General Question

crazyguy's avatar

Is it absolutely necessary to wear masks after full vaccination?

Asked by crazyguy (2291points) 2 weeks ago

This question really bothers me. My wife and I will complete our vaccinations today, so the question is rather immediate for us.

The current thinking seems to be that even though a person is protected by antibodies in most parts of the body, not enough can be mobilized to the nose and throat in time to prevent virus multiplication.

For instance, “The trials have so far analyzed only blood, but testing for antibodies in mucosa would confirm that the antibodies can travel to the nose and mouth. Tal’s team is planning to analyze matched blood and saliva samples from volunteers in the Johnson & Johnson trial to see how the two antibody levels compare.” This is from https://www.baltimoresun.com/coronavirus/ct-nw-nyt-coronavirus-vaccine-face-masks-20201208-7cjld4vxivew3jhjgjs7dgdg3a-story.html

It appears that the recommendation to wear masks after vaccination is based, like many COVID-related recommendations, on an assumption rather than science. We know that the virus can travel from the mucosa to the rest of the body. But we assume that antibodies cannot travel in the reverse direction.

To me, personally, the biggest payoff of the vaccines is a return to near-normal. We may get answers piecemeal, depending on which vaccine was administered.

I would welcome scientific responses to this question.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

128 Answers

kritiper's avatar

I have heard that it is better to continue wearing a mask.

zenvelo's avatar

@crazyguy This statement ”...on an assumption rather than science is once again, one of your false equivalents.

There is no comprehensive science yet to determine if mask wearing is necessary or not. The assumption therefore is to be prudent and cautious.

Wear the fucking mask and quit complaining. Most people haven’t been vaccinated yet.

ragingloli's avatar

The issue is, that we do not know if someone who is vaccinated, while not getting sick themselves, could yet still transmit the virus to someone else.

And about assumptions:
You can either assume that a vaccinated person can not infect others anymore, or you can assume that they still can.
And since wearing a mask barely even qualifies as an imposition, it is reasonable to err on the side of caution.

You know, I recently learned, that Castle Bravo, the Colonies’ first hydrogen bomb, turned out to be 3 times more powerful than planned, because the scientists involved assumed, that the lithium-7 that they put into it as some sort of buffer, would not undergo a nuclear reaction. But it did.

So you can either say “nah, it’s gonna be fine”, then be shocked when it goes wrong and more people die, or play it safe, with being slightly invonvenienced as the worst outcome.

cookieman's avatar

Even if you are immune after vaccination, it is possible that you could carry the virus and pass it along to someone who has yet to be vaccinated.

So continue to wear a mask. Not for your protection, but that of others.

Unless, of course, you only care about yourself.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Highly recommended. 95% effectiveness does not equal 100% effectiveness.

crazyguy's avatar

@kritiper That is exactly what I have heard; that is what I plan to do. However, I am hoping that science will answer the rather basic question I asked.

crazyguy's avatar

@elbanditoroso Moderna’s efficacy of 94.1% is calculated as 185/(185+11) = 94.1%. 185 is the number of positives in the placebo group, and 11 is the number of positives in the vaccine group. Not exactly a large sample. I suspect as the study continues, and the UK study which exposes vaccinated individuals to the virus, we will obtain better data, which will show efficacy much closer to 100%.

crazyguy's avatar

@cookieman If you think there is something wrong with examining the science behind the recommendation to wear a mask, you are just an obedient lamb…

crazyguy's avatar

@ragingloli An assumption that can be refuted with just a little bit of effort but lead to a whole lot of inconvenience for some people, should be refuted as soon as possible. Just like the assumed nature of Li-7 in your example.

cookieman's avatar

@crazyguy: When did I say that? But thank you for the name calling. That said, now I am in the mood for lamb chops. Mmmmm.

crazyguy's avatar

@zenvelo Let me correct you as gently as possible.

1. Look up the meaning of “false equivalence”. According to Wikipedia, “False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning.” My statement relates to just one subject, so your use of “false equivalence” is hard to understand.

2. I know that the science does not exist yet. The directive to continue wearing a mask is therefore based on an assumption.

3. The assumption is not to be prudent and cautious but that spread is possible from a fully vaccinated person. Being prudent and cautious is justification for making the assumption.

4. I do intend to wear a mask; but shall keep on raising questions about it as long as I am alive.

crazyguy's avatar

@cookieman I did paraphrase ever so slightly. What you said was:

“Even if you are immune after vaccination, it is possible that you could carry the virus and pass it along to someone who has yet to be vaccinated.
So continue to wear a mask. Not for your protection, but that of others.
Unless, of course, you only care about yourself.”

