Coronavirus

[MirrorMask]

The comparison falls apart when you realize that if you have unprotected sex, you don't knock up all the women you came into comtact with.

[Zydar]

Some are just that potent

[Chino]

I know people who wore masks everywhere they went but they still got it; I know people who have gone everywhere without masks and not gotten it. I really don't think treating the mask like the new Star of David is logical. That said, Rudy is indeed an idiot

I know people that got knocked up while using a condom and/or other forms of birth control. We should still advocate for their use even if not 100% effective.

did you compare getting pregnant to getting a disease

but, yes, I agree, although we should let the individual make their own choice, if we're really going to compare masks to condoms

I compared the effectiveness of the tools we use vs our desired outcomes. Just because it doesn't always work doesn't mean it's not an effective solution. Seatbelts and airbags don't prevent every death in a car, but they're a good idea. Occasionally a pressure release valve fails on a hot water heater and blows up someone's house, but I'd still prefer all hot water systems have them. Brushing your teeth wont prevent every instance of cavities, but not many people seem to balk at that routine. I'm not claiming that masks are 100% effective. However, they're the bare minimum to keep those around you safe. Pridefully not wearing one in an intimate setting like a courtroom isn't something we should be encouraging or entertaining as okay.

[MirrorMask]

If we were on Facebook I'd like Chino's post. If we were on Reddit, I'd give it an award.

 

[The Walrus]

I know people who wore masks everywhere they went but they still got it; I know people who have gone everywhere without masks and not gotten it. I really don't think treating the mask like the new Star of David is logical. That said, Rudy is indeed an idiot

I know people that got knocked up while using a condom and/or other forms of birth control. We should still advocate for their use even if not 100% effective.

did you compare getting pregnant to getting a disease

but, yes, I agree, although we should let the individual make their own choice, if we're really going to compare masks to condoms

I compared the effectiveness of the tools we use vs our desired outcomes. Just because it doesn't always work doesn't mean it's not an effective solution. Seatbelts and airbags don't prevent every death in a car, but they're a good idea. Occasionally a pressure release valve fails on a hot water heater and blows up someone's house, but I'd still prefer all hot water systems have them. Brushing your teeth wont prevent every instance of cavities, but not many people seem to balk at that routine. I'm not claiming that masks are 100% effective. However, they're the bare minimum to keep those around you safe. Pridefully not wearing one in an intimate setting like a courtroom isn't something we should be encouraging or entertaining as okay.

Yes, you are literally not telling me anything I don't already know. I agree with you. Just saying I don't think someone wearing a mask automatically means they're "better" or suddenly not gonna get it. A thin bandana that doesn't offer any medical grade protection from particles should, logically, be worthy of chastising too, but people are more concerned about the appearance rather than the effectiveness, it seems. Nobody says anything when I wear a super thin headband over my mouth, when it offers no protection, but the appearance comforts people, which isn't very logical

[Stadler]

I know people who wore masks everywhere they went but they still got it; I know people who have gone everywhere without masks and not gotten it. I really don't think treating the mask like the new Star of David is logical. That said, Rudy is indeed an idiot

I know people that got knocked up while using a condom and/or other forms of birth control. We should still advocate for their use even if not 100% effective.

did you compare getting pregnant to getting a disease

but, yes, I agree, although we should let the individual make their own choice, if we're really going to compare masks to condoms

I compared the effectiveness of the tools we use vs our desired outcomes. Just because it doesn't always work doesn't mean it's not an effective solution. Seatbelts and airbags don't prevent every death in a car, but they're a good idea. Occasionally a pressure release valve fails on a hot water heater and blows up someone's house, but I'd still prefer all hot water systems have them. Brushing your teeth wont prevent every instance of cavities, but not many people seem to balk at that routine. I'm not claiming that masks are 100% effective. However, they're the bare minimum to keep those around you safe. Pridefully not wearing one in an intimate setting like a courtroom isn't something we should be encouraging or entertaining as okay.

I'm with you on this, 100%, and I wear my mask wherever I go.   But like all of those things, they are a good idea, but our government doesn't MAKE us do them.   I have never ever been with a woman who said "well, you know, if it was up to me I'd let you do me without a condom, but it's not in my hands...."   

I'm not arguing that the government SHOULDN'T make us - because when I'm having sex with that woman, the other people in proximity to us aren't going to get pregnant no matter what - but that's the point that all these analogies fall apart. 

[The Walrus]

I have never ever been with a woman who said "well, you know, if it was up to me I'd let you do me without a condom, but it's not in my hands...."   

