinations don’t stop transmission completely either, though they are much more effective. The reason for this is largely due to the reduction of viral load transmission when using these methods. It is very possible to be exposed to Covid and test positive, yet not develop symptoms because the viral load was low and the immune system response was adequate. This may be, for example, because the exposure distance was further, or a mask lowered viral load.

It is important to not through out the good while searching for the perfect. Non-pharmaceutical methods absolutely do lower transmission rates. The more of them used, the better. They’re certainly not as effective as a vaccine, but until that vaccination program is complete, the number of covid cases and particularly of severe cases can be lowered. It’s just not as simple as virus size alone.

Pahonu,
Well said. You were respectfully informative without being dismissive, a gent. Now please everyone, lets not go down the rabbit hole of involving politics on the Magnum Mania Boards.
Because many people merely parrot what they hear on their preferred channel, without their own base of knowledge, helpless to know when they are being conned by operators who would
never ever break bread with them in real life.
Ancient Jersey Wisdom: "If you can't figure out who the mark is at the poker table - or in Life - it's you."
If someone is a Magnum fan, that's good enough for me to indicate they have good taste and are welcome to contribute their insights on the show and associated subjects. But please,
let's all leave our political opinions at the door.

[Pahonu]

I can't believe I'm living in a time where pathetic cloth masks are forced on the population - masks which do NOT stop the virus, coming or going. Don't people realize that viruses are many times smaller than the pores in the cloth and also escape around the cloth when breathing or talking??

It feels like I've awoken from a coma to a world that has been invaded by hostile aliens, intent on destroying mankind - and nobody seems to notice or care.

Aside from that, nice image of Higgins.

Sorry, but I’m going to disagree. Your point about virus size, which is accurate, is only one variable of many involved. There are basically two methods of responding to viral pandemics, pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical. The pharmaceutical obviously includes vaccines, but also any therapeutics that are developed, but those are post-infection. The non-pharmaceutical includes a list of things including quarantining, social distancing, hand washing, and mask wearing.

There are numerous studies showing that each of these, and especially a combination of these, do slow virus transmission. I can provide NIH and CDC links if you’re interested. None of them stop virus transmission completely, but then vaccinations don’t stop transmission completely either, though they are much more effective. The reason for this is largely due to the reduction of viral load transmission when using these methods. It is very possible to be exposed to Covid and test positive, yet not develop symptoms because the viral load was low and the immune system response was adequate. This may be, for example, because the exposure distance was further, or a mask lowered viral load.

It is important to not through out the good while searching for the perfect. Non-pharmaceutical methods absolutely do lower transmission rates. The more of them used, the better. They’re certainly not as effective as a vaccine, but until that vaccination program is complete, the number of covid cases and particularly of severe cases can be lowered. It’s just not as simple as virus size alone.

Pahonu,
Well said. You were respectfully informative without being dismissive, a gent. Now please everyone, lets not go down the rabbit hole of involving politics on the Magnum Mania Boards.
Because many people merely parrot what they hear on their preferred channel, without their own base of knowledge, helpless to know when they are being conned by operators who would
never ever break bread with them in real life.
Ancient Jersey Wisdom: "If you can't figure out who the mark is at the poker table - or in Life - it's you."
If someone is a Magnum fan, that's good enough for me to indicate they have good taste and are welcome to contribute their insights on the show and associated subjects. But please,
let's all leave our political opinions at the door.

Hey Dobie, thanks for your compliment. I try to be respectful always as I believe that argument is good as opposed to fighting and invective. I also understand this isn’t a political forum, but I would point out that if you go back through my posts of this kind, they are responses to other’s comments. I rarely initiate political discussions in my daily life either, but I am always up for a lively debate if it’s an area I know well, political or not.

I strongly believe that each is entitled to there own point of view, but if they choose to express them publicly then they should be prepared to defend them as well. If I’m being completely honest, I believe that the individual who expresses a controversial view and then wants the discussion to end there is the one being disrespectful, treating their view as more important than others. I’m not accusing anyone here of doing that, but it is not uncommon behavior on forums. I also believe that, unfortunately, very often it is the person who responds to a controversial or sensitive topic who is viewed as being argumentative. Yes it takes two to argue, but it only takes one to bring up a controversial topic.