To me, “continue to wear a mask” sounds like being a lamb.

stanleybmanly's avatar

This question is but an extension of the basic question: was it EVER necessary to wear a mask under ANY circumstances? I find it depressing that at this late stage the efficacy of a mask would be questioned whether one is vaccinated or not. The failure of logic in this country is enough to drive you to despair. To me this is like asking that if you’ve been vaccinated is it no longer necessary to wash your hands? The function of the mask is to block both the inhalation AND exhalation of aerosols. A hotshot scientist is not necessary to confirm this. If there is a single conclusion to be drawn regarding this disease it is this: we have bungled its management and accrued the casualties we deserve!

crazyguy's avatar

@zenvelo I wear a mask when I go shopping – most shops will not let you in without a mask. I do not wear a mask when I can social distance outdoors. So your point is hard to fathom. Are you saying that interference with my life is ok if the inconvenience is slight? And my job is to obey and not question?

hello321's avatar

Why is it that the only time conservatives feel rebellious and have an urge to not be a “sheep”, it almost always manifests in ways that cause demonstrable harm to others?

crazyguy's avatar

@hello321 “Harm to others” is an assumption. The assumption should be refuted as soon as possible. Until it is, I intend to wear a mask.

crazyguy's avatar

@Caravanfan Your refusal to engage in a scientific discussion says a lot about you.

cookieman's avatar

@crazyguy: That’s funny, “continue to wear a mask” sounds like being a cautious, thoughtful person to me.

To each his own.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy: “Harm to others” is an assumption. The assumption should be refuted as soon as possible.”

Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@crazyguy You do realize that @Caravanfan is an ER DOCTOR!
Read the link he provided.

cookieman's avatar

C’mon @SQUEEKY2, why on earth would an experienced and educated ER Doctor such as @Caravanfan know more about COVID and wearing masks than an average Joe like @crazyguy? ~

crazyguy's avatar

@cookieman The only thing I see wrong with not wearing a mask after being fully vaccinated (assuming that the studies will go the way I expect they will) would be: “How will people realize that you have been fully vaccinated?” I think we’ll need a visual symbol showing that.

crazyguy's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 @cookieman The only response from the “experienced and educated ER doctor” has been “SIGH”. He is obviously tired after treating the hordes of covid patients that got too close to non-mask wearers!

ragingloli's avatar

Anti-Maskers were already using fake “exemption” documents in order to get into shops maskless.
You think they are not going to fake these “I got vaccinated” symbols, too?

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
hello321's avatar

^ I’ll ask you again: Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?

crazyguy's avatar

@hello321 I guess you answered my latest question.

The assumption that I was talking about was that a vaccinated person is protected from the disease but is still capable of transmitting it.

filmfann's avatar

Yes. The vaccine does’t prevent you from catching and carrying the disease. It prevents the virus from propagatng in your body. Get the vaccine, and you will better withstand the virus.
So, wearing a mask is still necessary.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy – Why should this assumption be “refuted as soon as possible”?

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
Caravanfan's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 (Actually I’m not an ER doctor. I’m an ICU doctor)

canidmajor's avatar

Wait…wait… @crazyguy, didn’t you say you were here to keep us informed?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Sorry for that @Caravanfan .
Thanks for clearing that up.
But when the @crazyguy doesn’t realize the link and just recognizes as just one word kinda get to me.
Personally I don’t think the human race it intelligent enough to beat Covid19 anytime soon. there will be a great deal more deaths that could be prevented before this nightmare is over.

stanleybmanly's avatar

If nothing else, I wear a mask because the nation’s knuckleheads have rendered not wearing a mask the equivalent of a statement that “I don’t give a fk”. It is also an open admission that I am too stupid to be allowed to live among you and worthy of whatever consequence that implies.

Irukandji's avatar

@crazyguy “The only response from the ‘experienced and educated ER doctor’ has been ‘SIGH.’”

No, it was a sigh with a link to this article answering your question. (And again, he’s an ICU doctor, not an ER doctor.)

@hello321 “Why should ‘wearing a mask saves lives’ be an assumption that ‘should be refuted as soon as possible’?”

Because he doesn’t know what “refuted” means.

hello321's avatar

@Irukandji: “Because he doesn’t know what “refuted” means.”

That’s likely at this point. He has refused to answer the question.

Irukandji's avatar

Um, I think you mean he has refuted to answer the question. Get it right! ~

ragingloli's avatar

And why “as soon as possible”?
Wording it like that, implies severe negative consequences if it turns out that vaccinated people can not spread the virus.
Which there are not. The only consequence is people being slightly, minorly, trivially inconvenienced by having to wear a mask.

Strauss's avatar

The latest Public Service Announcement I saw from the Health Dept (state level) suggested wearing two masks. One mask is somewhere around 80% efficient in preventing airborne droplets both ways, double masking increases efficiency to somewhere around 90%.

lastexit's avatar

@crazyguy How will people realize that you have been fully vaccinated? Wear a scarlet V, or whatever color you like, as a symbol

Strauss's avatar

@Caravanfan Thanks, Doc! And thanks for all you do everyday!

crazyguy's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 I admit I missed the fact that @Caravanfan‘s one word answer was a link. I did go to it and read the entire article. It did provide a little more detail to what I had read elsewhere. However, it does not answer two basic questions:

1. What is so different between the flu antibodies and covid antibodies that we suspect that covid antibodies may not be able to fight the virus in the nose and throat?
2. Why can’t the question be answered rather simply by testing nano-pharyngeal samples for antibodies?

crazyguy's avatar

@canidmajor Given all the off-the-cuff answers, I dare say that most posters here could use some informing.

