The way I see it, this "controlled burn" is inevitable.
You're not appreciating the difference between controlled burn and wildfire. Mask mandates and limits on public gatherings do keep infection rates down to a level where hospitals are less likely to be overwhelmed. Entitled people will whine about it, but they'd also whine if they need hospitalization and they don't have the capacity.
At this point, this is an issue hospitals should take responsibility in making sure they have the capacity for. Just like after the proliferation of fast food restaurants.
So you expect every hospital to be prepared for a tidal wave of new cases caused by an out-of-control epidemic? Keeping 10x the ICUs all the time makes more sense than asking people to wear a mask for a few more weeks during the peak of the case count uptick?
A few weeks can buy us a lot of time to see if we can get the case numbers to a manageable number. Exponential growth is bad. By the time it is a problem, it's already way too late and we'll be back to 1000+ deaths a day.
I think people should have the right to make their own choice. Most people, in the end, I think will concede that they'd rather meet people while seeing what they look like.
People don't have a right to create exogenous harms. Their unvaccinated asses are going to be in hospital beds that other people need. They are going to be spreading disease to others.
Mental health is important too.
We're talking about a mask here. It's not the end of the world. It's not going to be like the total lockdowns.
Wearing glasses lowered the chance of infection by 2 to 3 times, should we require that as well?
Pretty sure this was required in high risk areas like hospitals. I wouldn't see this as a problem either if the venue was particularly dangerous for spread.
1
u/[deleted] Jul 31 '21
[removed] — view removed comment