That's the problem, it's not in her hands! 

[Ben_Jamin]

I know people who wore masks everywhere they went but they still got it; I know people who have gone everywhere without masks and not gotten it. I really don't think treating the mask like the new Star of David is logical. That said, Rudy is indeed an idiot

I know people that got knocked up while using a condom and/or other forms of birth control. We should still advocate for their use even if not 100% effective.

did you compare getting pregnant to getting a disease

but, yes, I agree, although we should let the individual make their own choice, if we're really going to compare masks to condoms

I compared the effectiveness of the tools we use vs our desired outcomes. Just because it doesn't always work doesn't mean it's not an effective solution. Seatbelts and airbags don't prevent every death in a car, but they're a good idea. Occasionally a pressure release valve fails on a hot water heater and blows up someone's house, but I'd still prefer all hot water systems have them. Brushing your teeth wont prevent every instance of cavities, but not many people seem to balk at that routine. I'm not claiming that masks are 100% effective. However, they're the bare minimum to keep those around you safe. Pridefully not wearing one in an intimate setting like a courtroom isn't something we should be encouraging or entertaining as okay.

Yes, you are literally not telling me anything I don't already know. I agree with you. Just saying I don't think someone wearing a mask automatically means they're "better" or suddenly not gonna get it. A thin bandana that doesn't offer any medical grade protection from particles should, logically, be worthy of chastising too, but people are more concerned about the appearance rather than the effectiveness, it seems. Nobody says anything when I wear a super thin headband over my mouth, when it offers no protection, but the appearance comforts people, which isn't very logical

That's the point. I see it as virtue signaling of a "sense of safety". Then, using your example, you wore a super thin headband, you are now basically the same as those that don't wear masks, as it offers no protection. That's why I laugh as well, because some of my shirts are thicker than the spare mask I bought online. Yet, my shirt doesn't qualify and people get upset because it's not a mask, or a "face shield" which has openings at the bottom and sides.

[jingle.boy]

I know people who wore masks everywhere they went but they still got it; I know people who have gone everywhere without masks and not gotten it. I really don't think treating the mask like the new Star of David is logical. That said, Rudy is indeed an idiot

I know people that got knocked up while using a condom and/or other forms of birth control. We should still advocate for their use even if not 100% effective.

did you compare getting pregnant to getting a disease

but, yes, I agree, although we should let the individual make their own choice, if we're really going to compare masks to condoms

I compared the effectiveness of the tools we use vs our desired outcomes. Just because it doesn't always work doesn't mean it's not an effective solution. Seatbelts and airbags don't prevent every death in a car, but they're a good idea. Occasionally a pressure release valve fails on a hot water heater and blows up someone's house, but I'd still prefer all hot water systems have them. Brushing your teeth wont prevent every instance of cavities, but not many people seem to balk at that routine. I'm not claiming that masks are 100% effective. However, they're the bare minimum to keep those around you safe. Pridefully not wearing one in an intimate setting like a courtroom isn't something we should be encouraging or entertaining as okay.

Yes, you are literally not telling me anything I don't already know. I agree with you. Just saying I don't think someone wearing a mask automatically means they're "better" or suddenly not gonna get it. A thin bandana that doesn't offer any medical grade protection from particles should, logically, be worthy of chastising too, but people are more concerned about the appearance rather than the effectiveness, it seems. Nobody says anything when I wear a super thin headband over my mouth, when it offers no protection, but the appearance comforts people, which isn't very logical

You're right... it's up to people to actually WANT to do the 'right' thing.  One could also wear a useless strap across their lap and call it a "seatbelt" to keep up appearances - and still get tossed thru their windshield.  But hey, they kept up the appearance!   

This isn't a shot at you Mike, cuz I'm sure you're not walking around with a headband over your mouth.  But if all people want to do is 'game' the rules, there's certainly no controlling that.

@ Stads... our gov't most certainly does "make" us do some of these things - building codes, health codes for the food industry, seatbelts for drivers, other safety standards for auto manufacturers ... the condom analogy falls apart (except for those knowing they have an STD), as does the teethbrushing, but the others do not.  As was noted, individual lack of compliance doesn't affect others in those senses.  Where gov't (imo) has the right to be involved is when said lack of compliance can directly affect the well-being of others.