@Irukandji 1. Yes, indeed. I did miss the link. Thanks for the reminder.
2. I would wager that my English is far better than most posters here. I do know what ‘refuted’ means; “wearing a mask to save lives” is not an assumption. However, it is based on the assumption that a mask helps a fully vaccinated person not infect somebody else.

@hello321 This thread is supposed to be educational, not confrontational. I am truly surprised at the venom directed at everybody who dares question a “fact”.

@ragingloli I would like to remind you that herd immunity requires the immunization of a large percentage of the population. Dr Fauci has given various answers about the exact percentage required, but I think 80–85% seems generally accepted. In order to get to that level, it is necessary to offer some reward for getting vaccinated. I think going maskless is a possible reward.

@Strauss Whoa, 90%, ONLY? Keep in mind that full vaccination gives you 95% protection.

@lastexit I do not think you can leave it up to the individual. It has to be a hard-to-duplicate, standard identification that is immediately visible to individuals around the vaccinated, maskless person, so they do not freak out.

ragingloli's avatar

@crazyguy
You would think that being all but immunte and a nearly eliminated risk of death would be reward enough.
Maybe the doctor can offer you an additional piece of candy or a lollypop.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy: “This thread is supposed to be educational, not confrontational. I am truly surprised at the venom directed at everybody who dares question a “fact”.”

Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?

jca2's avatar

@crazyguy: In this question you asked a few weeks ago, you made some vows to behave differently in the future. Right now, you are violating your new vows, having referred to some Jellies on this thread as lambs and other rude and unnecessary comments.

I thought a new leaf was being turned over when you asked this question a few weeks ago.

https://www.fluther.com/225048/how-can-we-reduce-the-division-in-the-us/

JLeslie's avatar

I haven’t read above.

I will still be masking in stores.

I will mask with friends who are not vaccinated.

I will not be wearing a mask with friends who are double vaccinated unless they want me to, then I will do whatever the other person requests.

Right now I don’t really care what the news and cdc are saying about always wearing a mask still, I’m just going to use my own brain, which has been fairly reliable so far with this pandemic.

It makes sense to me for everyone to still wear masks in public areas, because most of America is still not vaccinated and we possibly can be carriers and we need the peer pressure for mask wearing to be the norm. If I am in a room of 6 people and all have been vaccinated then it’s basically herd immunity in that setting.

Moreover, I love that people are a little more cautious during flu season, and think we should have some mask wearing and slight changes in behavior every flu season. Not to the extent we have now, but some precautions Nov-March could easily save 20,000 or more lives every year and millions fewer would get sick to begin with.

Caravanfan's avatar

@hello321 He can’t ignore you forever.

gorillapaws's avatar

@crazyguy “To me, personally, the biggest payoff of the vaccines is a return to near-normal…”

Then you’re not paying attention. Every minute this fucking virus remains in a host, it’s reproducing exponentially and mutating. It’s possible for this thing to become more deadly, more transmissible and more resistant to vaccination. The faster we can stomp this thing out, the faster we can go back to life-as-normal. That means doing your part and following the guidelines.

The biggest benefit to you of the vaccine is the opportunity for humanity to beat the virus before it mutates into something much worse.

hello321's avatar

@gorillapaws: “The faster we can stomp this thing out, the faster we can go back to life-as-normal. That means doing your part and following the guidelines.”

But what if rich guys who don’t work want to play golf and still show off their pearly whites? Isn’t wearing a mask the same thing as communism or something?

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
crazyguy's avatar

@ragingloli I got my second dose of the vaccine on Wednesday. In two weeks I should be all but immune. So, I do not need any reward to do the right thing. I was suggesting the reward for people who are opposed to the vaccine for some strange reason.

@hello321 “Wearing a mask (may) save lives” is a fact, not an assumption. However, if you are saying that a fully vaccinated person saves lives by wearing a mask, I am inclined to disagree for the simple reason that we do not yet know.

@jca2 I apologize. However, you must admit that I am getting attacked rather mercilessly for a question that I asked in good faith, based on its importance to me and society as a whole.

@JLeslie Here is what I think should happen going forward:

1. All fully vaccinated people should wear a clear, hard-to-copy identifier showing their status.
2. Such people should be given the option to be unmasked (if they so choose) after we find out for certain that a fully vaccinated person cannot spread the disease (unless s/he catches it first).
3. Anybody without the identifier and a mask should be arrested.

I agree with your suggestion for minimizing flu cases. The above approach will not work for flu until we get a vaccine with higher efficacy.

@gorillapaws You say: “Every minute this fucking virus remains in a host, it’s reproducing exponentially and mutating.” How does my wearing a mask help “stomp this thing out”? Assuming science can prove that a fully vaccinated person cannot catch or spread the virus.

@hello321 Your envy is showing through.