That said, your ancient Jersey wisdom is also a line used by Jim in The Rockford Files, my favorite show of all time.

[Luther's nephew Dobie]

I can't believe I'm living in a time where pathetic cloth masks are forced on the population - masks which do NOT stop the virus, coming or going. Don't people realize that viruses are many times smaller than the pores in the cloth and also escape around the cloth when breathing or talking??

It feels like I've awoken from a coma to a world that has been invaded by hostile aliens, intent on destroying mankind - and nobody seems to notice or care.

Aside from that, nice image of Higgins.

Sorry, but I’m going to disagree. Your point about virus size, which is accurate, is only one variable of many involved. There are basically two methods of responding to viral pandemics, pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical. The pharmaceutical obviously includes vaccines, but also any therapeutics that are developed, but those are post-infection. The non-pharmaceutical includes a list of things including quarantining, social distancing, hand washing, and mask wearing.

There are numerous studies showing that each of these, and especially a combination of these, do slow virus transmission. I can provide NIH and CDC links if you’re interested. None of them stop virus transmission completely, but then vaccinations don’t stop transmission completely either, though they are much more effective. The reason for this is largely due to the reduction of viral load transmission when using these methods. It is very possible to be exposed to Covid and test positive, yet not develop symptoms because the viral load was low and the immune system response was adequate. This may be, for example, because the exposure distance was further, or a mask lowered viral load.

It is important to not through out the good while searching for the perfect. Non-pharmaceutical methods absolutely do lower transmission rates. The more of them used, the better. They’re certainly not as effective as a vaccine, but until that vaccination program is complete, the number of covid cases and particularly of severe cases can be lowered. It’s just not as simple as virus size alone.

Pahonu,
Well said. You were respectfully informative without being dismissive, a gent. Now please everyone, lets not go down the rabbit hole of involving politics on the Magnum Mania Boards.
Because many people merely parrot what they hear on their preferred channel, without their own base of knowledge, helpless to know when they are being conned by operators who would
never ever break bread with them in real life.
Ancient Jersey Wisdom: "If you can't figure out who the mark is at the poker table - or in Life - it's you."
If someone is a Magnum fan, that's good enough for me to indicate they have good taste and are welcome to contribute their insights on the show and associated subjects. But please,
let's all leave our political opinions at the door.

Hey Dobie, thanks for your compliment. I try to be respectful always as I believe that argument is good as opposed to fighting and invective. I also understand this isn’t a political forum, but I would point out that if you go back through my posts of this kind, they are responses to other’s comments. I rarely initiate political discussions in my daily life either, but I am always up for a lively debate if it’s an area I know well, political or not.
I strongly believe that each is entitled to there own point of view, but if they choose to express them publicly then they should be prepared to defend them as well. If I’m being completely honest, I believe that the individual who expresses a controversial view and then wants the discussion to end there is the one being disrespectful, treating their view as more important than others. I’m not accusing anyone here of doing that, but it is not uncommon behavior on forums. I also believe that, unfortunately, very often it is the person who responds to a controversial or sensitive topic who is viewed as being argumentative. Yes it takes two to argue, but it only takes one to bring up a controversial topic.
That said, your ancient Jersey wisdom is also a line used by Jim in The Rockford Files, my favorite show of all time.

Pahonu,
I wasn't in any way citing you as stirring the possum, rather you corrected some inaccurate information that politicalized science, which is always good. I was hoping to nip in the bud any
back and forth that these days quickly degrades into nastiness. I hold Magnum Mania in very high regard - thank you Conch - and don't want to see a civil(or uncivil) war here.
One of the best Lions Club - "We Serve" the Blind - in NJ, in my district, invited a pol to give a talk, and he gave the Lions, a service club, a highly partisan lecture. Other Lions then invited to the
next meeting another political hack from the other party and in no time a club devoted to charity and fellowship, that from just one of their fund raisers(car raffle) raked in over 30 grand a year,
was destroyed.
You would be surprised how many people fall thru the cracks and can't afford eyeglasses, your local Lions - many cases referred thru town welfare offices - step in and pay for them or prevail
upon the store/eye doctor to donate part or all of their services. Every year a big Lions caravan of trucks teeming with used/donated glasses would drive down from Texas thru Central America
distributing glasses to the needy, many then seeing clearly for the first time in their lives.
Oops, sorry for the commercial.
By the way the guy behind The Sopranos and it's upcoming movie The Many Saints of Newark, David Chase, made his bones on The Rockford Files. He wrote 2 episodes that were the genesis
for The Sopranos, so no surprise he was hep to the that aforementioned "Jersey wisdom." And yes a buddy "forced" me into going to the real life Badda Bing Club. But that's another story.

