Tucker Carlson speculates the COVID vaccine "doesn't work and they're simply not telling you that"

Evidently Tucker will now say anything. 

We know the vaccines work, so why do TPTB still require us to wear masks.

As usual, Tucker makes a valid and logical point.

Trying to frighten Americans into not getting the vaccine is a form of treason. 

Maybe because so many people are lying sacks of shit and will not wear a mask while not being vaccinated, flouting best practices and any expectation of honesty.

We wear masks because Covid is still prevalent in this country, we have not yet achieved herd immunity, there are also variants of Covid, and it's just the smart thing to do.

why do TPTB still require us to wear masks.

A small segment of people who have gotten shots still contracted asymptomatic or mild covid. By not wearing masks in a largely non-vaccinated public that's now trying to fully open makes spread a certainty. Also, as we've seen, this virus mutates quite rapidly and any new variant spread could make the vaccine less effective.

Good answers!

I mask up as a courtesy to others.

Will take booster shots if recommended

[deleted]

Trying to frighten Americans into not getting the vaccine is a form of treason. 

Here you go:

msn

Good answers!

Would you expect anything else?

I mask up as a courtesy to others.

As do I. Also for my own benefit.

Will take booster shots if recommended

That would be wise.

Here you go:

Relevance?

ah you beat me to it.  I was gonna ask the same question, what about all the people who politicized the vaccines when they were being developed, pushing fear on the "Trump Vaccines".  Do they get lumped in with that treason crowd too?

Relevance?

I thought that would be obvious. JR just proclaimed that anyone trying to frighten Americans from getting a vaccine is a traitor. So I pointed out how Kamala Harris did just that before the election. Therefore, via JR's logic, she is a TRAITOR!

Don't you ever get tired of failing Vic ? 

"If the public health professionals, if Dr. Fauci, if the doctors tell us that we should take it, I'll be the first in line to take it, absolutely. But if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it, I'm not taking it," Harris said.

Oh, that made it so much different John/s.  They are now using and promoting the same vaccines - The Trump Vaccine!


Talk about failing!

You're just thrashing around Vic. Kamala Harris never told anyone not to take the vaccine. She said she wouldnt take it on Trump's say so, but if Fauci said it was ok she would be "first in line" . Fauci said it was ok and the rest is history. 

You're just thrashing around Vic. Kamala Harris never told anyone not to take the vaccine.

You bet she did. That POS is also MIA.

You are imagining things. 

What scientific data indicates that a vaccinated person needs to wear a mask?

Here's what she said Vic, from your own source [emphasis mine]: 

Asked at Wednesday's vice-presidential debate whether she would take a vaccine approved by the Trump administration before or after the election, Harris said she'd be the "first in line" to take the vaccine if health experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci recommended it.

"If the public health professionals, if Dr. Fauci, if the doctors tell us that we should take it, I'll be the first in line to take it, absolutely. But if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it, I'm not taking it," Harris said.

So where did VP Harris try to frighten anyone from getting a vaccine? Perhaps the context eludes you, but Ms. Harris is saying she listens to scientists and not politicans on such matters. And good on her for that too! Everyone should follow that example! It's basic common sense.

You bet she did.

That's nice. Prove it! Because your source does not.

That POS is also MIA.

Wow, stay classy Vic.

The Trump Vaccine!

There is no such thing.

What scientific data indicates that a vaccinated person needs to wear a mask?

The initial question why we should continue to wear masks, which I answered with common sense and facts. Herd immunity being a particularly big one. Even Greg was satisfied and we don't often see eye to eye on things.  But to answer your question more directly, I will refer you to the Cleveland Clinic : 

1. It takes time for the vaccine to kick in.   You won’t reach the nearly 95% effectiveness rate until two weeks after your second-dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine. [side note: this can be up to a 1-1/2 month time span]

2. The vaccines do not provide 100% protection.   Although the vaccines are incredibly effective (and were nothing short of amazing in terms of turnaround), they only offer 94% to 95% protection. There’s no way to tell who the 5% will be who don’t respond to the vaccine and will still be at risk for COVID-19.