@Blackberry If flu antibodies can make it from the bloodstream into the nose and throat, why can’t covid antibodies do the same? However, I am willing to wait a while for science to get its act together.

gorillapaws's avatar

@crazyguy ”... How does my wearing a mask help “stomp this thing out”? Assuming science can prove that a fully vaccinated person cannot catch or spread the virus.” [emphasis added]

If science proves it then you’re right. It is my understanding that this is still an open question currently being studied. Until that question is answered definitively, we should proceed with the most cautious approach, and that means following the CDC guidelines.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@crazyguy ” . . . . However, if you are saying that a fully vaccinated person saves lives by wearing a mask, I am inclined to disagree for the simple reason that we do not yet know.”

- – So science doesn’t count ?

CDC https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html recommends wearing a mask because vaccination does mean you can’t get COVID-19 or if you have a mild case you can’t give to non-vaccinated people.

sadiesayit's avatar

“Is it absolutely necessary” >> Probably not. It’s not “absolutely necessary” to do most things. This is an exceedingly high bar. Most things are not “absolutely necessary.” (Arguably, nothing humans do or experience is… After all, the world will keep turning; the universe will keep expanding.)

Is it important to wear a mask? Absolutely… And that’s enough of a reason.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy: ”“Wearing a mask (may) save lives” is a fact, not an assumption. However, if you are saying that a fully vaccinated person saves lives by wearing a mask, I am inclined to disagree for the simple reason that we do not yet know.”

Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?

Caravanfan's avatar

Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?
Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?
Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?
Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?
Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?
Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?
Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?
Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?

Caravanfan's avatar

(Just in case he didn’t see the question)

JLeslie's avatar

From the Oregon Health Department:

Today we announced the discovery of four “breakthrough” cases of COVID-19. These are cases where an individual has tested positive for COVID-19 at least 14 days after completing their vaccination series….

Genome sequencing is underway, and we expect results next week.

Such cases are not unexpected. Clinical trials of both vaccines presently in use included breakthrough cases. In those cases, even though the participants got COVID-19, the vaccines reduced the severity of illness…

crazyguy's avatar

@gorillapaws I agree. I fully intend to wear a mask until a definitive finding is made. However, I do not see any reason why covid antibodies would behave any differently than flu antibodies.
Do you?

crazyguy's avatar

@Caravanfan I answered the question (which is totally unrelated to my question) as best as I can.

hello321's avatar

^ You haven’t answered the question yet.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie Thanks for the heads up.

I think the true test of vaccine efficacy is what percentage of vaccinated people catch covid with identical exposure. The Phase III studies left volunteers on their own and then calculated efficacy as the percentage of people with covid in the placebo group of the total number of positives. Deliberately exposing volunteers to the virus poses many ethical questions as addressed in
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/covid-19-human-challenge-trials-play-crucial-role-vaccinating/
However, without such trials, the calculated efficacy of a vaccine does not adjust for different behavior patterns, and may be somewhat misleading. After my two doses, I want realistic estimates of the chances of:

1. Me or my wife catching covid.
2. Me or my wife passing on the disease while asymptomatic.

crazyguy's avatar

@hello321 The best I could do (and it is already done) is:

”“Wearing a mask (may) save lives” is a fact, not an assumption. However, if you are saying that a fully vaccinated person saves lives by wearing a mask, I am inclined to disagree for the simple reason that we do not yet know.” If you don’t think that is an answer, please dig it up yourself.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy: ”“Wearing a mask (may) save lives” is a fact, not an assumption.”

@crazyguy: ”“Harm to others” is an assumption. The assumption should be refuted as soon as possible. Until it is, I intend to wear a mask.”

@crazyguy: “However, if you are saying that a fully vaccinated person saves lives by wearing a mask, I am inclined to disagree for the simple reason that we do not yet know.”

So, as I have continued to ask: Why should “wearing a mask saves lives” be an assumption that “should be refuted as soon as possible”?

If you misspoke and meant that something else should be “refuted as soon as possible”, can you elaborate?

Dutchess_III's avatar

He’s just pretending he understands medicine and biology and he doesn’t

crazyguy's avatar

@hello321 When exactly did I say that “wearing a mask saves lives” is an assumption? And please do not add or leave out any words from my statements.

hello321's avatar

^ @crazyguy: ””“Harm to others” is an assumption. The assumption should be refuted as soon as possible. Until it is, I intend to wear a mask.””

What assumption should be refuted as soon as possible?

Strauss's avatar

To act with “an abundance of caution” is to wear a mask. The “assumption”, in this case, is that if we err by masking we err on the side of caution.

crazyguy's avatar

@hello321 Let me spell it out for you again. Since we do not know for certain that a fully vaccinated person can spread covid asymptomatically, we ASSUME that is the case. That assumption can and will be refuted soon.

AND if you still don’t get it, please feel free to ask and perhaps somebody else will try to enlighten you.

sadiesayit's avatar

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that once someone has the vaccine they cannot in any way spread covid, and we know this to be the case. (Side note: I’m not a medical professional, but from what I understand, this is not how vaccines work… regardless, let’s assume it’s true).

It would still be prudent (read: necessary) to require general mask wearing, and it would still be prudent (read: necessary) to wear a mask after being vaccinated.