[Mad Kudu Buck]

Pahonu,
I wasn't in any way citing you as stirring the possum, rather you corrected some inaccurate information that politicalized science, which is always good. I was hoping to nip in the bud any
back and forth that these days quickly degrades into nastiness. I hold Magnum Mania in very high regard - thank you Conch - and don't want to see a civil(or uncivil) war here.

What? What is this? Who said anything political? Are mask discussions political in the US? (I don't follow US media, so I wouldn't know)

I had no intention of any nastiness to Pahonu. Why would I? He's a fine fellow.

I made a very brief comment on the mask image, then moved on, not intending to discuss it further because the topic of this thread is John Hillerman.

I read Pahonu's logical, well-written argument, accepted his point of view and was going to leave it there.

I strongly believe that each is entitled to there own point of view, but if they choose to express them publicly then they should be prepared to defend them as well. If I’m being completely honest, I believe that the individual who expresses a controversial view and then wants the discussion to end there is the one being disrespectful, treating their view as more important than others.

Oh great. Now I have to continue this so I'm not being disrespectful.

I probably would agree with some of your points on masks if it wasn't for 2 things:

1. Excess cloth mask use can increase the chance of bacterial pneumonia and stress your system from excess carbon dioxide, weakening your immune system, thereby making it easier to get things like Covid

2. If masks are going to be mandated, the masks used should follow strict medical guidelines for proven blockage of viruses - not just be a random bit of fashion cloth. These masks should be freely available. Yes, this could be expensive. I suggest a micro-tax on high-volume stock trading. (Even better: nationalize the privately-owned Federal Reserve. Then there would be plenty of money for everything! ...and I would suggest all countries around the world simultaneously nationalize their privately-owned central banks. That will get us out of Covid - damn quick!*)


(*this is not intended to start an endless discussion on central banks. This is the Higgins thread, after all. )

[ENSHealy]

I hereby officially regret posting the mask pic.

[Pahonu]

Pahonu,
I wasn't in any way citing you as stirring the possum, rather you corrected some inaccurate information that politicalized science, which is always good. I was hoping to nip in the bud any
back and forth that these days quickly degrades into nastiness. I hold Magnum Mania in very high regard - thank you Conch - and don't want to see a civil(or uncivil) war here.

What? What is this? Who said anything political? Are mask discussions political in the US? (I don't follow US media, so I wouldn't know)

I had no intention of any nastiness to Pahonu. Why would I? He's a fine fellow.

I made a very brief comment on the mask image, then moved on, not intending to discuss it further because the topic of this thread is John Hillerman.

I read Pahonu's logical, well-written argument, accepted his point of view and was going to leave it there.

I strongly believe that each is entitled to there own point of view, but if they choose to express them publicly then they should be prepared to defend them as well. If I’m being completely honest, I believe that the individual who expresses a controversial view and then wants the discussion to end there is the one being disrespectful, treating their view as more important than others.

Oh great. Now I have to continue this so I'm not being disrespectful.

I probably would agree with some of your points on masks if it wasn't for 2 things:

1. Excess cloth mask use can increase the chance of bacterial pneumonia and stress your system from excess carbon dioxide, weakening your immune system, thereby making it easier to get things like Covid

2. If masks are going to be mandated, the masks used should follow strict medical guidelines for proven blockage of viruses - not just be a random bit of fashion cloth. These masks should be freely available. Yes, this could be expensive. I suggest a micro-tax on high-volume stock trading. (Even better: nationalize the privately-owned Federal Reserve. Then there would be plenty of money for everything! ...and I would suggest all countries around the world simultaneously nationalize their privately-owned central banks. That will get us out of Covid - damn quick!*)


(*this is not intended to start an endless discussion on central banks. This is the Higgins thread, after all. )

Hey Mad Kudu Buck, I enjoy our conversations also and meant no disrespect. I also wasn’t referring to you in terms of making a comment and wanting to shut of the discussion thereafter. I have experienced that many times elsewhere and it is frustrating in terms of debate fairness. Sorry if you felt compelled to respond because of that.