[The Walrus]

I mean actually yes I am using that same headband I wore to ProgPower over my mouth and have been doing that for 5 months. Started when my 'real' mask broke when I tried putting it on and I've stuck with it since because I don't want someone to cause a scene while I'm buying eggs and also I just like to follow the rules of an establishment. If anything I'm going to chastise people who wear their masks incorrectly more than those who don't, at this point

[cramx3]

From my understanding, any cloth over the face is still better than nothing. 

[XeRocks81]

just so it’s clear the face covering isn’t to protect yourself.  It prevents your own droplets from traveling in the air and infecting others in case you are asymptomatic and don’t know.  So having anything over your nose and mouth, from the cheapest cloth to an n95 mask and faceshield, is better than none and if every single person in the grocery store or wherever has one the protection works as well as it can.

[The Walrus]

From my understanding, any cloth over the face is still better than nothing.

Yes. But .00001% more than nothing really doesn't mean much even if, mathematically, it checks out. That's my point. Bandanas, a ripped off piece of a t-shirt... it'll make you feel safer more than it actually prevents you from breathing in a microscopic particle. How many people are actually washing those face coverings (shirt, bandana, whatever) every time they come home? I know I don't

just so it’s clear the face covering isn’t to protect yourself.  It prevents your own droplets from traveling in the air and infecting others in case you are asymptomatic and don’t know.  So having anything over your nose and mouth, from the cheapest cloth to an n95 mask and faceshield, is better than none and if every single person in the grocery store or wherever has one the protection works as well as it can.

Yes. Literally everybody except science deniers knows all of this by now. Even if it is just .00001% more than nothing

[bosk1]

just so it’s clear the face covering isn’t to protect yourself.  It prevents your own droplets from traveling in the air and infecting others in case you are asymptomatic and don’t know.  So having anything over your nose and mouth, from the cheapest cloth to an n95 mask and faceshield, is better than none and if every single person in the grocery store or wherever has one the protection works as well as it can.

Yes. Literally everybody knows all of this by now. Who doesn't?

I guess...anyone who talks about masks in terms of what you breathe in rather than what you breathe out?

... it'll make you feel safer more than it actually prevents you from breathing in a microscopic particle.

Oh...er...oops.

[The Walrus]

A thin headband manufactured to be worn on the head, a t-shirt designed to be a t-shirt and not a mask, etc. doesn't offer the same protection against microscopic particles as medical masks even if it offers the slightest more protection. It doesn't matter if you're talking about breathing in or out, and just because it might offer the slightest bit more protection than wearing nothing doesn't mean it's suddenly gonna be helpful. This coming from a guy who wears masks, bandanas etc. every time he's out. Try to 'gotcha' me again though Jerry

[MoraWintersoul]

There's a lot of virtue signalling over masks because people refused to wear them (in some countries) and some still do (in some countries). When people finally start getting used to them and you guys get to have few months of politically neutral mask practice in your state, it will become a non-issue. Tbh I don't feel that safe when I'm going in and out of places even when everyone is wearing them. Some places are small and unventilated, you touch a lot of things and don't get to sanitize your hands every time you do that on the move, you have to fiddle with your mask a lot when you wear glasses... it's not that perfect. I saw a woman take off her mask to eat chips out of a bag on the public transport after touching the pole without doing a round of hand sanitizer, if she got infected she'd be like "I don't know how I got it, I wear a mask everywhere".

I was taking a B2 Norwegian exam today, and they said that you should stay home if you have symptoms, so I avoided going outside in the past week because it's cold and I didn't wanna get the sniffles and be judged by everyone. Well, I did all that anti-fitness for nothing, because a girl with a suspiciously dry cough showed up today, and no one told her anything at all

[bosk1]

A thin headband manufactured to be worn on the head, a t-shirt designed to be a t-shirt and not a mask, etc. doesn't offer the same protection against microscopic particles as medical masks even if it offers the slightest more protection. It doesn't matter if you're talking about breathing in or out, and just because it might offer the slightest bit more protection than wearing nothing doesn't mean it's suddenly gonna be helpful. This coming from a guy who wears masks, bandanas etc. every time he's out. Try to 'gotcha' me again though Jerry

It's not a "gotcha!"  It's just that, while you say "well, who doesn't know that?" when clearly MANY people--probably the majority--talk as if they do not.  I'm just highlighting that fact, and your own post made it easier to make the point.  When several posts on this page talk about begin safer by virtue of wearing a mask, or talk in terms of what you breathe in when wearing a mask, people either don't get it, or at least talk as if they don't. 