It would be a nightmare—logistically and socially—to attempt some sort of system that separates out “the vaccinated” from the “not vaccinated,” especially in a place like the US where such a strong “anti-mask” sentiment has been cultivated. Requiring general mask wearing until a herd-immunity vaccination level is reached is far less invasive for the individual and far more feasible for the community. Selective mask requirements are a bad idea. Continued mask wearing from all is important and needed for preventing even more unnecessary loss of life.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy: “That assumption can and will be refuted soon.”

This is the part you aren’t explaining. When you used should be refuted”, were you not making a normative statement? Or did I misunderstand? Was “should” simply serving to express that you felt it was likely?

If it was the latter, explain what “as soon as possible” does in your statement?

It appears that you made a very strong statement and are now (possibly) walking it back to mean that you anticipate understanding about the utility of wearing a mask to change shortly.

crazyguy's avatar

@sadiesayit If a reasonable means cannot be found to identify fully vaccinated individuals, I agree that mask wearing for all should be enforced. However, I think if a hard-to-duplicate badge can be produced, and then vaccinated folks are allowed to go maskless, that would provide a huge incentive for the unvaccinated to get their shots.

sadiesayit's avatar

I really don’t see “vaccine badges” being the incentive you think they would be, nor being as simple and consequence-free to implement as you think they would be. You also seem to be basing the whole idea on the assumption that people who have a vaccine cannot still spread a virus to others, while ignoring the other reasons that continuing to wear a mask is and will continue to be important in the immediate future.

What’s the fixation on finding something other than wearing a mask to serve the purposes that masks already serve sufficiently well? Just wear a mask in public. It’s really not that big of a deal.

ragingloli's avatar

We all know that such a badge would be equated to Star of David Concentration Camp armbands. Or the “Mark of the Beast”.

jca2's avatar

A “hard to duplicate vaccine badge” will be something that in this entitled atmosphere we live in, people will go off if asked “Miss, do you have proof that you were vaccinated?” “I left it home” and a million other excuses will come forth. OK, so the remedy will be if you don’t have your proof, you put on a mask. Then the screaming starts. Easier to just make a blanket policy, you must wear a mask to enter.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy – Ok, so I was correct.

@crazyguy: “However, I think if a hard-to-duplicate badge can be produced, and then vaccinated folks are allowed to go maskless, that would provide a huge incentive for the unvaccinated to get their shots.”

Incentive? Who wouldn’t want to get vaccinated? The incentive should be obvious to everyone. Who doesn’t want to get vaccinated as soon as possible? The problem right now is that people can’t get the shot. It’s simply not available.

If we found that we needed to provide an incentive, we could confine these people to their homes – or some island. Once they want to be part of society, they could start acting like it.

JLeslie's avatar

I agree with @jca2. Plus, look at the flu map! We are saving millions from flu illness and thousands of people didn’t die from flu this year because we are masked up and distancing. You can change the year and slide back to the same week. Look at all of January. It’s drastic! https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/usmap.htm

I don’t mind the idea of a wallet vaccine card, since it is probably impossible to do something on our phone since Americans are too afraid of privacy being taken away, we wouldn’t use the apps Asia used for alerting someone if they had been near someone with covid.

crazyguy's avatar

@hello321 We can indulge in word-smithing all day and miss the forest. The point I am trying to make (and I believe you already understand that) is that we are assuming that a fully vaccinated person can spread the disease asymptomatically. The reason for the assumption is that we don’t know any better.

There is absolutely no reason to think that a fully vaccinated person will be able to spread the disease. I agree that the science has not got there yet, but I am confident it will. Once it does, mask-wearing will become optional, since it will be only for protection of the wearer. If the vaccine were 100% effective, there would not be any need for masks at all. But what just happened in Oregon is enough to convince me that the vaccine is not 100%. If a vaccinated person does catch the disease, and is symptomatic, s/he should quarantine just like a non-vaccinated person.

hello321's avatar

@crazyguy: “The point I am trying to make (and I believe you already understand that) is that we are assuming that a fully vaccinated person can spread the disease asymptomatically. The reason for the assumption is that we don’t know any better.”

Your “point” is that you feel that there is some need to refute this “assumption” as soon as possible…for some bizarre reason. We’re in the middle of a pandemic, nobody can actually get vaccinated, and your concern is that we should allow the vaccinated to go maskless as soon as possible. What? Why is…I’m beyond confused.

You’ve said above that you feel going maskless could be an incentive for people to get vaccinated. I’ve already commented on that absurdity. Is there some other reason?

Let’s entertain your ridiculous argument and say the vaccines become available so people can start to get vaccinated. Let’s say we get to a point where 20% of the population is fully vaccinated with the 95% effective vaccine. Let’s also grant you the scenario where it’s scientifically shown that a vaccinated person cannot carry the virus or transmit it.

Great. Now, let’s say I’m one of the 80% of the population that can’t get access to the vaccine yet. I see someone walking towards me without a mask. What are my options?

a) I could scream at them to stop where they are and ask them for proof that they have been vaccinated.
b) I could assume they are a sociopath who doesn’t care about killing me.
c) I could just quietly take the risk and allow them to possibly kill me.
d) I could shoot them in self defense.