In this case, I was addressing the science of the issue, and you are unfortunately correct in one respect, wearing masks has become very politicized in the US. Regarding your second point, I absolutely agree that the type of mask is definitely an important variable, as is wearing it properly. More guidelines on mask construction would seem to be effective.

I’ve seen no studies regarding your first point about bacterial pneumonia so I can’t speak directly to those details, but cleaning cloth masks regularly is a part of the recommendations and could be addressing that issue. I am very curious about the premise that wearing a mask increases Covid susceptibility from excess carbon dioxide. It seem to me that healthcare workers who spend significant portions of their working day masked and in contact with the virus would be putting themselves at greater risk by masking. The logic doesn’t seem to hold?

Don’t feel you have to respond but I am curious about any studies about CO2 and Covid.

[☨magnum.t]

I am always weary of "studies" and "trials". With something this new and not having any prior data researching it more than say a year any information being put out can't be taken as gospel, in my opinion. I am a front line worker at a Veterans Affairs Hospital, I can say from personal experience here we are required to wear masks at all times unless confined to a solitary office. I also know for a fact how many providers and nurses have contracted the virus since the mask mandate and the number is surprisingly high. About 8 out of every 10. As stated before the masks purpose is not to prevent you from breathing the virus in but to limit how far the particles travel from an infected persons face. I believe in personal liberties and am against a mask mandate in the public but I also realize this is just like my opinion man. I am required to get a Flu shot working at a hospital so I'm used to being told what to do when it comes to my health so I don't fuss too much.

[Pahonu]

I am always weary of "studies" and "trials". With something this new and not having any prior data researching it more than say a year any information being put out can't be taken as gospel, in my opinion. I am a front line worker at a Veterans Affairs Hospital, I can say from personal experience here we are required to wear masks at all times unless confined to a solitary office. I also know for a fact how many providers and nurses have contracted the virus since the mask mandate and the number is surprisingly high. About 8 out of every 10. As stated before the masks purpose is not to prevent you from breathing the virus in but to limit how far the particles travel from an infected persons face. I believe in personal liberties and am against a mask mandate in the public but I also realize this is just like my opinion man. I am required to get a Flu shot working at a hospital so I'm used to being told what to do when it comes to my health so I don't fuss too much.

It’s not only your opinion that a single study or trial shouldn’t be taken as gospel, it scientifically should not be. Repeatable and verifiable studies should be the goal. Unfortunately, many people do this. Scientific knowledge is advanced by accumulating a body of knowledge. It drives my wife nuts, as a human anatomy and physiology teacher, that every new study, about diet for example, is reported on as if it’s the definitive answer. Each study is a piece of the puzzle to more fully understanding what are typically very complex concepts.

[MagnumsLeftShoulder]

Are mask discussions political in the US? (I don't follow US media, so I wouldn't know)

You'd be hard pressed to to find anything that's not political in the US right now.

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

The mask wearing becomes political when the federal government begins to mandate that people wear them, no questions asked. The thing is the U.S. is very big on this thing called "individual rights" and "liberties". Or at least has been for the longest time, since its inception. Lately it's been slowly stripped away from people. So people who value and cherish these things tend to get their feathers ruffled when the government begins to issue these mandates for "our own good". Because of course we don't know any better. I personally was sick with COVID this past December. Coughed, sneezed, had headaches, lost taste and smell - tested positive. I went through the usual quarantine period and everything returned back to normal. No idea where I got it from though. I wore masks when in public because we HAVE to. Still, I got it somehow. Go figure. Mask didn't seem to do me any good.

Bottom line is the government tells us to wear them and we do, no questions asked. But why? We had the Swine flu, we had the Spanish flu, other pandemics - no one was required to wear masks. Thousands of lives were lost as recently as 2009 but we barely heard anything about it. No one was wearing masks that's for sure. Now, put on your mask or else. What happened to individual liberties? Don't we have choices about how to live our lives?