3. Those who have been vaccinated might be asymptomatic spreaders.   The vaccines prevent illness, but more research is needed to determine if the vaccines also prevent transmission. Experts are concerned that vaccinated people can still become infected without symptoms and then spread it to others who have not been vaccinated yet. 

4. We still need to protect those with compromised immune systems and those who can’t be vaccinated.   We know that people with  chronic medical conditions  (like heart disease and cancer) are at risk for developing a severe case of COVID-19. And since this population wasn’t involved in clinical trials, we can’t assume that they’ll have the same effectiveness rate.

5. There are still limited doses of the vaccine.   There are more than 330 million people in the U.S. Experts say that 50 to 80% of the population will need to vaccinated to reach herd immunity, which could take us until the end of 2021.

See, simple common sense and facts. Also, if someone is maskless, you don't know if they're vaccinated or not. Like masks, vaccines are just another tool to help fight and prevent Covid. Why wouldn't someone want to use all available tools at their disposal to prevent Covid, either for themselves or others?

Her comments regarding Trump carried absolutely NO value and were unwarranted and uncalled for.

All she said was she would accept the recommendation from a scientist and not a politician. That seems smart. So what's so unwarranted about it? I agree with her. I've said the same thing since the pandemic started and Trump tried talking about it.

Perhaps you should give it some thought.

I did. That's why I replied as I did.

Aw ... look who bought a carton of Mike Scalise's sour milk.

1. It takes time for the vaccine to kick in.

Yes, I know, but this is a minor point. So, get vaccinated. Wait two weeks. And then it seems like you should be able to throw away your mask.

2. The vaccines do not provide 100% protection.

No vaccine does. No one ever imagined any vaccine would be 100%. But it never needed to be. If this is our new benchmark - and it would be new - then the masks will never come off. The vaccine is supposed to hurry us along to herd immunity, which never needed to be at 100%.

A point about efficacy, which is the number you’re looking at. The efficacy number is about infection, not serious symptoms or death. So, for example, vaccinated people, 94%-95% of the time, will not even get infected. That’s an insanely good result! Flu vaccines WISH they were that good. Meanwhile, 5%-6% of vaccinated people will still get infected, but their symptoms will be mild. So far, these vaccines function at 100% for keeping people from death or the ICU. That is all anyone ever wanted, could hope for, or needed.

3. Those who have been vaccinated might be asymptomatic spreaders.

But there is no science that tells us we should actually think that is true. Just consider this basic fact about how vaccines work: They cause the body to quickly recognize and neutralize the virus’s ability to enter cells where they would replicate. This is a different scenario from an unvaccinated person being infected and spreading the virus asymptomatically. In a vaccinated person, the virus can’t replicate itself - at least not for long. Even if vaccinated people can spread it, logically the dose should be very low. So why would it spread? And even if it did, with every passing day, it’s likely it would spread to vaccinated people. No biggie.

Furthermore, the recommendations from scientists are that vaccinated groups of people, meeting together, don’t need to mask up or social distance from one another in spite of the fact that they may have encountered the virus before meeting up with their immunized friends. Why would this be ok if they can somehow incubate and spread the virus? The answer is obvious. They can’t spread the virus effectively, or get sick from it even if they could. We have no reason to think otherwise.

4. We still need to protect those with compromised immune systems and those who can’t be vaccinated.

Those people are the only ones equipped to help themselves. The best thing the rest of us can do for them is get vaccinated. And obviously, if you haven’t been vaccinated, keep masking and distancing. But vaccinated people should not be a threat to them.

5. There are still limited doses of the vaccine.

So? That doesn’t say anything about whether or not a vaccinated person should wear a mask. All it says is that it will be some time before everyone can take their masks off.

Also, if someone is maskless, you don't know if they're vaccinated or not.

Very true. So if you have not been vaccinated, make sure you wear a mask and keep your distance. But if you have been vaccinated, such a person is not a threat to you.

All of this worry and paranoia comes across as a complete disregard for everything people have known about vaccines for generations. Vaccination in general is being treated as it were a brand new, untested concept. A year ago, everyone knew we needed a vaccine to solve this problem. But today, we’re supposed to believe that we have no reason to be confident in the most effective vaccine ever made? That’s not rational.

it’s unclear

That leaves open the possibility

could then silently transmit the virus

they may

they could

None of that is data or even so much as “more likely than not” based on actual evidence.

