Airline CEOs got it right

@syag-lchochma You never answered the question. What have people said that makes them skeptical of Yiddishkeit while taking COVID by faith alone?

@orangecountychapper That’s true, it’s all about what passengers want, what shareholders want, and whether they could be liable if someone gets sick on a plane.

Orange > HEPA filters didn’t change it then and still won’t change it.

I am not 100% sure, but I believe that pre-pandemic filtering was insufficient, it was known that it made infection go around, but nobody cared. As I did not research it in detail, I hesitate to claim it, so consider this an opinion.

> For now, I will wear a mask

As was already mentioned, not clear how masking became a symbol of rebellion. We wear a lot of stuff that restrict our movement – from socks to hats. There are so many serious topics to discuss about Covid: medical, educational, work, helping those who need help in any of those. The focus on anti-masking, anti-vaxxing is really very childish. Sad that the country is holding by this, and even sadder that our community does.

>> “The focus on anti-masking, anti-vaxxing is really very childish. ”
Syag> No kidding. Glad you finally realize it.

What I mean that people who protest very basic public health measures, such as masks and vaccines, are behaving childishly.

I have no idea what you mean by “follow their doctors”. 98% of doctors are vaccinated and probably 100% are working in masks. Are you saying that 30% of the population that are not vaccinated or not wearing masks are following recommendation of their actual doctors? This does not sound probable, and I was asking people here and not getting response. Btw, as of today, most of US is under omicron that partially avoids previous immunity both vaccine and disease. Do you expect people who touted their “natural immunity” to change their opinion? I don’t.

Syag, we had looong discussions here with some of these guys and they all refer to websites, inner knowledge and personal choice. I was asking whether anyone was told this by their regular physician and heard babkes back. I am sure there are some, but they do not add up to the numbers of those who stand by those positions. Our religion makes a stand whether to drink a cup in 1 or 2 or 3 gulps. Surely, we can consider risks to life as religious issue. I am not insisting that my position is right, I am just throwing arguments out there and always happy to hear a reasoned argument back.

Re:omicron. What I read so far: most data so far is on transmission that seems not to be slowed much by JJ/AZ/Chinese/Russian vaccines, only in part by 3rd dose of mRNAs. And seems the same for “natural immunity”.

I first thought that “3rd” means “recent”, but I saw slides comparing 2nd and 3rd on the same day after the dose and difference was large. It is now admitted that having 3-4 weeks between 1st and 2nd doses were not ideal, Brits are now recommending 3 months for kids between vaccines. Maybe this explains decrease after 2nd dose. As to serious cases, everyone seem to hope that all previous exposures help, but the data from the field is not in, it will come in several weeks.

Syag,
an interesting case of mask and public discourse: some articles today quote a michigan study where schools with no rules now have same transmission as schools with rules. Hurrah!

Click on the study and you see a very simple timeline: both types of school started at the same rate in august, then masked schools stayed 20-30% below the unmasked and then all schools experienced sharp increase in November becoming equal by thanksgiving and then all falling down together. So, if you care about number of kids who were infected (and transmitted to families, etc) you would understand that total number of sick people is way less in masked case. If you care about making a silly point – you point to the plot and say – see they are now the same.

Same presentation shows 13x higher rate of death for unvaxed v vaxed, standardized by age, and a plot of direct correlation between state cumulative death rate and vaccination rates. None of this is quoted, of course, in those childish articles.

So here’s the thing. Your article had nothing to do with what I was saying to you. And then you supported that inability to acknowledge there can be information you don’t like with a second response of lableling everything you don’t want to hear to be “unreasonable” (I wasn’t referring to Health’s suggestions at any point)
And now you seem to have repeatedly added the word childish to try to add a demeaning quality to not just other views, but to those who read them.

Last try – it is your behavior that is offensive, not the science. (the real science of course. The kind doctor use when they worry about patients and not politics) Your behavior is offensive, not the science. What you have done with your beliefs is offensive, not what it true.

@syag-lchochma There’s the Syag I know and love! Well, I’m glad at least this time you aren’t responding with all-caps “LIAR LIAR” when I didn’t directly quote your question word for word, I guess we’ve all matured. Let’s pretend I have a bad memory. Can you copy and paste the answer you gave to the following question “What examples are there of the very same people who question and dismiss away many aspects of judaism are willing to accept all covid facts with blind faith?”