But imagine this scenario. Tomorrow you wake up in the morning and the government tells you that mask-wearing will now be mandatory forever. It's in your future, your kids' future, their kids' future. Now, I'm sure some folks will be "good little soldiers" and won't question or oppose this, falling in line because it's for "our own good". But there is NO WAY I'm ok with this! Seriously? So I lived half my life without a mask on my face but now you're telling me that for the rest of my life I have to have this thing on my face???? It's the new normal?? I DON'T THINK SO!!!! I'll take my chances with the virus, thank you very much. I don't think this is acceptable and I would imagine most rational people would agree with this. We and our ancestors went through who knows what terrible pandemics over past centuries (and millions died too) but somehow we didn't hide our pretty faces from anyone. It's human nature to expose your mouth and nose and not hide them behind a piece of cloth, restricting your breathing. Imagine future generations of family photos, everyone in face masks. It's not even funny. I find the idea pretty frightening. But believe it or not, such a thing could happen. All it takes is the government handing out these "mandates" and folks falling in line like sheep without questioning or thinking rationally what the implications are for future generations.

Bottom line is WE THE PEOPLE should make our own decisions about these things. That's what separates us from Soviet Russia where Ivan keeps prisoners in bamboo cages and shoots them in legs for stepping out of line.

Mandates? We ain't got no mandates! We don't need no mandates! We don't need no stinking mandates!

[Pahonu]

The mask wearing becomes political when the federal government begins to mandate that people wear them, no questions asked. The thing is the U.S. is very big on this thing called "individual rights" and "liberties". Or at least has been for the longest time, since its inception. Lately it's been slowly stripped away from people. So people who value and cherish these things tend to get their feathers ruffled when the government begins to issue these mandates for "our own good". Because of course we don't know any better. I personally was sick with COVID this past December. Coughed, sneezed, had headaches, lost taste and smell - tested positive. I went through the usual quarantine period and everything returned back to normal. No idea where I got it from though. I wore masks when in public because we HAVE to. Still, I got it somehow. Go figure. Mask didn't seem to do me any good.

Bottom line is the government tells us to wear them and we do, no questions asked. But why? We had the Swine flu, we had the Spanish flu, other pandemics - no one was required to wear masks. Thousands of lives were lost as recently as 2009 but we barely heard anything about it. No one was wearing masks that's for sure. Now, put on your mask or else. What happened to individual liberties? Don't we have choices about how to live our lives?

But imagine this scenario. Tomorrow you wake up in the morning and the government tells you that mask-wearing will now be mandatory forever. It's in your future, your kids' future, their kids' future. Now, I'm sure some folks will be "good little soldiers" and won't question or oppose this, falling in line because it's for "our own good". But there is NO WAY I'm ok with this! Seriously? So I lived half my life without a mask on my face but now you're telling me that for the rest of my life I have to have this thing on my face???? It's the new normal?? I DON'T THINK SO!!!! I'll take my chances with the virus, thank you very much. I don't think this is acceptable and I would imagine most rational people would agree with this. We and our ancestors went through who knows what terrible pandemics over past centuries (and millions died too) but somehow we didn't hide our pretty faces from anyone. It's human nature to expose your mouth and nose and not hide them behind a piece of cloth, restricting your breathing. Imagine future generations of family photos, everyone in face masks. It's not even funny. I find the idea pretty frightening. But believe it or not, such a thing could happen. All it takes is the government handing out these "mandates" and folks falling in line like sheep without questioning or thinking rationally what the implications are for future generations.

Bottom line is WE THE PEOPLE should make our own decisions about these things. That's what separates us from Soviet Russia where Ivan keeps prisoners in bamboo cages and shoots them in legs for stepping out of line.

Mandates? We ain't got no mandates! We don't need no mandates! We don't need no stinking mandates!

Hey Ivan, I think we’re going to disagree a lot based on your arguments. I will also say that if you don’t want to debate the topic with me, you certainly have that choice. I understand, but I enjoy reading and analyzing arguments such as the paragraphs you wrote above.

