I am totally with you, ChangeTheGame. I myself experienced over a year and half of intensive chemotherapy, and may again in the future, so I feel I have a good perspective on being immunocompromised. I would never have dreamed of wanting the world to constantly mask up for my sake (especially in terms of covid where we now have a range of options including EvuShield, N95 masks, 4 doses of vaccination which are proving to be quite effective for the immunocompromised, tests readily available that if they turn out to be positive means that qualified patients can quickly get monoclonal antibodies and/or Paxlovid or other treatment, etc). Now, admittedly, I did take risks when I was immunocompromised, and the only time I wore a mask (not N95 as I hadnāt heard of those then) was when I flew on an airplane (and comically, back then masks were so rare, I think people on the plane thought that I had a terrible contagious disease and they seemed to move away from me, rather than realizing I was protecting myself from them). My heart breaks for those who suffer from anxiety and for those who may even believe their odds are worse than they really are or for those who donāt realize all of the protective options available to them. But I cannot personally relate to wishing that others would wear masks any longer than necessary, for my sake, especially when thereās so much I can do to protect myself. I do have a few people Iām close with who are currently immunocompromised, and knowing that, since I have access to masks, I choose to mask up around them, but I canāt imagine that they would want to see the general public out and about at stores, baseball games, and in the world at large wearing masks all the time.
I think the first part is more in line with the sentiment, and I donāt think anyone is asking for the second part.
I think the individuals that the author of the article chose to profile are clearly asking for the second part. Thatās what the article was aboutāthat even though it is generally perceived to be a reasonable time to drop mask mandates, they want the mandates to stay in place. I just donāt believe that all or the majority of immunocompromised individuals feel the same way that the selected people profiled do.
Perhaps you and I read different articles? I donāt recall anyone advocating for permanent mask requirements at places like ābaseball games,ā in āthe general public,ā or in āthe world at large.ā To me your claims seem like exaggerations which unreasonably distort the viewpoints expressed in the article and the issue as a whole.
There was a sense from some of those discussed that they do not want to be written off as ācollateral damage,ā and I understand why they would feel that way. There is often an ugly sentiment expressed that their lives arenāt just that important. For example, prolific posters here have stated that they would rather have tens of thousands of of extra deaths among the vulnerable in their state if it means that their kids wonāt have to be burdened with wearing a mask. That sure seems like the vulnerable are being considered ācollateral damageā to me.
Nonetheless, the possible remedies discussed in the article werenāt broad and endless masking mandates at baseball games and such, but more focused protections. For example, keeping infections low by getting almost everyone vaccinated, improving ventilation in businesses, and providing extra protections in places where vulnerable people have no choice but to go, such as in medical offices.
And of course by occasionally, in limited circumstances, acting with common courtesy by wearing a mask around those who are vulnerable, like you said you were already doing with those around you who are immunocompromised.
I also wholeheartedly support investing in improved ventilation and wish everyone who is able would get vaccinated. But yes, this article and others like it do convey a strong wish for the mask mandates to stay in place, despite being past a point where it is generally perceived (including by our medical leaders) to be reasonable for them to lapse. That desire to maintain mask mandates for everyone who is out and about in the world-at-large (all public indoor spaces such as the mandates required, I think only a couple of states had outdoor mandates) is what I (as a formerly and possibly future immunocompromised person) canāt relate to, particularly given all the tools available at this point in 2022 to protect oneself.
ETA: By the way, I missed the comment where someone said theyād rather see tens of thousands of people die in their state than wear a mask in certain situationsā¦ā¦nasty comment, indeed!
I think where we disagree is not with what we as a community can do to protect our follow citizens, but in raw numbers. A little over 75% of all adults are fully vaccinated and even though I wish those numbers were higher and done with a little less āteeth pullingā is a strong majority. No one is arguing against improving ventilation besides those who may have to pay for those improvements. I believe that the article and your posts are talking about a vocal, but very small minority of people who would fight against something as simple as masking up in a medical office. The impression that I get from articles like the NYT piece is that this is a wide spread societal choice to make more challenges for the immuno-compromised and that is what I do not accept, and I also get the impression that they want some places that do not have mask mandates in my area (like grocery stores) to have universal masking enforced.