You are imagining things. 

Or fabricating them...

[REMOVED]

The key to all this is achieving herd immunity. Until then, everyone is potentially a risk and at risk. Even those who have been vaccinated. No one knows if an unmasked person is vaccinated or not. So it's safe to view them as a potential threat. So they should remain masked even if they're vaccinated. And being vaccinated is no guarantee one will not get sick or contagious. Masks are just an extra line of defense. Espevially since there are other Covid strains, which current vaccines may not be as effective against. After all, if you were vaccinated against the flu, would you let someone cough on your face without a mask?

No one knows if an unmasked person is vaccinated or not.

I think if they want us to keep wearing masks and distance as a sort of solidarity with people who haven’t been vaccinated yet, I’m fine with that policy. Just say so out loud. It’s like when Fauci was saying last year that masks didn’t do anything. He doesn’t really believe that, but he was trying to preserve supply for medical workers. Just say the truth and then you don’t have so many people mistrusting the spokespersons.

And being vaccinated is no guarantee one will not get sick or contagious.

That’s true, of course. But so far, the data show that vaccinated people who do get sick have comparatively mild symptoms. Those people could certainly infect others, especially if they aren’t vaccinated. If we want to say that people should wear masks for that reason, I am also fine with that, but it’s never really articulated that way.

Instead Fauci starts going on about variants as if he had some kind of data that indicated they were a problem for the vaccine. But so far, the data shows the opposite. That makes people not trust him.

And there needs to be a limit on this soon. Already, a third of the country is at least partially vaccinated. Fauci dissembles and moves the goal posts so much I think many people have the impression that even when we get to 70, 80, 90%+ vaccinations, we will still have to endure restrictions. 

Why, exactly, would any politician want to be the source of inconvenience for his/her constituents?

What is the rational reason for doing this?    You have stated that this is simply exploiting power.    So you think these politicians are gratuitously imposing hardships on their constituents and thus compromising campaign contributions and reelection?   How does that make any sense to you?

there is no logical point of restricting the lives of the vaccinated

Yes there is.   The vaccine protects the vaccinated.   It does not necessarily (in fact it looks like it does not at all) prevent the virus from being transmitted from a vaccinated individual to one who is not vaccinated.

This is why herd immunity is the goal and why so many need to be vaccinated to wipe out this virus.

I think if they want us to keep wearing masks and distance as a sort of solidarity with people who haven’t been vaccinated yet, I’m fine with that policy. Just say so out loud.

That's been the general policy for a year now: Masks and social distancing.

It’s like when Fauci was saying last year that masks didn’t do anything. He doesn’t really believe that, but he was trying to preserve supply for medical workers. Just say the truth and then you don’t have so many people mistrusting the spokespersons.

The problem there was Dr. Fauci was likely being politically pressured too, in addition to worrying about available mask supplies. At the time, there was going to be an exponential need for masks and limited supplies, until manufacturing could catch up. Masks would be most needed by healthcare workers and first responders, and understandably so.

But so far, the data show that vaccinated people who do get sick have comparatively mild symptoms.

That's to be expected with any vaccine. The immune system is primed and kicks into high gear before any infection can really "take hold," as it were.

Those people could certainly infect others, especially if they aren’t vaccinated.

Therein lies the problem. And it will remain an issue until at least herd immunity is achieved. Little by little though.

If we want to say that people should wear masks for that reason, I am also fine with that, but it’s never really articulated that way.

I would think people would have enough common sense to realize that on their own by now.

Instead Fauci starts going on about variants as if he had some kind of data that indicated they were a problem for the vaccine. But so far, the data shows the opposite. That makes people not trust him.

Dr. Fauci is either not articulating himself well enough on the subject or people do not understand him. Maybe he doesn't speak "laymen" well enough. But he is rightfully concerned about Covid variants, as such strains could be just different enough to negate the efficacy of the vaccine to various degrees. New strains could lead to a new upsurge in Covid cases and related hospitalizations and deaths again. Then a new vaccine will have to developed all over again to deal with the variant. A new strain/s could potentially undo all the progress made thus far. I think it's safe to say that nobody wants that. At least, I would hope not.