I’ll start by saying that there are an incredible number of things we Americans with all of our liberties routinely concede to as part of living in our society. I’m thinking of laws about wearing seatbelts, a minimum drinking age above adulthood, helmet laws in various states, public smoking laws, vaccinating children to enroll in public schools, etc... In each of these cases the public good has been prioritized ahead of individual rights and those laws have been created by elected officials selected by WE THE PEOPLE. The constitution established a republic, NOT a direct democracy. If enough people don’t agree with the law then they will vote out the lawmakers.

No individual rights are absolute and those who think they are have oversimplified things. You may not agree with every law, and neither do I, but they were created under our federal republic’s system. In the end we all have a choice to follow the laws or not. State police aren’t physically forcing compliance as happens in totalitarian systems like Soviet Russia. We have a choice, but certain choices may carry a consequence. If you don’t wear your seatbelt you can be ticketed. If you don’t vaccinate your child, you’ll need to find a non-public school that accepts that or home school them. If you don’t wear a mask currently you may not be allowed inside someone’s business. Those who complain that their rights are being taken away are in reality complaining about having the right to behave in any way they want, but without consequence. That doesn’t exist in any society. Someone’s personal rights only extend until they infringe on someone else’s rights. If someone can’t play nice with others in the sandbox, they may be asked to go play somewhere else by themselves.

Lastly, I would argue that many more Americans have rights today than in decades past or at our nation’s founding. The argument that we as a nation have fewer rights today than in the past neglects some pretty basic facts like half the population, women, have voting rights now, or Native Americans have full citizenship now, or that male voting rights don’t require the ownership of land or that enslavement is unconstitutional now. The only amendment to our constitution that has limited individual rights is Prohibition, the majority of the rest, since the Bill of Rights have expanded our rights, not limited them. Laws that violate those amendments can be struck down by the court. The courts have ruled repeatedly over the decades regarding public health versus individual rights and have squarely sided with the public welfare.

[waverly2211]

The mask wearing becomes political when the federal government begins to mandate that people wear them, no questions asked. The thing is the U.S. is very big on this thing called "individual rights" and "liberties". Or at least has been for the longest time, since its inception. Lately it's been slowly stripped away from people. So people who value and cherish these things tend to get their feathers ruffled when the government begins to issue these mandates for "our own good". Because of course we don't know any better. I personally was sick with COVID this past December. Coughed, sneezed, had headaches, lost taste and smell - tested positive. I went through the usual quarantine period and everything returned back to normal. No idea where I got it from though. I wore masks when in public because we HAVE to. Still, I got it somehow. Go figure. Mask didn't seem to do me any good.

Bottom line is the government tells us to wear them and we do, no questions asked. But why? We had the Swine flu, we had the Spanish flu, other pandemics - no one was required to wear masks. Thousands of lives were lost as recently as 2009 but we barely heard anything about it. No one was wearing masks that's for sure. Now, put on your mask or else. What happened to individual liberties? Don't we have choices about how to live our lives?

But imagine this scenario. Tomorrow you wake up in the morning and the government tells you that mask-wearing will now be mandatory forever. It's in your future, your kids' future, their kids' future. Now, I'm sure some folks will be "good little soldiers" and won't question or oppose this, falling in line because it's for "our own good". But there is NO WAY I'm ok with this! Seriously? So I lived half my life without a mask on my face but now you're telling me that for the rest of my life I have to have this thing on my face???? It's the new normal?? I DON'T THINK SO!!!! I'll take my chances with the virus, thank you very much. I don't think this is acceptable and I would imagine most rational people would agree with this. We and our ancestors went through who knows what terrible pandemics over past centuries (and millions died too) but somehow we didn't hide our pretty faces from anyone. It's human nature to expose your mouth and nose and not hide them behind a piece of cloth, restricting your breathing. Imagine future generations of family photos, everyone in face masks. It's not even funny. I find the idea pretty frightening. But believe it or not, such a thing could happen. All it takes is the government handing out these "mandates" and folks falling in line like sheep without questioning or thinking rationally what the implications are for future generations.

Bottom line is WE THE PEOPLE should make our own decisions about these things. That's what separates us from Soviet Russia where Ivan keeps prisoners in bamboo cages and shoots them in legs for stepping out of line.