Is this how you would like to see this play out? Am I missing an option?

What is your obsession with masks?

Dutchess_III's avatar

I’ve never seen anyone contradict themselves as rapidly as @crazyguy does….

Caravanfan's avatar

I actually get cold really easily. I grew up in San Diego so 50 degrees is cold. So I like wearing a mask because it keeps my face warm when I go outside.

JLeslie's avatar

I agree with @crazyguy that EVENTUALLY there might be incentive to get vaccinated to not have to wear a mask. Especially, for people who work in certain jobs. We are just waiting for the science. If the science shows there are still large outbreaks then we will still have to wear masks in public places, but hopefully this will be extremely unlikely once we are at 80% vaccinated.

I have a friend who prior to covid wore a fitted N95 all day at work during flu season because she did not take the flu shot annually, the hospital she works in required it. If she had taken the flu shot she would not need to wear that mask, so it is not an absurd idea that this could eventually become the case for covid. My same friend really wants to be able to take off her mask after work, so she did take the covid shot.

Right now the government health agencies have incentive to not change anything regarding mask requirements no matter what the science is showing, because we need people to keep wearing masks, we need it to be the norm while we still have so much of the population not vaccinated.

Certainly, we can be maskless if we are fully vaccinated and in a room with other people who are fully vaccinated assuming all variants of the virus are susceptible to the vaccine. Otherwise, what is the point of being vaccinated? There is still a risk, but it would be extremely low. That would be like worrying about Chicken Pox in a room when the whole room has been vaccinated.

Once we get to a point that masks are not required, then people who are very vulnerable and cannot receive a vaccination can wear a mask and it will be a signal to others to keep their distance. In Japan the sick wear a mask if they have to go out in public and it is a signal to people that they are trying to protect others. In AMERICA for many years cancer patients wear masks when in public and we knew to be careful. Before covid when I saw friends with mask on I knew not to hug, not to touch, to respect their space and their efforts to stay as healthy as possible.

What I don’t understand is why the people in the phase two and three testing were not tested for covid every 14 days while in the study to see if they were shedding virus. That seems like an obvious thing to do to see if there was any asymptomatic shedding.

I agree with @Caravanfan about the cold weather and the mask.

crazyguy's avatar

@hello321 The scenario you posed is definitely challenging, but I did address it earlier on the thread:

” If a reasonable means cannot be found to identify fully vaccinated individuals, I agree that mask wearing for all should be enforced. However, I think if a hard-to-duplicate badge can be produced, and then vaccinated folks are allowed to go maskless, that would provide a huge incentive for the unvaccinated to get their shots.”

As far as incentive to take the vaccine goes, I noticed that you personally did not answer the earlier question on whether you would take the vaccine when it is offered to you. The extremely unscientific survey showed that most, but not nearly all, Fluther members would take the vaccine. National, more scientific, surveys have shown about one-third of Americans do not plan to take it. Actually, my wife and I have wondered if the day or two of feeling feverish and having arm ache was truly worth getting vaccinated, if it does not change our lifestyle at all. So yes, incentive is required.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie WONDER OF WONDERS! Somebody on Fluther (other than Wulfie, Yellowdog and other White Supremacists!) has agreed with me!

In turn I agree with most off what you said. I had some difficulty with:

Right now the government health agencies have incentive to not change anything regarding mask requirements no matter what the science is showing, because we need people to keep wearing masks, we need it to be the norm while we still have so much of the population not vaccinated.

If the science shows that vaccinated people can no longer spread the virus, there is no need for vaccinated people to keep wearing masks. As I have stated many times on this thread, we do need a hard to duplicate means of identifying such people.

I want to give you a shout-out for the wonderful statements in your final paragraph:

“What I don’t understand is why the people in the phase two and three testing were not tested for covid every 14 days while in the study to see if they were shedding virus. That seems like an obvious thing to do to see if there was any asymptomatic shedding.”

My explanation: They were pressured to not release that part of the study. Let us see how easy that would be. They would test (for antibodies) the same nasopharyngeal swab they used for covid testing. Do you really believe they did not do that?

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated
JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy My statement that you have a problem with goes back to @jca2’s point. Carding people is a hassle and some people will take issue with it. That might work in the far future for specific situations, but not now. It’s not realistic now. Anti-vaccine people will say they are discriminated against. People who can’t take the vaccine will feel hassled. Our children will still need to be masked. We need masking to be the norm.

Just too early in the game right now, but the topic is worth the thinking about. It’s worth the government’s time to consider what type of recommendations in the future might be reasonable regarding vaccine ID if we cannot get to significant herd immunity and squash the virus.

Keep in mind every year we let flu kill thousands of people. I doubt the government is looking for zero deaths from covid to finally lift many of the precautions.

sadiesayit's avatar

“Actually, my wife and I have wondered if the day or two of feeling feverish and having arm ache was truly worth getting vaccinated, if it does not change our lifestyle at all.