And there needs to be a limit on this soon. Already, a third of the country is at least partially vaccinated. Fauci dissembles and moves the goal posts so much I think many people have the impression that even when we get to 70, 80, 90%+ vaccinations, we will still have to endure restrictions. 

The problem is, and one which I do not think many people understand, is that Covid and the vaccine are relatively new. We simply do not have enough hard, long term data yet to more accurately determine what percentage of the population needs to be immunized for active herd immunity. Or how long is the vaccine effective for: will people need annual vaccinations, booster shots, ect.." That doesn't even address other factors like overall health, comorbidities, long term effects of covid or the vaccine, ect. There are still a lot of variables to deal with. People are rather impatient too. Realistically and quite possibly, Covid is not going away anytime soon, if ever at all. Hopefully, Covid will decrease to the point where it becomes manageable (like the flu) enough to not warrant restrictions. Although, precautions are still a good idea in such a situation.

Why, exactly, would any politician want to be the source of inconvenience for his/her constituents?

What is the rational reason for doing this? 

There isn't any, but the conspiracy theories go much deeper than politicians simply creating inconvenience.  We have seen many variations, some with varying levels of rationalization.

There is of course the theory that the powers to be (you have to couch it in the faceless men behind the curtain you see) are seeking to condition us for obedience and acceptance of all that the "authorities" require of us, as they slowly strip us of our freedoms to pursue happiness in our working and leisure lives, while increasing their power to control us. 

While I appreciate the concern that ever more intrusive government, or increasing dependence on government, can spell trouble (historically speaking), this type of theory ignores the magnitude of the threat posed by Covid-19.   And it characterizes as overly onerous the idea that we can work together to try and combat it by following some fairly simple recommendations, and temporarily adjusting the way we work and play accordingly. 

Certainly this virus, and more aptly the reaction to it, has caused more than just minor inconvenience.  And the government response to this has put the country even further into what can only be described as unrecoverable crushing debt.  Everyone seems to ignore that giant elephant in the room, but the alternative is that people would be left with no means to cope with the problems caused not so much by the virus but by the reaction to it.  It would be interesting to have a crystal ball and know what would have happened if the restrictions had not been as drastic as they were in some areas.

My brother sent me this article a couple months ago that discusses an interesting comparison of response/approaches in California and Texas, culminating in not so different results in terms of per-capita Covid cases and deaths.  Sure makes one think about the possibility of over-reaction in these types of situations.

Despite their contrasting approaches, the results have not been as different as expected. Texas has a higher death rate per person—only Arizona and South Carolina have fared worse, according to the CDC . But the gap is not as great as you might expect: Texas has had 127 deaths per 100,000 compared with 104 per 100,000 in California. “People in California are frustrated because they feel like they are experiencing the worst of both worlds,” says Ken Miller of Claremont McKenna college and author of the book “Texas vs California”. They have endured never-ending lockdowns, and yet deaths are currently higher than ever. Meanwhile, in Texas, the economic benefits of a more libertarian approach are hard to discern. The unemployment rate in both states is higher than the national average.   

Anyhow, food for thought.

Anyhow, food for thought.

Vomit.   Some people (too many nowadays) are just nucking futs.

It would be interesting to have a crystal ball and know what would have happened if the restrictions had not been as drastic as they were in some areas.

A higher rate of infection (and thus death) and the people would be outraged that the government did not take 'proper' action (consider cases like Katrina).   There is no winning here for the officials.

There is no winning here for the officials

Indeed, especially when the inevitable partisan acrimony plays into it. 

A higher rate of infection (and thus death) and the people would be outraged that the government did not take 'proper' action.

Perhaps, but I did find it interesting, and a bit surprising, that Texas and California while taking two very different approaches, ended up with similar results in terms of the impact of the disease on the populace.  What I also found surprising is that my brother, who is as progressive as they come, alerted me to that article and a few others making the same point.  (-:

FOX was correct when they claimed in court that anyone believing anything that tucker said was a moron.

Anyone that doesn't want a vaccine shouldn't get one. I won't shed any tears for them when they get sick or infect family members.