I’m agreeing with @always_ask_questions over here. Masking is a very basic measure that has been proven to be extremely effective against COVID, even in the absence of a vaccine. So are vaccinations. The current opposition to vaccines and masking is nothing short of childish. The current dangerous claim is that single girls who get vaccinated won’t have children. In a year when that’s proved to be more nonsense you and the others will move on to another, equally ridiculous, lie.

And on a similar note, although many of these people that seem to be cheering on COVID claim that many doctors are against vaccinations, at no point have I heard of any of these people asking their local physician that they always go to if they should get vaccinated and wear a mask. It’s always some random guy on the Internet with a PhD in paleontology or something.

Can you explain to me how you “reprimand” me for a ‘snarky’ comment and then write the paragraph above which I’d say snarky is probably too nice to describe? As you say, “nobody appreciates snark” umm, except you when it works for you, right? seems to be a pattern here….

CS: On a serious note, the mask requirement on airplanes has always baffled me (and I’m generally a supporter of indoor mask requirements in crowded situations with unknown up close and personal seating). How are you “safer” when the rules allow you to take off the mask for what I would guess is typically 1/3 to 1/2 the time you are seated for drinking and eating. Perhaps its better than no mask for the entire flight but otherwise only contributes to public cynicism of (and non-compliance with) public health rules.
P.S. I’m generally a veggie and big fan of tofu-based chulent. Much healthier for the heart (albeit perhaps less so for the atmosphere).

GH – I have been baffled about the mask off when you eat policies as well. Unfortunately I have been told (by doctors) that it is because the masks don’t really work so no harm done. I think the inconsistency has contributed to the turn-off/non compliance (as it tends to do in most situations) which is unfortunate. I would love for some real rules based on real science and real data presented by real, non politically funded projects. Not expecting it to happen but a girl can dream.

On a tangent, if you don’t mind me asking. I have noticed you and CS seem to think mentioning cholent and the ozone layer is really funny, as it comes up more often than I personally feel comfortable with. My question is, tho, I haven’t really met anyone over 10 that enjoys that joke anymore and I think you are both my senior. Is this what I have to look forward to in my sunset years?

GH> “mask-on/mask-off” comedy under the current rules where you open a bottle of water

I am not defending a specific policy, but the idea is to reduce risk while minimizing inconvenience to the public. Obviously, no free-loving person would sacrifice his lunch to protect some stranger. So, thus the rules. Presuming that 80% of public have masks on 80% of the time, this reduces risk a lot.

See the MI report I mention above comparing school with and without masks. Significant difference even presumably enforcement was not 100% and they also had breakfast, lunch, and recess. Report actually had a group of “partial mask mandate” – and it was much closer to masked than to the no mask.

Yserbius, rules for new variant are unclear. Looking at preventing serious disease, you may be right that high vaccination/previous disease by itself will prevent worst outcomes. Masks will limit transmission. Usefulness of masks may depend on SD and ventilation …

I wonder whether high transmissibility means that those who are generally relaxed should plan for the easiest way to go thru infection: a vaccine in addition to initial dose or previous infection and plan for some exposure under light conditions – so that as they are getting infected, they are not getting a huge dose by sitting in an office for hours with people…

to those with “natural infection”, they should follow recommendations for booster similar to those with vaccination. Antibodies are at about same level 6 months after either event (vaccination higher first, but declining faster)

common > fervor in the way they approach masks etc and have a very nonchalnt take on frumkiet and yiddishkiet.

in case, I am irritating someone’s nostrils, let me clarify unstated: my concern is yiddishkeit. Any unscripted event sent to us by Hashem reveals people’s thinking beyond the formal training they got in school. So, when people start saying: I don’t care about others, let them protect themselves; don’t listen to the psak, the rabbi is senile; this is obviously not yiddishkeit I know. The other part where I probably irritate you is listing cases where I suggest violating usual Jewish conventions: I bring them to point out cases where there is a trade-off with other, neglected, values. This is 1% of cases, I am not going to write here about 99% cases where there is no question. And you would not like to read me talking about me being inspired by natilas yadaim in the morning.

Commonsaychel – thank you.