This hurts to read.

ragingloli's avatar

It is not just you getting vaccinated that will “change your lifestyle”, it is everyone else also getting vaccinated that will, by making unnecessary quarantines, lockdowns, social distancing and having to wear masks.
But frankly, this selfish and shortsighted thinking, this inability and/or unwillingness to consider and contemplate anything beyond their front door, is something I have come to expect from conservatives.
It really is one of their defining features.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie I did not specify that form the proof of vaccination should take. @jca2 assumed it would be some sort of card. I do not think that will work because how would you feel if some stranger asked you to produce your card?

No. it has to be something out of sci fi, like an aura or something that cannot be duplicated and is visible from 20–30 feet, at a minimum.

Even if a vaccine passport were provided, how many people will move around their neighborhoods with that?

Perhaps you don’t need to do anything. The fully vaccinated person dopes not care who gets close to him/her. The unvaccinated better protect themselves from all strangers.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy The problem is the mask protects others better than it protects ourselves, so the unvaccinated person might wear a mask, but they are safer if the other person is wearing a mask. I know you accept this as a given.

That’s why I go back to a cultural shift where a person wearing a mask is a signal to other people to keep their distance. I’m shocked how people where I live don’t understand this. I’m wearing a mask, that means I give I care about not spreading contagious disease. Why in the name of Mary and Joseph would someone walk right up to me a foot away whether they have on a mask or not? Get back.

sadiesayit's avatar

“No. it has to be something out of sci fi, like an aura or something that cannot be duplicated and is visible from 20–30 feet, at a minimum.”

I’m genuinely confused. Has your entire position on a “vaccine identification” process been in some sort of jest, or only this comment?

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie If I am fully vaccinated, there are two things I have to worry about:

1. Catching COVID.
2. Infecting others.

The first is a selfish reason. The second is something that can, and should be, mandated because it protects others.

A fully vaccinated person has a very low risk of catching the disease. If assurances can be provided that a fully vaccinated person is incapable of asymptomatic transmission, then there is no need for a mask mandate. The person may choose to wear a mask, but there should be no mandate to wear one.

crazyguy's avatar

@sadiesayit I fully realize the difficulties of getting Americans to willingly display some sort of proof of vaccination. And the difficulty of assuring that the proof cannot be duplicated by an unvaccinated person.

You may assume that, if I knew the answer, I would provide it. However, do not assume that I am joking just because I do not have the answer.

sadiesayit's avatar

@crazyguy—I wasn’t assuming. That’s why I asked. The sci-fi comment seems to come out of nowhere from my perspective, so I wasn’t sure if that was the tone you’d intended to convey with everything else you’d said so far, or just a one-off.

If you “fully realize the difficulties of getting Americans to willingly display some sort of proof of vaccination. And the difficulty of assuring that the proof cannot be duplicated by an unvaccinated person” ... Then why isn’t mask wearing enough of an answer? It’s simple, it’s clear, it’s visible, it’s consistent, it’s already established as a practice (and already working), and it doesn’t introduce new unnecessary risks and confusions to an already difficult situation. Why continue to insist that there ought to be some other elaborate system introduced, as if there’s something so terribly difficult about wearing a mask until enough of the population is vaccinated that things can begin to relax? Wearing a mask for the time being is not a big ask.

crazyguy's avatar

@sadiesayit I agree that mask wearing is not a big ask. However, please answer the following question: why should anybody go through the pain that is a side effect of the vaccine (especially the second dose) if there is no benefit to their life style until everybody is vaccinated?

sadiesayit's avatar

Because if everyone’s waiting for everyone else to be vaccinated first, no one gets vaccinated, and the pandemic never ends.

There aren’t enough vaccines (or enough infrastructure, or enough medical professionals, etc.) to stick everyone at the same time. If there were, that’s what would have already happened.

Also, you now have the peace of mind to know that you likely can’t get covid, and if you do, the severity of your individual illness is vastly reduced.

A few days of mild discomfort as your body responds to the vaccine should pale in comparison to those two reasons.

longgone's avatar

Why should anybody go through the pain that is a side effect of the vaccine (especially the second dose) if there is no benefit to their life style until everybody is vaccinated?

That’s a non-issue if I’ve ever seen one. There are literally millions of people who want the vaccine, now, and would probably take it even if both their arms turned black and blue for a week. I would.

Nobody is being forced to get the vaccine, so we are – by definition – letting only those who want it have it. Why should we incentivise you, or anyone, while there’s masses ready to take it already? In my country, 70% want the vaccine, with the number rising steadily. Even if it’s really just a third in America (vaccine acceptance tends to go up when everyone in your social circle gets one), that is still millions.

So how about we vaccinate those who want it, and you can choose to wait (and worry about catching Covid, or not) as long as you like. I hope you make a choice that feels safe to you, but we really don’t need to worry about your dose going to waste.

crazyguy's avatar

@longgone You make good points. Let me try and counter.

1. I DID want the vaccine; that is why I got it. The vaccine was to protect me from the disease and to allow some relaxation in my protective routine, which essentially eliminates any chance of catching covid. If no relaxation in my protective routine is possible, then the dose given me, and the doses given to most retired people are probably wasted and could have been better utilized on somebody who has to face other people for a living.