People who've been fully vaccinated should not have to wear masks.  Most will stop soon enough.  Those who've  been fully vaccinated and want to can of course continue to wear masks in perpetuity if they want. 

This is just another "Get Tucker Out" article....by those who can't handle the truth.

We’ve seen this before. They take something he said and twist it totally to create a scandal story. Meanwhile they ignore the perfectly valid point he made.

This is just another "Get Tucker Out" article....by those who can't handle the truth.

Tucker has never said anything truthful...

People refusing to wear masks is probably the stupidest fucking thing I've seen in my lifetime, outside of Trump's presidential aspirations. 

People refusing to wear masks is probably the stupidest fucking thing I've seen in my lifetim

Fully vaccinated people refusing to wear masks is the stupidest thing you've seen?   Now that's funny. 

That's not what I said, but yes, it is funny.  No one is harmed whatsoever by wearing a mask. 

We have had millions of Trumpsters refuse to wear a mask , even though it does no harm to them. They say the mask infringes on their "freedom". Freedom to do what? Be an idiot ? 

Why is it stupid for a vaccinated person to not wear a mask?

Fully vaccinated people refusing to wear masks is the stupidest thing you've seen?   Now that's funny. 

More than half a million people are dead, and you're defending not wearing a mask, (even after vaccinations)? Are you serious? Why would you NOT want to wear a mask? I mean, other than because trump said that masks are stupid? 

Are they interfering with your ability to live your life? Do you also rail against wearing a seatbelt? Drunk driving laws? Speed limits? Why not? But somehow, wearing a mask for the 10-15 minutes you're in a store is just a bridge too far? WTF?

Why is it stupid for a vaccinated person to not wear a mask?

See post 1.1.25.

People seem to think the vaccine is an instant fix. Once they are vaccinated, they think they're immediately protected and don't need other precautions. It's a very narrow and self centered way of thinking.

 Why would you NOT want to wear a mask? I mean, other than because trump said that masks are stupid? 

You can't think of a single reason why a fully vaccinated person wouldn't wear a mask other than something you imagine Trump said? Really?   In your world, the only reason someone vaccinated from a disease won't wear a mask is because of Trump.  That's sad. 

Are they interfering with your ability to live your life?

So you are going to wear a mask the rest of your life then? Go ahead. No one is stopping you.  

 In your world, the only reason someone vaccinated from a disease won't wear a mask is because of Trump.  That's sad. 

In this world, there are unvaccinated people who refuse to wear masks because of Trump. And yes, that is sad. And profoundly stupid.

here are unvaccinated people who refuse to wear masks because of Trump.

source?

People seem to think the vaccine is an instant fix.

I don’t know anyone who thinks that. It has been pretty clearly communicated that the vaccine takes a couple weeks to be fully effective. And so far, most people have been getting the vaccines that require two doses spaced weeks apart, so it’s inherently not “an instant fix.”

So you cannot answer the question, got it.

All you have to do is watch the news. I can't go a day without seeing at least 1 story of someone refusing to wear a mask and throwing a tantrum about having to. Florida is well know for its anti mask attitude and even held anti mask rallies at the height of Covid. Just Google it or check Youtube. There are plenty of examples. 

I didn't say it was an instant fix. Only that some people seem to think that way.

So you cannot answer the question, got it.

You didn't answer the questions. Sad.

It shouldn't be hard to understand why a fully vaccinated person  might not want to wear a mask for hours on end.

ll you have to do is watch the news.

So no source for your claim then.  I was looking for objective data, not anecdotes. 

I understand. And I am saying that 1) I haven‘t seen anyone who thinks that and 2) There is good reason why they wouldn’t think that.

I have. It seems there is still misinformation out there.

Like I said, you can Google and YouTube for all the sources you want. 

I don't understand why some people have issues with wearing masks. It's just a mask. Big deal! It's hardly an inconvenience and you don't even notice it after wearing one for awhile. Maybe people should grow some balls, suck it up, and stop whining. 

Like I said, you can Google and YouTube for all the sources you want. 

