Masks Outdoors

[RustyK]

Please move this to the political forum....

[gardi]

The real problem is there's lots of scientists with slightly differing views on what's going on.

Actually, I think the real problem is that when people don't like what the scientific community says, they find some lone dissenting quack with a differing view and use that as justification to disregard the science.

I agree with both of you. Scientist having differing views is healthy (in that in ensures that all possible variables and interpretations are eventually tested) and they are in fact trained to always think of alternative explanations, but it also poses a challenge when communicating with the public. However I think that the root cause of the problem is the huge distrust of our institutions (and politicians, and I won't get into whether it's deserved or not). If we all trusted that CDC guidelines are issued in good faith, after balancing the scientific consensus with other practical considerations, perhaps we wouldn't be second guessing them or scrutinizing the opinions of individual scientists.

[hillbangin]

The real problem is there's lots of scientists with slightly differing views on what's going on.

Actually, I think the real problem is that when people don't like what the scientific community says, they find some lone dissenting quack with a differing view and use that as justification to disregard the science.

I agree it's about mitigating risks. But to understand the risks you have to start by understanding the science. Proposals that are based on an erroneous premise (e.g. I'm vaccinated so I can't get infected) should be disregarded.

That's what I said.

Who's science?

Its pretty easy to figure out the one off quack.



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[gardi]

Does anyone know if Killington has lifted the mask requirement now that the CDC issued updated guidance?

I'm not sure how the updated guidance would affect the requirement since it still calls for masks in "crowded settings" (I think a busy lift line would be considered a crowded setting). While I suppose that they could consider relaxing the policy on weekdays if not too many people are on the hill I don't think they have anything to gain by it, so I would guess that they won't change anything until next season. Maybe we'll be able to get on the lift (with a bike) without a mask on at some point this summer, but I wouldn't count on that either.

[easyrider16]

Agreed, it should be easy to spot if you dispassionately consider the scientific evidence rather than searching for evidence to support your predisposed notion.

The other major issue is that people seem to have a hard time accepting that scientific understanding evolves over time. CDC's guidlelines in the beginning were based on a limited understanding of this particular virus. As understandimg grew, guidelines were updated. Yet people took that as evidence that CDC guidelines should be ignored because they were "wrong" in the beginning.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[spanky]

Please move this to the political forum....

Will watch this. As of now, I don’t think it’s political. What do others think?

As for outdoor masks, let me see if I understand those that think we should be wearing masks outside… it is not OK to be maskless outside when not in close proximity to others (let’s define close proximity as within 6 feet for more than 5 minutes) BUT it is OK to be maskless INSIDE a restaurant for an hour or more with other maskless people in the same “room”? We all know everyone breathes the same air inside. If we didn’t, it would still be OK to smoke indoors.

[gardi]

Please move this to the political forum....

Will watch this. As of now, I don’t think it’s political. What do others think?

As for outdoor masks, let me see if I understand those that think we should be wearing masks outside… it is not OK to be maskless outside when not in close proximity to others (let’s define close proximity as within 6 feet for more than 5 minutes) BUT it is OK to be maskless INSIDE a restaurant for an hour or more with other maskless people in the same “room”? We all know everyone breathes the same air inside. If we didn’t, it would still be OK to smoke indoors.

I was thinking that it wasn't particularly political at least for the standards of this board

I don't think anyone thinks that being maskless inside a restaurant is less risky than being maskless outside (at least I hope so). It's more an issue of not being able to eat with a mask on and not wanting all restaurants to go bankrupt. I'm not sure what would have been the best way of balancing that (nor would my opinion be particularly relevant).

[RENO]

I was wearing my mask at K. For some reason I got strange looks?

[Bubba]

Please move this to the political forum....

Will watch this. As of now, I don’t think it’s political. What do others think?

As for outdoor masks, let me see if I understand those that think we should be wearing masks outside… it is not OK to be maskless outside when not in close proximity to others (let’s define close proximity as within 6 feet for more than 5 minutes) BUT it is OK to be maskless INSIDE a restaurant for an hour or more with other maskless people in the same “room”? We all know everyone breathes the same air inside. If we didn’t, it would still be OK to smoke indoors.

I didn't think it was political either, at least not yet or at least not for the most part. Maybe we need a Pseudo-Scientists Forum?

[hillbangin]

The science says there's no Covid inside a restaurant. That's why you wear your mask going in but you take it off while you are eating. Everything is fine because the restaurant staff is wearing masks.

My favorite one is airplanes. Unlike resturants there is Covid inside the plane that has better ventilation than any restaurant you have ever eaten in. And it's generally cleaner.

Lastly. There is no Covid while you are sitting down at the Umbrella Bar eating and drinking. Butt, you have to wear your mask while you are standing in line waiting to sit outside to eat and drink without your mask on.

None of this is political. It's insane.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[gardi]

The science says there's no Covid inside a restaurant. That's why you wear your mask going in but you take it off while you are eating. Everything is fine because the restaurant staff is wearing masks.

My favorite one is airplanes. Unlike resturants there is Covid inside the plane that has better ventilation than any restaurant you have ever eaten in. And it's generally cleaner.

Lastly. There is no Covid while you are sitting down at the Umbrella Bar eating and drinking. Butt, you have to wear your mask while you are standing in line waiting to sit outside to eat and drink without your mask on.