I know that there are lots of people who do not like wearing masks and others who are ādoneā with the pandemic, but I have continually watched people follow masking mandates (besides the folks who wear their masks terribly, which has been a problem).
Iām not entirely clear what @one1ofeach was saying but I think he/she was implying that long Covid was psychosomatic (imagined by people who thought they had Covid but hadnāt tested positive IIRC).
This study appears to be recent (per @ChangeTheGame )and is not a big sample but is investigating one of the mechanisms by which long covid appears to attack the body.
(Long COVID: Nerve damage may arise from immune system dysfunction)
The elderly and medically vulnerable are disproportionately direct victims of covid. The children, young adults, and others who have suffered from lockdown measurers leading to mental health issues, learning loss, and increased drug use, are the collateral damage.
Finally a great study indicating the value of masking in school.
āIn other words, school districts with optional masking had approximately 3.6 times the rate of in-school COVID-19 cases when compared to schools with mandatory masking. These data also show that mandatory masking was associated with a 72% reduction of in-school COVID-19 cases, compared to districts with optional masking.ā
We cannot forget about long Covid and MIS-C in children.
And to show that I am not biased or unreasonable, my HS senior hasnāt worn a mask to school since sometime in January, since our community transmission levels are low and hospitals are not overwhelmed.
while its an interesting study, I would not call it āgreatā yet, until it passes peer review. And my quick read found a glaring omission: they did not account for community masking. Perhaps the lower transmission in fully-masked schools was related more to the surrounding fully-masked community in contrast to the mask-optional schools which likely matched a mask-optional (or massless) community.
True, we donāt know what is going on in the community. This is somewhat mitigated by the wide geography in the study.
North Carolina, Wisconsin, Missouri, California, Washington, Georgia, Tennessee, Kansas and Texas
When those discussed in the article feel like they are being treated collateral damage, I think they are referring to how their value as human beings is being discounted in the quest for the return normalcy. That is what I referring to when I mentioned collateral damage. As an example of what I mean, upthread I asked you if you were seriously considering āwhether 10,000 deaths (and many more severe illnesses) in Texas alone would be a fair tradeoff to avoid a few months of online learning?ā you responded:
To my mind, that is an example of treating the elderly and vulnerable as collateral damage in quest to return to normalcy.
Iām surprised we arenāt in agreement on this, as you have expressed the same sentiments repeatedly, especially regarding older and vulnerable teachers and professors and school staff. I guess it just matter of different perspectives.
Trying to understand your point here . . . is it that masking in the broader community in addition to the schools would be more effective than mask-optional schools in a maskless community? If so I agree, but am not sure that completely undercuts the study.
I was submit that its exacerbated by the community. California and Washington went into full lockdown and masking across in all private/public indoor spaces, as well as schools. The other states, not so much.
Exacerbated by the community? Not sure what you mean. Which community and what is being made worse?
We wonāt know the collateral damage toll of covid (school dropouts, shortened lives due to dropouts/ drug abuse, crime) for at least 20 years. It wouldnāt surprise me at all if it greatly exceeds the direct covid death toll.
The collateral damage toll, and the increased efficacy of targeted measures for only the most vulnerable (including treatments and highly effective masks), are why all states have rolled back their covid response now.
This study takes into account community transmission, and is another study showing the effectiveness of masking.
Community transmission is low, hospitals not overwhelmed. Society is not at risk of collapse of the healthcare system.
We wonāt know the collateral damage toll of Covid, itself, medically until then either. At this point they know thereās a lot of internal damage similar to aging in kidneys, lungs, cardiac, brain, perhaps autoimmune, and who knows what else? Will bodies fix themselves or will doctors be seeing a lot of premature issues? No one knows at this point.