So you have no facts and are only offering your partisan opinion. Got it.

don't understand why some people have issues with wearing masks

Then wear a mask all day. It's always amazes me how some people are so self involved they can't fathom why people might have different opinions then themselves. I can't understand how a person can't understand why some people don't want to be forced to wear masks for hours on end. But I'm capable of putting myself in other's shoes.   

Maybe people should grow some balls, suck it up, and stop whining. 

What an emotional outburst. Instead of getting all upset and lashing out, why don't you explain why Americans should be forced to do something that makes no logical sense.  A fully vaccinated person has almost zero risk of even catching covid, let alone getting seriously sick from it. Those afraid of tiny risks should stop forcing others how to act, grow some balls and accept there is always going to be some risk in the world.  Rather than forcing others to rearrange their lives to suit your irrational fears, maybe you should  live in a bubble and avoid all possible sources of infection. If you are that scared of tiny risks, the outside world is not for you. 

The necessity of wearing masks has been explained to the American people ad nauseum now. But some people act like whiny little bitches about wearing a mask. That's not an emotional outburst. It's simple fact. The ones arguing or complaining about masks, saying it disrupts their lives in sone way, are the one being emotional. It seems some people are so soft or coddled that they can't handle even the littlest of inconveniences. I get it, they don't want to wear a mask. But we're dealing with a pandemic that's been going on over a year now and every one should be doing their small part like wearing masks to help overcome the pandemic. 

I don't understand why some people have issues with wearing masks

Do you wear glasses? That’s a big reason I don’t like them. The mask fogs glasses and makes it very difficult to see.

Wear contacts then. Or wear a better fitting mask. 

No, you don't got it. If you actually  were the slightest bit interested, you would do your research.

Contacts won’t work for me, and I have tried several masks.

It seems some people are so soft or coddled that they can't handle even the littlest of inconveniences

You are demanding other people protect you from an infinitesimal risk of getting sick and you call others soft? That's hilarious.  Do you get all hot and bothered because Americans prefer to drive cars rather than protecting you by  walking  everywhere in bubble wrap?  Sad to say, but risk can never be fully taken away and you'll be much happier when you learn to deal with it rather then engage in emotional outbursts at those who actually understand numbers and risk. 

  Taking vaccines off the market and slowing down vaccinations is what will prolong the epidemic. Forcing fully vaccinated people to wear masks they don't need only perpetuates a climate of fear. 

If you actually  were the slightest bit interested, you would do your research.

Do you imagine you are fooling anyone? Its such a juvenile and transparent ploy to claim the information is out there but refuse to provide a source. 

Forcing fully vaccinated people to wear masks they don't need only perpetuates a climate of fear. 

The medical establishment that we rely on to give us reliable information about such things as viral pandemics says that people should continue to wear masks, even if they have been vaccinated , because wearing masks will lower the continued spread of the virus. It is NOT objectively reasonable to say "I dont care what the relevant medical experts say, I want my "freedom".

I guess people can say Dr Fauci is a fraud , or whatever, if they want, but it is not a reasonable position. 

What proof do you have that the risk is infinitesimal?

You are making claims without any proof while at the same time demanding it.

I don't know what to tell you then. I've worn eye wear with masks and I've never had a problem. 

What proof do you have that the risk is infinitesimal?

99.991% of fully vaccinated people have avoided infection

wsj

Covid cases are rising in more than half of U.S. states, despite ramp-up in vaccinations

 because wearing masks will lower the continued spread of the virus.

Not allowing anyone to leave their house will lower the continued spread of the virus too. So I guess it'd be wrong to object to that too, huh?  

Liberty  and trying to limit transmission are always going to be in tension, unless you are a zealot in either camp. The fact that "reliable information" shows that fully vaccinated people do not drive the spread of the disease should be obvious to you.   It's reasonable for people to wear masks if it might slow the spread. It's unreasonable when vaccinations make it extremely unlikely for them to do so. Holding out for zero risk would be a massive shift in our society and one I doubt you'll apply to other situations. 

That doesn't contradict anything I wrote. all it does is argue for people to be vaccinated. Obviously, mask mandates aren't stopping the virus. 

Most places dropped mandates.

Most places dropped mandates

Only 12 states have dropped mask mandates. Michigan, which has the most infections per capita and is the biggest hot spot in the country has a mask mandate. 

