Your Day

OccultHawk · 12-21-2020, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

Ok, word police. Good chat. Changes absolutely nothing.

I need to go to work.

Don’t breathe. There’s covid there.

Plankton · 12-21-2020, 12:21 PM

Well, I know that made my day.

Have good work day.

WWWP · 12-21-2020, 12:38 PM

Such self righteousness in here lol

Y'all are acting like jwb is out there in covid central maskless and making out with the general public.

@Plank remember when OH roasted you for seeing your lady friend in March and suggested you're hands are bloodied by the inevitable death sentences you had signed?

@OH remember how you hate your family and wouldn't be visiting them anyway?

@Frown actually nah you're not in this category

Y'all don't have social pods? You're truly unable to assess your own risk level? Learn how to adapt, boomers.

Trollheart · 12-21-2020, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWWP

Sure, I was speaking more to the general public.

If I were you I'd be going to see my family too. You're right that everything is risk/reward, and this deep into it those numbers are fluctuating.

There's nothing rational about the "if you don't wear a mask you're killing grandma" line of thinking either.

I don't understand this. I live in constant fear of accidentally bringing it home to Karen, who would almost certainly die if she got it. Masks protect you and others, people in the older age bracket get it easier and find it harder to fight it, so why is there nothing rational about this argument? It makes perfect sense.

**Marie Monday** · 12-21-2020, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

I don't understand this. I live in constant fear of accidentally bringing it home to Karen, who would almost certainly die if she got it. Masks protect you and others, people in the older age bracket get it easier and find it harder to fight it, so why is there nothing rational about this argument? It makes perfect sense.

For most people who are lower risk it's too exaggerated to be fair. If I thought there was a realistic chance I'd kill my family by going back for Christmas I'd never have done it. I don't know the details of Karen's situation of course, but her health seems to be very fragile, and it's logical that you're more cautious.

@jwb's later comments, that's fair. What I'm saying about my own case is also basically a risk/cost analysis.

WWWP · 12-21-2020, 01:00 PM

I'm not anti-mask, I tend to err on the side of overly-cautious. But essentially it's correlation =/= causation.

I have family members I am not visiting because of the risk. I have family members I am visiting because of the lack of risk. It's not even about it being too exaggerated or anything regarding fairness, it's just a case by case basis that requires critical thinking.

"If you don't wear a mask you have blood on your hands" is the same as saying "if you use the wrong pronoun for someone you are transphobic."

rostasi · 12-21-2020, 01:01 PM

There is no such thing as "lower risk"
when it comes to getting the virus folks.

OccultHawk · 12-21-2020, 01:06 PM

Quote:

OH roasted you for seeing your lady friend in March and suggested you're hands are bloodied by the inevitable death sentences you had signed?

If everyone behaved like me in March we would’ve beaten this thing like so many other countries. I stand by that reaction now more than ever. It’s been proven beyond any measure of doubt that I was dead on correct. All we had to do was not compromise during that window. Other countries did it.

Quote:

I live in constant fear of accidentally bringing it home to Karen, who would almost certainly die if she got it.

That’s exactly why I’ve said what I’ve said and behaved how I’ve behaved.

Quote:

I don't know the details of Karen's situation of course, but her health seems to be very fragile, and it's logical that you're more cautious.

It’s logical that EVERYBODY be more cautious so people Like them can return to normalcy someday. It’s CONTAGIOUS. I understand that I have to sacrifice because I understand that my poor behavior puts them at greater risk.

Quote:

boomers

Yes because boomers are so well know for putting others first.

Quote:

remember how you hate your family and wouldn't be visiting them anyway?

I haven’t made a single social visit once since this broke. I do have friends and loved ones that I’ve put on hold this entire time without exception. Not one in person visit. I don’t do anything unless it’s mandatory for my survival.

That’s the sacrifice that we needed. Universally. I did my part but I still have to live in the valley of death because of others greed, selfishness, and stupidity.

Trollheart · 12-21-2020, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marie Monday

For most people who are lower risk it's too exaggerated to be fair. If I thought there was a realistic chance I'd kill my family by going back for Christmas I'd never have done it. I don't know the details of Karen's situation of course, but her health seems to be very fragile, and it's logical that you're more cautious.

@jwb's later comments, that's fair. What I'm saying about my own case is also basically a risk/cost analysis.

Karen has MS, is confined to bed, has difficulty breathing, can do nothing for herself and because of the breathing I've been advised by a doctor when she was in hospital earlier this year (at the height of the outbreak - colour me **** scared) that if she did contract it they could not risk putting her on a ventilator, in the same way as, when she was going for an operation to have her gall bladder removed, there were literally weeks of consultations to see if it was safe to put her under. The terrifying pronouncement: if we anaestethise her she may not come back out of it" is something you never want to hear.

So would she just die then? No answer. Luckily she got out okay, but now I have to be extra-extra careful, to the extent that the only real remaining member of my family I would want to see has agreed it would be too dangerous to take the risk to come up at Christmas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWWP

I'm not anti-mask, I tend to err on the side of overly-cautious. But essentially it's correlation =/= causation.

I have family members I am not visiting because of the risk. I have family members I am visiting because of the lack of risk. It's not even about it being too exaggerated or anything regarding fairness, it's just a case by case basis that requires critical thinking.

"If you don't wear a mask you have blood on your hands" is the same as saying "if you use the wrong pronoun for someone you are transphobic."

How do you assess the risk? Anyone can get it, and just because they may be in a lower risk category medically (young, no underlying conditions etc) doesn't by any means imply they're safe and you can just go ahead in the knowledge they won't get it. That's really specious reasoning to me. If there's ANY chance - particularly with the vaccines now being rolled out, so it's not like this will go on forever - then surely the safe and sane thing to do is err on the side of caution and stay away?

OccultHawk · 12-21-2020, 01:11 PM

Quote:

If I thought there was a realistic chance I'd kill my family by going back for Christmas I'd never have done it.

There’s other people who aren’t in your family that have compromised immune systems and other co-morbidities.

It’s contagious.

12-21-2020, 12:21 PM	#71472 (permalink)
Plankton Just Keep Swimming... Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: See signature... Posts: 7,765	Well, I know that made my day. Have good work day. __________________ See location...

12-21-2020, 01:01 PM	#71477 (permalink)
rostasi . Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 4,040	There is no such thing as "lower risk" when it comes to getting the virus folks.