Who thinks the CDC will roll back their new mask rules from two days ago?

[Laura72]

Are you saying that your brother is vaccinated and is very ill with the Indian variant? I thought that in countries where that variant has spread (particularly Britain) only the unvaccinated were getting sick with that variant. If that's not the case, then that's really, really bad news.

My state dropped the mask requirement on Friday at midnight, and almost immediately nearly every business in our area dropped their mask mandates right away. It's frustrating to me, because I have two partially vaccinated children (they got their first doses on Thursday) and one child who is not eligible to be vaccinated until July 20th. This will really restrict their summertime activities - I can have them wear masks when we go places, but I'm in a pretty anti-vax county and I expect unvaccinated people to shed their masks pretty immediately, so the kids wearing their masks won't be enough protection.

children wearing mask should still have a 17-30% protection from direct exposure while wearing mask.

 

[sam_gordon]

Actually, my assumption is that businesses are no longer requiring/enforcing mask mandates, unless they expressly tell me that a mask is required in their business.

Is a sign enough?

 

[OregonDisDad]

People are vulnerable and at a higher risk of contracting covid without vaccination. That's purely what that means nothing more nothing less. Has zero to do with grace or what reasons people haven't gotten a vaccination.

Generally people who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons are protected by those who are vaccinated. That's who is normally defined by people as vulnerable. Throughout the pandemic vulnerable was also applied to the elderly and those in congregate settings (especially nursing homes) and other such characteristics.

Vulnerable now has been included to mean those who are unvaccinated, regardless of the reason in comparison to those who are vaccinated. It's a practical outlook here. If you aren't vaccinated you're part of the vulnerable population who people sought to protect throughout the pandemic. I'd also like to point out that throughout this pandemic a lot of people were quite pointed about those who are vulnerable should stay home, you don't need to be out and about. It's often those people, at least on comments (maybe not verbally said in real life), who haven't realized if they are unvaccinated they are those vulnerable people now (but of course who is going to tell them to stay at home? and some really don't care about their unvaccinated status).

Respectfully, I think you are misusing the term “vulnerable”. The ones most vulnerable to Covid are those who are most likely to have severe cases (which generally include the elderly, and those with specific medical conditions). Being susceptible to catching Covid because you are unvaccinated does not make you vulnerable. A healthy young adult (who is unvaccinated) is very likely to be no more vulnerable to Covid than they would be to seasonal flu. Based on current data children actually may be more vulnerable to seasonal flu.

My concern, however, was not with people noting that unvaccinated people (who have not already had Covid) are more likely to catch the current strains of Covid. That seems to be a fact. My concern was with comments that seemed to be gleeful about others being vulnerable to Covid. I believe one post (not sure it was on this thread) even referenced natural selection. IMO, this is where we could all benefit from a bit more grace.

 

[Nicolepa]

I think we have to look at it how it is now.

Well when I look at how it is now almost 50% of the country has at least one dose, now that 12+ can get vaccinated that number will spike up again soon. In March that number was 20%. Add in those who have immunity from having Covid and the numbers are pretty darn high.

I also believe that people have been dealing with this long enough that they know what to do to protect themselves. For example, I don't wear a mask outdoors. I also don't wear a mask when I am walking around an uncrowded store (unless the store requires it), but I do wear one when I am in line to checkout or when I am entering/exiting somewhere crowded. I use my brain to evaluate the situation and act accordingly and I believe that a majority of people who aren't in the wear a double mask 24/7 even though I've had Covid and been fully immunized crowd.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I believe one post (not sure it was on this thread) even referenced natural selection. IMO, this is where we could all benefit from a bit more grace.

And I would wholeheartedly agree with you on that. I despise when people say things like natural selection even in a joking manner so you have my agreeance there that people shouldn't act like that.

Respectfully, I think you are misusing the term “vulnerable”.

I agree it was most applied to severe complications/hospitalization/death but as soon as vaccinations started up the conversation and tone shifted to apply more and more broadly towards those who stood at an increase of contracting covid although it existed beforehand just not as prevalent. It included those at risk of severe complications and those who were at an increased risk of contracting covid. Certain demographics were given priority for the vaccine for that very reason. They weren't just elderly, they were those an increased risk of contracting covid from healthcare workers to congregate settings to first responders/police/frontline workers, to corrections facilities to teachers to retail and restaurant workers. We gave them the priority for good reasons.