[The Walrus]

A thin headband manufactured to be worn on the head, a t-shirt designed to be a t-shirt and not a mask, etc. doesn't offer the same protection against microscopic particles as medical masks even if it offers the slightest more protection. It doesn't matter if you're talking about breathing in or out, and just because it might offer the slightest bit more protection than wearing nothing doesn't mean it's suddenly gonna be helpful. This coming from a guy who wears masks, bandanas etc. every time he's out. Try to 'gotcha' me again though Jerry

It's not a "gotcha!"  It's just that, while you say "well, who doesn't know that?" when clearly MANY people--probably the majority--talk as if they do not.  I'm just highlighting that fact, and your own post made it easier to make the point.  When several posts on this page talk about begin safer by virtue of wearing a mask, or talk in terms of what you breathe in when wearing a mask, people either don't get it, or at least talk as if they don't.

Even though I've made many posts in this thread clearly indicating I understand this, you went ahead and tried to imply that I don't understand that. I saw what you were doing with your "um.... er... oh... oops" crap, smartass. You breathe in, you breathe out. Both processes are relevant with respect to the mask issue and any particulate matter. If you were talking about other people, there's no reason for you to have quoted me there, you could've specified, and you would say the same thing to others. You know what you're doing, trying to rankle feathers. Which you succeeded at - congrats, I suppose. For someone who has chastised me on the regular for 'trolling' you as recently as a couple weeks ago in a Star Wars thread you sure know how to do it to others well. I accept your apology though

[bosk1]

It's not about you, so stop derailing the thread by trying to make it personal.  It isn't.  It's discussion.  There's a legitimate point to be made about people not getting it and/or talking about it like they don't get it.  So (1) thanks again for making the point for me, which your post did, and (2) sorry if you don't/can't understand the point being made and choose to focus on the fact that your post happened to be a poster child for that argument.

[The Walrus]

It's not about you, so stop derailing the thread by trying to make it personal.  It isn't.  It's discussion.  There's a legitimate point to be made about people not getting it and/or talking about it like they don't get it.  So (1) thanks again for making the point for me, which your post did, and (2) sorry if you don't/can't understand the point being made and choose to focus on the fact that your post happened to be a poster child for that argument.

You say it isn't about me and yet you went out of your way to use me as an example and use your "oh.. er... oops" thing to make it look like I don't understand what is being discussed. Stop insulting my intelligence. You do this all the time. Just ban me instead. It'll be much less of a pain in the ass than dealing with you treating me like a child. We constantly have this discussion about respecting one another publicly and through PM and we *both* pledge to be better but it always circles back to you never accepting responsibility for your own behavior or statements. So, honestly, I don't know what your problem is. You came in here to poke the bear and derail things with an unnecessary post aimed at agitating me, but it's my fault. Got it. You're sick of me and I'm sick of you. Your call, Warden, 'cause at this point I couldn't care less. It's your sandbox and I'm just kicking sand around in it.

[jingle.boy]

Will the two of you lighten up on one another?!?!  Mike... you know I'm one of the last one's to back Bosk, but you did kinda step in it yourself.  You stated that you full well know the reasons for masks, yet openly state you don't bother to wear a suitable mask.  There are countless studies (peer reviewed), that outline even 2-ply cloth masks reduce the spread, and have some benefit to the wearer.  Then you go on to say you're not bothered enough to do anything but wear a thin head band... and then make a comment about the effect of what you breathe in.

You kinda opened yourself up to the comments.  Let me ask you ... would you have been as bothered if I or someone else had made the comment, or are you just a tad sensitive to the post coming from Bosk?

[The Walrus]

Will the two of you lighten up on one another?!?!  Mike... you know I'm one of the last one's to back Bosk, but you did kinda step in it yourself.  You stated that you full well know the reasons for masks, yet openly state you don't bother to wear a suitable mask.  There are countless studies (peer reviewed), that outline even 2-ply cloth masks reduce the spread, and have some benefit to the wearer.  Then you go on to say you're not bothered enough to do anything but wear a thin head band... and then make a comment about the effect of what you breathe in.

You kinda opened yourself up to the comments.  Let me ask you ... would you have been as bothered if I or someone else had made the comment, or are you just a tad sensitive to the post coming from Bosk?