None of this is political. It's insane.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I don't disagree that it doesn't make sense, but it's unfair to imply that it's the result of a scientific conspiracy. What scientific study suggested that there's no covid inside a restaurant? As far as I know the CDC always stated that it's a risky behavior (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/ ... mm6936a5_x).

The restaurant exception has nothing to do with the science and everything to do with the economy. And yes, airlines claim that their planes are so well ventilated that the probability of transmission is really low. And they funded studies that reached somewhat surprising (at least to me) conclusions supporting that. I can't refute them without data, but I think a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable given past experience (with the tobacco industry for instance). That's why reputable scientific journals require a disclosure of conflicts of interest. Unfortunately, since we gave up on contact tracing they have benefited from the almost impossibility of tracing the source of an infection (and thus of figuring out how many come from airplanes).

I don't know why it's so strange to you that the rules are just an attempt to compromise. Of course eating indoors is more (or equally) risky than standing in line. But while you can stand in line with a mask, you can't eat while wearing one. Just because you accept a bit of extra risk (at the population level) to try to keep some restaurants from closing doesn't mean that you have to give up entirely on trying to contain the spread.

[spanky]

The science says there's no Covid inside a restaurant. That's why you wear your mask going in but you take it off while you are eating. Everything is fine because the restaurant staff is wearing masks.

My favorite one is airplanes. Unlike resturants there is Covid inside the plane that has better ventilation than any restaurant you have ever eaten in. And it's generally cleaner.

Lastly. There is no Covid while you are sitting down at the Umbrella Bar eating and drinking. Butt, you have to wear your mask while you are standing in line waiting to sit outside to eat and drink without your mask on.

None of this is political. It's insane.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I don't disagree that it doesn't make sense, but it's unfair to imply that it's the result of a scientific conspiracy. What scientific study suggested that there's no covid inside a restaurant? As far as I know the CDC always stated that it's a risky behavior (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/ ... mm6936a5_x).

The restaurant exception has nothing to do with the science and everything to do with the economy. And yes, airlines claim that their planes are so well ventilated that the probability of transmission is really low. And they funded studies that reached somewhat surprising (at least to me) conclusions supporting that. I can't refute them without data, but I think a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable given past experience (with the tobacco industry for instance). That's why reputable scientific journals require a disclosure of conflicts of interest. Unfortunately, since we gave up on contact tracing they have benefited from the almost impossibility of tracing the source of an infection (and thus of figuring out how many come from airplanes).

I don't know why it's so strange to you that the rules are just an attempt to compromise. Of course eating indoors is more (or equally) risky than standing in line. But while you can stand in line with a mask, you can't eat while wearing one. Just because you accept a bit of extra risk (at the population level) to try to keep some restaurants from closing doesn't mean that you have to give up entirely on trying to contain the spread.

I’m pretty sure there was just a bit of sarcasm in hillbangin’s response.

[gardi]

The science says there's no Covid inside a restaurant. That's why you wear your mask going in but you take it off while you are eating. Everything is fine because the restaurant staff is wearing masks.

My favorite one is airplanes. Unlike resturants there is Covid inside the plane that has better ventilation than any restaurant you have ever eaten in. And it's generally cleaner.

Lastly. There is no Covid while you are sitting down at the Umbrella Bar eating and drinking. Butt, you have to wear your mask while you are standing in line waiting to sit outside to eat and drink without your mask on.

None of this is political. It's insane.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I don't disagree that it doesn't make sense, but it's unfair to imply that it's the result of a scientific conspiracy. What scientific study suggested that there's no covid inside a restaurant? As far as I know the CDC always stated that it's a risky behavior (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/ ... mm6936a5_x).

The restaurant exception has nothing to do with the science and everything to do with the economy. And yes, airlines claim that their planes are so well ventilated that the probability of transmission is really low. And they funded studies that reached somewhat surprising (at least to me) conclusions supporting that. I can't refute them without data, but I think a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable given past experience (with the tobacco industry for instance). That's why reputable scientific journals require a disclosure of conflicts of interest. Unfortunately, since we gave up on contact tracing they have benefited from the almost impossibility of tracing the source of an infection (and thus of figuring out how many come from airplanes).

I don't know why it's so strange to you that the rules are just an attempt to compromise. Of course eating indoors is more (or equally) risky than standing in line. But while you can stand in line with a mask, you can't eat while wearing one. Just because you accept a bit of extra risk (at the population level) to try to keep some restaurants from closing doesn't mean that you have to give up entirely on trying to contain the spread.

I’m pretty sure there was just a bit of sarcasm in hillbangin’s response.

Ah, sorry I missed that. That must be why easyrider's reply disappeared...

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[throbster]

Can the hospital style masks be used as a panty liner? Asking for asher8675309.

[asher2789]

For the love of God, end the mask requirement for outdoors.

Will Biden follow the science?

one of the rare times i agree with you.

masks should only be worn outdoors if you're in a crowd of people. so i'd still wear one if i was in a busy lift maze, even if the mandate was lifted (although by the looks of it the season will probably end before the mandate will).

having stupid rules just makes people respect the rules less, which leads to people disrespecting the rules that do keep them safe. this isn't just in regards to masks but any rule/law, really.