Commonsaychel,

They won’t fly

I don’t ask Airplane CEO’s or anybody else that is not a Medical professional for medical advice and I surely do not take their advice.
I definitely don’t take medical advice from a 35 year old judge who was rated as NOT QUALIFIED by the ABA when she was nominated 2 years earlier. Her admission to the bar was in 2012 and she had not tried a single case, civil or criminal, as lead or co-counsel when she was given by Lame Duck Trump and his band of Republican Traitors a life-time appointment.

Republicans can consider themselves the pro-life party from today until tomorrow but we all know that they don’t give a hoot about living humans.

The real priority now is to provide some clear legal authority for responding to future pandemics including specification of conditions under which emergency actions can be mandated, duration of emergency and mechanisms for speedy judicial review. Otherwise, we will simply reinvent the past two years of uncertainty and litigation with no clear lines of authority and seemingly endless legal challenges.

age of the judge does not seem to be the problem in this case. Liberals were musing on the radio whether it is worth appealing the ruling because there is a real chance that the Supremes will uphold it. So, the ruling is not baseless. The issue seems to hedge on what “and other measures” mean in the law. I would say that CDC was justified using emergency powers in first several months but Congress should step up and define the Fed powers exactly.

Practically speaking:
– airlines and buses should be able to designate masked and non-masked sections, or at least let passengers exchange seats.
– please look out for elderly people in your neighborhood who took public transportation and now might not use it and would need a ride (with an open window)

Dr pepper )) You also neglected to mention that the ABA said that she “has a very keen intellect, a strong work ethic and an impressive resume

If this quote is correct, I would also be interested to know what caused jackk to post misleading information? Maybe he replied 9na secondary source for the quote. I don’t believe someone would have a yetzer hara to purposefully distort information in order to score a point against another avatar

@Always_Ask_Questions

In order to fully appreciate the post by @jackk you have to take into account not only what he wrote but also what he did NOT write (i.e. read between the lines).

Before I get into what I read between the lines; here’s a quote from jackk in a different thread explaining why he so forcefully defends the Democrats despite writing earlier in the same thread that a Frum Yid should not stand behind either party.

“I defend the Democrats forcefully in the CR. They have positions that a Frum Yid should agree with and the Republicans have some positions that a Frum Yid should reject.

If everyone in the CR respected that there can be different views, I would barely have what to say. I am defending the Democrats from the views of those who believe that they are completely Evil and that Republicans are completely Righteous, and that it is assur to vote Democrat.”

With that being said here’s what I read between the lines:

1. jackk made it very clear that he’s angered by this ruling.

What jackk did NOT say is why he’s angered by the ruling. As someone who hasn’t shown the same amount of anger towards the slaughter of unborn babies, or to perverts being allowed to follow young girls into a locker-room under the guise that they woke up feeling like a female that morning- he’s clearly not concerned about the safety of others. If I had to guess what’s really bothering him over here- it’s that he was hoping that before the elections President Biden (or another Democrat) would remove the mask mandate and voters would forget about the price of gas and sky high inflation and vote for Democrats. Now that the mandate had been ruled as unconstitutional, and by a judge appointed by a Republican, that’s no longer an option.

2. jackk did say that he won’t take medical advice from a 35 year old judge…

What jackk did NOT say is that the judge wasn’t making the decision based on medical expertise- the decision was based on whether the CDC had the authority to make the decision in the first place. jackk also did NOT say that a judge is supposed to rule based on the law- not what they want the law to be. The judge’s hands were tied in this case.

3. jackk did say that the ABA rated the judge as not qualified.

What jackk did NOT say is that the rating was made based on the judge not having the recommended amount of legal experience. jackk also did NOT say that the ABA said that she “has a very keen intellect, a strong work ethic and an impressive resume” and that “her integrity and demeanor are not in question”. (You can check out her biography on Wikipedia just like I did.)

4. jackk did say that her admission to the bar was in 2012 and she had not tried a single case, civil or criminal… when she was given… a life-time appointment.

What jackk did NOT say is that Supreme Court Justice Elana Kagan was NEVER a judge at all and that was a life-time appointment to an even higher court!

5. jackk did say that “they don’t give a hoot about living humans”.

What jackk DID say is “living” humans- read between the lines over there.

(As a side point I do think that Republicans care more about humans (both living and unborn) hence they are against abortion, against defunding the police and against taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens who want to protect themselves from the lawlessness that the Democrats are creating.)