I can understand if you want to look at it at a semantics way (and I respect if that's where you're coming from) but that tone is and has been shifting to now consider those who are fully vaccinated are serving the purpose of protecting those who are not. It's one reason why the frustration level is high and why people point out the tables have turned. There was a comment on a different thread a while back that said "It’s time we protect the vulnerable and move on." That poster had advised they were not going to get the vaccine. I'm not sure they saw it from the perspective that the people who are getting the vaccine are protecting the people who aren't. That the way to protect others IS to get the vaccine if you can. That the fully vaccinated are trying to move on in life and now with the updated guidelines the unvaccinated in large part get to move along with them.

Right now here's how my area chose to speak towards it at this moment: "Since there will be fewer people wearing face masks now, the health director says the unvaccinated are in a worse place. They are now going to be at higher risk because there will be less protections"

Worse place and higher risk, maybe someone doesn't consider that makes someone vulnerable but that is the direction the description is going.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Well when I look at how it is now almost 50% of the country has at least one dose, now that 12+ can get vaccinated that number will spike up again soon. In March that number was 20%. Add in those who have immunity from having Covid and the numbers are pretty darn high.

I also believe that people have been dealing with this long enough that they know what to do to protect themselves. For example, I don't wear a mask outdoors. I also don't wear a mask when I am walking around an uncrowded store (unless the store requires it), but I do wear one when I am in line to checkout or when I am entering/exiting somewhere crowded. I use my brain to evaluate the situation and act accordingly and I believe that a majority of people who aren't in the wear a double mask 24/7 even though I've had Covid and been fully immunized crowd.

I don't disagree with what you are mentioning I was responding to your discussion around what TX and other states had when they lifted their mandates. You were using them as a reason for why the other poster shouldn't be concerned. I was just trying to discuss that it was a different time then. I won't really get into natural immunity, I think that is best left out of the equation because we don't have the exact numbers on that but that's purely my opinion.

It really doesn't matter what the country's numbers are unless you're looking at it from a tourism standpoint of movement concerns with the virus IMO, it really matters what someone's area is which may include just their state or multiple states mainly. My state I believe last I saw was 36% fully vaccinated (with the state next to me close to that). Isn't going to matter what the country's numbers are with respects to my concerns over an upswing in cases in my area (which is what the other poster was concerned about talking about states). My county is 43.1% but the county above me is at 25.1% fully vaccinated. That's just 2 counties but I've got about 14 of them in my metro (though several are not as mentioned as much in my direct area). A lot of people use the U.S. as a whole's number to justify this or that but we have always known that different areas have had different increases, some having it at this time, some at that time, some sharp increase some small. Comparisons at that country level are really good when comparing to other countries, not so good at comparing how individual areas (states, counties, etc) are doing, IMO at least.

 

[jrmasm]

Actually, my assumption is that businesses are no longer requiring/enforcing mask mandates, unless they expressly tell me that a mask is required in their business.

As for hooding where to spend my $$$, I’ve never been a big fan of cancel culture, but I definitely will be inclined to spend where the purchasing experience is most tolerable to me.

If there is a sign on the door saying masks are required, they are expressly telling you.

 

[EACarlson]

I don't think they will role them back, but I think there will be a clarification that they meant no masking to only apply to people that are fully vaccinated. I don't think they fully thought out the part of not being able to verify who is or who is not vaccinated... or businesses not having enough personnel to check those paper cards that are so easily forged anyway, and that they should have had a better verification system in place, IMO.

There is not now nor was there ever going to be a "verification" system in place. HIPAA rules would absolutely forbid it, especially for private businesses. Any business that tells me I have to show them a vaccination card is a business that will never see another penny from me. I have no issues following any reasonable request, including wearing a mask, but there is no way I'm giving private health information for the privilege of giving you my money. What companies have said that nationwide they are going to keep a mask rule in place?

children wearing mask should still have a 17-30% protection from direct exposure while wearing mask.

Do you have a cite for this statistic? I would find it very interesting to read.

 

[AndreaA]

I don't disagree with what you are mentioning I was responding to your discussion around what TX and other states had when they lifted their mandates. You were using them as a reason for why the other poster shouldn't be concerned. I was just trying to discuss that it was a different time then. I won't really get into natural immunity, I think that is best left out of the equation because we don't have the exact numbers on that but that's purely my opinion.

Yes, it was a different time then - everything is better now in basically every metric. No where in the US has gone DOWN in their vaccination rate since May. People who want to be concerned will always find a reason.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Yes, it was a different time then - everything is better now in basically every metric. No where in the US has gone DOWN in their vaccination rate since May. People who want to be concerned will always find a reason.

Well that's a rather flippant way of responding to concern some have voiced. I know people weren't like that when you had your concerns about getting the vaccine due to your anxiety, I'm sure you appreciated that People were very supportive of you and encouraging you. I'm sure there's a better way to show encouragement of the position we are in right now I'd think than "people who want to be concerned will always find a reason" but I respect that may be very much a YMMV.

 

[jrmasm]

There is not now nor was there ever going to be a "verification" system in place. HIPAA rules would absolutely forbid it, especially for private businesses. Any business that tells me I have to show them a vaccination card is a business that will never see another penny from me. I have no issues following any reasonable request, including wearing a mask, but there is no way I'm giving private health information for the privilege of giving you my money. What companies have said that nationwide they are going to keep a mask rule in place?

Do you have a cite for this statistic? I would find it very interesting to read.

HIPAA doesn’t work the way you think it does.

 

[spiders]

There is not now nor was there ever going to be a "verification" system in place. HIPAA rules would absolutely forbid it, especially for private businesses. Any business that tells me I have to show them a vaccination card is a business that will never see another penny from me. I have no issues following any reasonable request, including wearing a mask, but there is no way I'm giving private health information for the privilege of giving you my money. What companies have said that nationwide they are going to keep a mask rule in place?

If a business has relaxed rules for vaccinated people and requests proof then you have three options:

1) Provide them proof
2) Decline to answer and then follow non-vaccinated rules
3) Go elsewhere

Delta announced last week that vaccines will be required for new employees. The EEOC already stated last year that these types of requirements are legal.

 

[luv2cheer92]

There is not now nor was there ever going to be a "verification" system in place. HIPAA rules would absolutely forbid it, especially for private businesses. Any business that tells me I have to show them a vaccination card is a business that will never see another penny from me. I have no issues following any reasonable request, including wearing a mask, but there is no way I'm giving private health information for the privilege of giving you my money. What companies have said that nationwide they are going to keep a mask rule in place?

Do you have a cite for this statistic? I would find it very interesting to read.

Yea, not at all how HIPAA works. Not even close.

 

[DLgal]

I feel like we need a School House Rock style cartoon about how HIPAA works, because MAN do so many people have it wrong.

HIPAA applies ONLY to health care providers. It simply, and ONLY prevents a healthcare provider from SHARING YOUR PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION WITH A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT. It also allows patients to obtain copies of their own health records.

That's it. There is no other application of this law and it doesn't go beyond that.

 

[AndreaA]

Well that's a rather flippant way of responding to concern some have voiced. I know people weren't like that when you had your concerns about getting the vaccine due to your anxiety, I'm sure you appreciated that People were very supportive of you and encouraging you. I'm sure there's a better way to show encouragement of the position we are in right now I'd think than "people who want to be concerned will always find a reason" but I respect that may be very much a YMMV.

Yes, I admit that I was being flippant. The difference between this and my vaccine thread is that this one wasn’t started with a “please support me” premise. There have certainly been AMPLE posts on here that mock, invalidate, and denigrate anyone who is leery of the vaccines.

My point wasn’t directed at the person who initially voiced concern, it was over the back and forth from random people who replied about it. I stand by my words - things ARE better, by every statistic that is being tracked in every state. There were FOUR states states with increasing cases last week - one specifically due to logging a backlog of cases. Obviously no states have fewer vaccinated citizens this week vs last week. I mean sure, if you want to go down to the county, city, and town level maybe there are variations within a state. That doesn’t negate the fact that we are in all in a much better place now than we were a month, two months, or six months ago.

 

[OregonDisDad]

And I would wholeheartedly agree with you on that. I despise when people say things like natural selection even in a joking manner so you have my agreeance there that people shouldn't act like that.
I agree it was most applied to severe complications/hospitalization/death but as soon as vaccinations started up the conversation and tone shifted to apply more and more broadly towards those who stood at an increase of contracting covid although it existed beforehand just not as prevalent. It included those at risk of severe complications and those who were at an increased risk of contracting covid. Certain demographics were given priority for the vaccine for that very reason. They weren't just elderly, they were those an increased risk of contracting covid from healthcare workers to congregate settings to first responders/police/frontline workers, to corrections facilities to teachers to retail and restaurant workers. We gave them the priority for good reasons.

I can understand if you want to look at it at a semantics way (and I respect if that's where you're coming from) but that tone is and has been shifting to now consider those who are fully vaccinated are serving the purpose of protecting those who are not. It's one reason why the frustration level is high and why people point out the tables have turned. There was a comment on a different thread a while back that said "It’s time we protect the vulnerable and move on." That poster had advised they were not going to get the vaccine. I'm not sure they saw it from the perspective that the people who are getting the vaccine are protecting the people who aren't. That the way to protect others IS to get the vaccine if you can. That the fully vaccinated are trying to move on in life and now with the updated guidelines the unvaccinated in large part get to move along with them.

Right now here's how my area chose to speak towards it at this moment: "Since there will be fewer people wearing face masks now, the health director says the unvaccinated are in a worse place. They are now going to be at higher risk because there will be less protections"

Worse place and higher risk, maybe someone doesn't consider that makes someone vulnerable but that is the direction the description is going.

Thanks. Certainly agree that data shows that somebody who is unvaccinated is at higher risk of catching Covid than somebody who is vaccinated. Not sure about them being at higher risk than they were a few months ago, though (I don’t think that is what you were saying, but see that as good news). Given increasing vaccination rates, and dropping transmission rates, we seem to be moving in the right direction.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Thanks. Certainly agree that data shows that somebody who is unvaccinated is at higher risk of catching Covid than somebody who is vaccinated. Not sure about them being at higher risk than they were a few months ago, though (I don’t think that is what you were saying, but see that as good news). Given increasing vaccination rates, and dropping transmission rates, we seem to be moving in the right direction.

I agree with ya there!

 

[leahgoogle]

I think people aren’t talking about natural immunity from being infected because there haven’t been as many studies on it, so we just don’t have as much information to work with. Not that we have tons of definitive data about the vaccines either since this virus, and therefore the vaccines for it, haven’t been around that long in the grand scheme of things, but from what I have found, the vaccines have been the subject of more scientific studies than natural immunity for whatever that’s worth.

I’ve seen conflicting articles about natural immunity, some saying protection is just as good as vaccine, some saying protection is decent for a few months (3 months? 5 months? more?) but doesn’t last as long as the vaccine (which last I heard, all we knew about vaccines was at least 6 months, but they’re guessing/hoping longer), some saying the protection is good against the variant the person was infected with but not other variants, so who knows.

I don’t know if they are still doing it, but Red Cross at least used to be checking COVID antibodies for everyone who donated blood if you wanted some sort of peace of mind about your personal antibody status from natural infection.

I actually was talking about natural immunity from being infected. There have been some promising findings. Up to eight months with antibodies and some experts believe it will last much longer. The interesting thing is that virus specific b-cells actually increased over time after recovering from covid. Most basic antibody tests won't check for T-cells and B-cells so even if a routine blood antibody test is negative after some time, there may still be a deeper immunity. There was another article I read (I will try and find it) that said that they found that people that recovered from SARS actually had mild cases of covid because they had some crossover immunity. They expect this to apply to covid variants, as well. It is definitely fascinating.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/your-immune-system-evolves-to-fight-coronavirus-variants/

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

There is not now nor was there ever going to be a "verification" system in place. HIPAA rules would absolutely forbid it, especially for private businesses. Any business that tells me I have to show them a vaccination card is a business that will never see another penny from me. I have no issues following any reasonable request, including wearing a mask, but there is no way I'm giving private health information for the privilege of giving you my money. What companies have said that nationwide they are going to keep a mask rule in place?

Do you have a cite for this statistic? I would find it very interesting to read.

While you would absolutely have the right to not go to a business that requires proof, please understand it is not a HIPAA violation. People are throwing that term around, clearly not understanding what it protects. It protects you in that medical personnel can’t disclose your medical information without your consent.

 

[EACarlson]

While you would absolutely have the right to not go to a business that requires proof, please understand it is not a HIPAA violation. People are throwing that term around, clearly not understanding what it protects. It protects you in that medical personnel can’t disclose your medical information without your consent.

It would certainly be a HIPAA violation if the state or my HMO discloses that information directly to a third party without my explicit consent, which would have to happen in order for there to be any kind of verification. I know exactly what HIPAA is, my wife and I both deal with it daily for work.