Motherfucker, Chad. I don't wear a suitable mask for numerous reasons (mostly convenience and I'm tired of buying masks), but NOT because I'm some anti-medical mask knuckdragger. I flat-out have said this morning that unsuitable masks are more effective than wearing nothing at all, but that I don't feel they actually offer MUCH protection at all (thin material - probably not being washed - people touching masks and not worrying about washing their hands - etc.), and are more effective at calming people due to the appearance of having something over your mouth. That's it. What you breathe in matters as much as what you're breathing out. I don't understand why there is confusion on this. You don't breathe one way. Also, yeah, I am sick of bosk's double standard shit especially when he admits to being overzealous in PM but then in public doubles down on his wrist slapping without acknowledging his unnecessary 'examples' which he could've used without trying to imply that I am dumb. Because it's gone on for 3 years now and I would rather he just ban me than put me through this eyeroll worthy ringer again. But I'll tap out now. Peace

[bosk1]

Again, the point is that, this far into this health crisis, people should clearly get what certain types of masks do and don't do.  And yet, the way people talk about it, it illustrates that there are at least two problems:  (1) a lot people use imprecise language that, taken literally, is incorrect; and (2) a lot of people clearly don't get it.  Several posts in this very thread illustrated the point.  The one that I quoted illustrated it perfectly, hence the quote. 

Off topic, sorry if that bothered you.  If it did, you can either take it to PM, or just roll with it and move on.  Sarcasm and humor are part of the way a lot of people post, myself included.  And I know sometimes, sarcasm and/or humor can be taken the wrong way.  In light of your latest post, I publicly apologize that I posted in such a way that you took it as me indirectly calling you "dumb."  Not my intent, and I'm sorry I posted something that was taken that way.  But my actual point was legitimate, and I'm not going to walk on eggshells before I quote someone and wonder whether or not they woke up on the right side of the bed and are going to take it the wrong way because they have decided they have a personal ax to grind that day. 

On topic, and back to the reasoning behind my post, I still legitimately don't understand why people don't understand what certain types of masks do, why, and in what context.  I'm not calling anyone out for making an informed decision that I happen to disagree with.  But I am legitimately bothered by the fact that this far along, a lot of those decisions are not informed, and are often based on dialog that perpetuates that misinformation.

[jingle.boy]

Will the two of you lighten up on one another?!?!  Mike... you know I'm one of the last one's to back Bosk, but you did kinda step in it yourself.  You stated that you full well know the reasons for masks, yet openly state you don't bother to wear a suitable mask.  There are countless studies (peer reviewed), that outline even 2-ply cloth masks reduce the spread, and have some benefit to the wearer.  Then you go on to say you're not bothered enough to do anything but wear a thin head band... and then make a comment about the effect of what you breathe in.

You kinda opened yourself up to the comments.  Let me ask you ... would you have been as bothered if I or someone else had made the comment, or are you just a tad sensitive to the post coming from Bosk?

Motherfucker, Chad. I don't wear a suitable mask for numerous reasons (mostly convenience and I'm tired of buying masks), but NOT because I'm some anti-medical mask knuckdragger. I flat-out have said this morning that unsuitable masks are more effective than wearing nothing at all, but that I don't feel they actually offer MUCH protection at all (thin material - probably not being washed - people touching masks and not worrying about washing their hands - etc.), and are more effective at calming people due to the appearance of having something over your mouth. That's it. What you breathe in matters as much as what you're breathing out. I don't understand why there is confusion on this. You don't breathe one way.

No one called you an anti-mask'r, or a kuckdragger.  Only trying to reconcile what seems like opposing statements.   

The only thing each and everyone of us can do is control ourselves.  Your rational for why you don't wear an appropriate mask is illogical to me. Even in this above post here, you acknowledge they don't do much, and imply you're only wearing a mask to help keep other people calm.  Personally, I do it because I can only control my actions - so I choose to do everything within my power.  I wear gloves when I'll be touching things in public places.  The jingle.family has 4-5 masks each, and we wash them each visit outside of the house. I wash or sanitize after anytime I've touched anything in public (we keep sanitizer in our vehicles)  I can't control what others do/don't do, only myself.  That's how I roll.

[bosk1]

On a different subtopic, I heard something this morning that I thought was interesting.  I radio commentator I was listening to suggested that the elderly be given less of a priority for the eventual vaccine, and that, e.g., grocery store workers be giving higher priority.  The reasoning is that there are workers out there in capacities that are crucial for our society and business infrastructure that, by virtue of the nature of their jobs, have to interact with others, so it is therefore better for the overall recovery of our society as a whole to protect those people first.  What do you all think of that?