2. As you say, there are 30% of the population (by the way, the US has the same percentage) who do not want the vaccine. That being the case, we may never achieve herd immunity.

crazyguy's avatar

@sadiesayit I agree with all your points. I am glad to have both doses of the vaccine in me. I would not do it any other way.

However, my wife and I, because we are retired, could take every conceivable precaution against catching covid. So the doses given to us could have been used more beneficially on people who are required to take risks in order to make a living.

The powers that be deemed that people older than 65 should be vaccinated ahead of younger people. In my opinion, that was a stupid decision.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Not stupid. People over 65 are more likely to die from C19 than a younger person.

Strauss's avatar

At age 72 I am still trying to get an appointment for vaccination that is less than 20 miles away, which makes for about a 2-hour bus ride.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Don’t you have someone who can give you a ride @Strauss? Have you checked your local pharmacy to see if they’re vaccinating?

crazyguy's avatar

@Dutchess_III You are absolutely right. However, a retired person over the age off 65 has to be fairly careless to catch the disease. It is easier to isolate yourself completely when you are retired.

crazyguy's avatar

@Strauss If you live anywhere close to me (South Orange County) I would be glad to give you a ride.

Caravanfan's avatar

@Strauss If you don’t have the funds, I’m sure if you set up a small go-fund-me people on Fluther would chip in for an Uber for you.

stanleybmanly's avatar

A few decades back, I can remember being struck when watching news footage from Asian countries, there would be people (seemingly ordinary people) engaged in ordinary things but wearing masks. The trend then showed up here. It wasn’t a fad or anything, but occurred often enough that I gave it little thought. You would see masks particularly on the buses and streetcars. What if masks are going to be the norm from here on out?

Strauss's avatar

@Dutchess_III I’ve been checking with several local pharmacies and clinics. They each all have on-line sign-up, and they all say there are no appointments available. I’ve read that the polar invasion inversion might have an adverse effect on getting the vaccine here. My daughter works for a public school system here and her mandatory first dose vaccination happened today.

@crazyguy I appreciate it, but it’d be a 24-hour trip one way. Although I could come up with an awesome playlist for you!

@Caravanfan Thanks for the suggestion, but I don’t feel that urgent a need. I’m in excellent health for my age, no cardiopulmonary or immune system issues, and I’m well isolated with the family. I feel safe saying I will get it when I can.

crazyguy's avatar

@Strauss If you have managed to avoid covid for almost a year by doing the right things, there is absolutely no need to take the shots. I would have gladly given my spots to somebody who has to take risks in order to make a living.

Caravanfan's avatar

@Strauss I feel the need to correct Crazy dude yet again as his advice is terrible. There is every need to take the shot. You’ve gotten lucky so far but if you get Covid your chance of death or disability is higher than most so get the shot.

Strauss's avatar

I plan on getting the shot as soon as possible. State of Colorado gas a goal of getting everyone in my bracket immunized by February 28. I’m not freaking out about it, but I will get it as soon as possible.

crazyguy's avatar

@Strauss I think you should get the shot ASAP in order to protect you in case all the other precautions you have been taking for months fail. My earlier comment related to a theoretical question: “Who needs the shot more: a retired person who can rather easily isolate him/herself or a person who has to take risks in order to make a living?” Of course, our so-called expert ignored that in his comment!

By the way, here is a story about how Israel is handling the issue of providing some benefit for taking the vaccine:
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210217-israel-s-green-badge-plan-to-open-services-to-vaccinated-stirs-concern

Strauss's avatar

@crazyguy “asap” meaning “as soon as possible”!

I just haven’t been able to get an appointment yet. One of the insurance companies is hosting a mass event this weekend. I think that’s my best shot!
(intentional pun)

Caravanfan's avatar

Hey @Strauss I hope you don’t have whiplash from Crazy dude’s comments. First he says to you that “there is absolutely no need to take the shots.” Then he says: “I think you should get the shot ASAP in order to protect you in case all the other precautions you have been taking for months fail”

Of course the second comment is the correct one.

Strauss's avatar

I finally received an alert that there are appointments available Saturday afternoon at a local hospital. I was able to schedule my first this Saturday at 2:45 and my second three weeks later.

I’m still gonna mask up when I go out.

gorillapaws's avatar

@Strauss Do you have transportation figured out?

JLeslie's avatar

@Strauss Woohoo! Excellent.

crazyguy's avatar

@Strauss That is awesome news. You will feel safer and according to Fauci, you can be normal with other vaccinated folks.

Strauss's avatar

@gorillapaws I was hoping @crazyguy would drive from South Orange County to help me!~~

Just kidding! It’s a Saturday, so my son is available and willing to drive me there and back.

crazyguy's avatar

@Strauss I do not know where you live but I gather it is far from South Orange County, CA!

Strauss's avatar

@crazyguy Yeah, I don’t think you’d make it to Colorado in time for my appointment this afternoon! I have a ride set up and all is well.

crazyguy's avatar

@Strauss I am so glad. Do let us know if you get any reaction.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther