Quote:
Originally Posted by Randall Stevens
I wouldn't exactly say that, but if eligible individuals are passing on the vaccination, then I'm not exactly sure why we should give a ****.
To Randall's point, akin is this question:
If some people choose not to wear a seatbelt in a car, should I stop driving so as to lower their chances of getting in a (fatal/serious) car crash by having less cars on the road to crash into? By doing so, my already low risk goes to 0, so I'm also being much more cautious, but at what cost to me? And is that a trade-off most would make, or should?
I am concerned about my fellow citizens, naturally, but I'm not going to willfully sacrifice more than they are willing to sacrifice. If they can't be bothered to get the vaccine, that shouldn't obligate me to mask up/lockdown again b/c I did get the vaccine.
I would like this public health crisis to end as soon as possible, however I seriously question the effectiveness of masking efforts when 50% of my countrymen are unvaccinated and will remain so indefinitely, especially if allowed to 'mask' as an alternative*. I think it's time to let Darwin take over. for all involved.
To Batman/Robin: your point is made - Delta has increased the risk to everyone, including the vaccinated. However, an increase from 0.003% to 0.0075% (note: these #s are squarely from my own a**, and are only there to prove a point about a 2.5x increase that you tout) to the vaccinated doesn't move the needle for most, if not all, to an unhealthy risk.
Your personal choice is your personal choice, and your opinion of what is safe for others/masses is yours as well, and both have been made many times over. I'm not sure the path you're going down now of arguing with every poster who disagrees is helping your cause, of which you seemed to genuinely care about when your posting in this thread started.
*note - this is without even bringing into question how effective 6' of distance is, and/or cloth masks worn improperly by >50% of the population.