Mandates? We ain't got no mandates! We don't need no mandates! We don't need no stinking mandates!

The influenza pandemic of 1918 and 1919 was the most deadly flu outbreak in history, killing up to 50 million people worldwide. In the United States, where it ultimately killed around 675,000 people, local governments rolled out initiatives to try to stop its spread. These varied by region, and included closing schools and places of public amusement, enforcing “no-spitting” ordinances, encouraging people to use handkerchiefs or disposable tissues and requiring people to wear masks in public.

Mask-wearing ordinances mainly popped up in the western states, and it appears most people complied with them. The nation was still fighting in World War I, and officials framed anti-flu measures as a way to protect the troops from the deadly outbreak.

Full Article
https://www.history.com/news/1918-spani ... resistance

[Pahonu]

The mask wearing becomes political when the federal government begins to mandate that people wear them, no questions asked. The thing is the U.S. is very big on this thing called "individual rights" and "liberties". Or at least has been for the longest time, since its inception. Lately it's been slowly stripped away from people. So people who value and cherish these things tend to get their feathers ruffled when the government begins to issue these mandates for "our own good". Because of course we don't know any better. I personally was sick with COVID this past December. Coughed, sneezed, had headaches, lost taste and smell - tested positive. I went through the usual quarantine period and everything returned back to normal. No idea where I got it from though. I wore masks when in public because we HAVE to. Still, I got it somehow. Go figure. Mask didn't seem to do me any good.

Bottom line is the government tells us to wear them and we do, no questions asked. But why? We had the Swine flu, we had the Spanish flu, other pandemics - no one was required to wear masks. Thousands of lives were lost as recently as 2009 but we barely heard anything about it. No one was wearing masks that's for sure. Now, put on your mask or else. What happened to individual liberties? Don't we have choices about how to live our lives?

But imagine this scenario. Tomorrow you wake up in the morning and the government tells you that mask-wearing will now be mandatory forever. It's in your future, your kids' future, their kids' future. Now, I'm sure some folks will be "good little soldiers" and won't question or oppose this, falling in line because it's for "our own good". But there is NO WAY I'm ok with this! Seriously? So I lived half my life without a mask on my face but now you're telling me that for the rest of my life I have to have this thing on my face???? It's the new normal?? I DON'T THINK SO!!!! I'll take my chances with the virus, thank you very much. I don't think this is acceptable and I would imagine most rational people would agree with this. We and our ancestors went through who knows what terrible pandemics over past centuries (and millions died too) but somehow we didn't hide our pretty faces from anyone. It's human nature to expose your mouth and nose and not hide them behind a piece of cloth, restricting your breathing. Imagine future generations of family photos, everyone in face masks. It's not even funny. I find the idea pretty frightening. But believe it or not, such a thing could happen. All it takes is the government handing out these "mandates" and folks falling in line like sheep without questioning or thinking rationally what the implications are for future generations.

Bottom line is WE THE PEOPLE should make our own decisions about these things. That's what separates us from Soviet Russia where Ivan keeps prisoners in bamboo cages and shoots them in legs for stepping out of line.

Mandates? We ain't got no mandates! We don't need no mandates! We don't need no stinking mandates!

The influenza pandemic of 1918 and 1919 was the most deadly flu outbreak in history, killing up to 50 million people worldwide. In the United States, where it ultimately killed around 675,000 people, local governments rolled out initiatives to try to stop its spread. These varied by region, and included closing schools and places of public amusement, enforcing “no-spitting” ordinances, encouraging people to use handkerchiefs or disposable tissues and requiring people to wear masks in public.

Mask-wearing ordinances mainly popped up in the western states, and it appears most people complied with them. The nation was still fighting in World War I, and officials framed anti-flu measures as a way to protect the troops from the deadly outbreak.

Full Article
https://www.history.com/news/1918-spani ... resistance

Absolutely true. The fundamental difference in that era, however, was the complete lack of antibiotics. Penicillin was still years away, so the deaths caused by untreatable secondary infections, like pneumonia, was massive. The therapeutics available were very minimal. Antibiotics were an absolute medical game-changer in human history.

Also, without the massive movement of people caused by WWI, the pandemic may have remained regional as so many do, rather than becoming global. It was a very tragic convergence of events.