[cramx3]

On topic, and back to the reasoning behind my post, I still legitimately don't understand why people don't understand what certain types of masks do, why, and in what context.  I'm not calling anyone out for making an informed decision that I happen to disagree with.  But I am legitimately bothered by the fact that this far along, a lot of those decisions are not informed, and are often based on dialog that perpetuates that misinformation.

People are bozos.  My pediatrician friend's stories about parents refusing to follow guidelines while their children have tested positive is mind blowing. 

I've always considered myself a selfish person, but I'm starting to think I might not be so bad given the way many Americans are handling this.

As Jingle said, you can only control yourself, so it's best to be educated and do the things you can to help everyone else, but many can't seem to be bothered educating themselves so they are clueless about what they can do to help everyone.

[Chino]

On a different subtopic, I heard something this morning that I thought was interesting.  I radio commentator I was listening to suggested that the elderly be given less of a priority for the eventual vaccine, and that, e.g., grocery store workers be giving higher priority.  The reasoning is that there are workers out there in capacities that are crucial for our society and business infrastructure that, by virtue of the nature of their jobs, have to interact with others, so it is therefore better for the overall recovery of our society as a whole to protect those people first.  What do you all think of that?

For me that would depend on what constitutes "elderly". I work in a grocery store on the weekends, and if it came down to me or my 66 year old mother getting a vaccine, I'd give it to her every time. Assuming visiting bans are still in effect, I don't think it'd be the worst thing to not vaccinate the elderly patients of nursing homes (assuming that vaccination is required by all staff).

I see the point in the argument though, but think I'd rather see children, teachers, bus drivers, school officials, and the janitorial staff vaccinated before grocery store workers. Getting schools back to a normal schedule would do wonders for the mental health of a lot of parents right now and would mitigate a lot of the problems parents are having while working from home and juggling kids.

[Grappler]

On a different subtopic, I heard something this morning that I thought was interesting.  I radio commentator I was listening to suggested that the elderly be given less of a priority for the eventual vaccine, and that, e.g., grocery store workers be giving higher priority.  The reasoning is that there are workers out there in capacities that are crucial for our society and business infrastructure that, by virtue of the nature of their jobs, have to interact with others, so it is therefore better for the overall recovery of our society as a whole to protect those people first.  What do you all think of that?

I've heard it described as making sure "essential" workers have access to it first.  My issue is that the definition essential is very broad - I'm essential because I work in insurance, in the financial sector.  But I sit behind a desk all day and don't come into much contact with people, especially since the pandemic began and I spend 4 days a week working at home. 

I don't agree with putting a kid stocking grocery shelves in place ahead of an elderly person (like my parents or in-laws) who have to walk through that store to buy their groceries. 

[lonestar]

I mean actually yes I am using that same headband I wore to ProgPower over my mouth and have been doing that for 5 months. Started when my 'real' mask broke when I tried putting it on and I've stuck with it since because I don't want someone to cause a scene while I'm buying eggs and also I just like to follow the rules of an establishment. If anything I'm going to chastise people who wear their masks incorrectly more than those who don't, at this point

Imagine where we'd be if this was a universal sentiment.

[cramx3]

I'm not too worried about the prioritization, there's a significant amount of people who are going to refuse it and there's going to be plenty of doses available in 2021. I think healthcare gets it first, then maybe the most vulnerable which isn't necessarily old people but ones with immunocompromised systems.  Then we can trickle down to the ones who are most exposed like essential workers and teachers/children. 

I think a lot of grocery store people who have been working throughout the whole pandemic are probably more likely to have some sort of immunity at this point than the people who have been locked up since this started.

[bosk1]

I think children are near the bottom.  Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, children are both the least impacted and are at or near the bottom in terms of being vectors as well.

[jingle.boy]

I think children are near the bottom.  Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, children are both the least impacted and are at or near the bottom in terms of being vectors as well.

They're generally accepted as the most useless contributors to society too.

[cramx3]

I think children are near the bottom.  Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, children are both the least impacted and are at or near the bottom in terms of being vectors as well.

They're generally accepted as the most useless contributors to society too.

  yea you may be right about them being least susceptible, but I lumped them in as it might get schools back on track sooner which helps society as a whole.

[bosk1]

I think children are near the bottom.  Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, children are both the least impacted and are at or near the bottom in terms of being vectors as well.

They're generally accepted as the most useless contributors to society too.

You mean, besides politicians, right? 

[King Postwhore]

I think children are near the bottom.  Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, children are both the least impacted and are at or near the bottom in terms of being vectors as well.

They're generally accepted as the most useless contributors to society too.

You mean, besides politicians, right? 

I got to agree with bosk1 here.