Obviously, mask mandates aren't stopping the virus. 

The medical authorities who lead the federal response say it has kept the infection and death rate from being much higher.

he medical authorities who lead the federal response say it has kept the infection and death rate from being much higher.

Great.  Why is there little difference between states with mask mandates and those without? Why has Florida done much better than New York, for instance? 

But again, we are talking about masks on people who are fully vaccinated. 

Obviously, mask mandates aren't stopping the virus. 

Look up mitigation and try to achieve a cogent understanding of it's value Sean. 

Why is there little difference between states with mask mandates and those without? Why has Florida done much better than New York, for instance? 

Perhaps you can acknowledge that throughout the year, people in Florida can congregate OUT DOORS while that is NOT true in NY. Then review how much more readably the virus spreads IN DOORS in close proximity. 

Look up mitigation and try to achieve a cogent understanding of it's value Sean. 

So you can't prove that mask mandates have made a difference between states, got it.

Was cogent your word of the day recently? Every time I read a post of yours you seem to use it obsessively.  You should try expanding your vocabulary. 

Then review how much more readably the virus spreads IN DOORS in close proximity

Yes, which is why the outbreak was so much worse in the summer in the areas of the country where hot weather  necessitates  constant AC and people are forced indoors.  It's almost like weather drives the outbreaks and not government actions.  

.. Remember when progressives thought "political leadership" stopped in the virus in states like New York during the summer?  Good times!

Actually many cities and counties in FL have a mask mandate. Ocala and Marion County where I live have a mandate issued by the city council. Most every store you enter 95% of the people are wearing masks and all of the employees are wearing masks. 

So you can't prove that mask mandates have made a difference between states, got it.

Moving the goal posts I see. You first stated that it had to STOP the virus, now you're asking for proof that it made a difference between states. 

There is ample evidence that masks worked WITHIN states. I don't know if there has been a study about the differences BETWEEN states and I don't see any reason that it's relevant. 

Was cogent your word of the day recently?

No, that was probably back in grade school. 

Every time I read a post of yours you seem to use it obsessively. 

Once in a comment doesn't qualify as 'obsessive' Sean and BTFW YOU have used it more than I have in this seed.

You should try expanding your vocabulary. 

Supercilious. 

I'll just give you a chance to try and catch up instead. 

I've worn eye wear with masks and I've never had a problem. 

I wear glasses, and at work I've always worn both safety goggles and a mask.  Do my glasses fog sometimes?  On occasion.  And then I remember to modify my breathing (no big exhalations), and they clear up.

If healthcare workers can manage a full shift in a mask and glasses or goggles, everyone else should be able to handle a trip through the grocery store.

If healthcare workers can manage a full shift in a mask and glasses or goggles, everyone else should be able to handle a trip through the grocery store.

Absolutely. It's neither difficult or that bad. I just don't get what all the fuss is about.

I mean, walking from the cold outdoors into a warm building fogs my glasses up worse than my mask does.  It's just one of the inconveniences of having lousy eyesight.

It's just one of the inconveniences of having lousy eyesight.

That's all masks are at worst, an inconvenience. But the way some people go on and complain about them or protest using them and such, you would think the masks are worse than Covid. Go figure.

People who've been fully vaccinated should not have to wear masks.

That is correct but only under certain conditions per the CDC.  See HERE .

So if you are fully vaccinated you may go unmasked in gatherings where all others are also fully vaccinated, or in areas where people are at low risk of serious infection.

However, if you are in an indoor area where unvaccinated people who may be at more risk (elderly, etc.), or in large gatherings where risk and vaccinations are unknown, you should still wear a mask to help prevent transmission from you to those at risk.  Distance is of course still the best way to avoid the spread.

However, if you are in an indoor area where unvaccinated people who may be at more risk (elderly, etc.), or in large gatherings where risk and vaccinations are unknown

At some point very soon, the only people who may be more at risk of Covid are going to be those who chose to be more at risk by not being vaccinated. 

There have always been people who are at more at risk of infectious diseases then others. Covid is not new in that sense. We never mandated masks because of the flu.   The goalposts have moved from stopping  mass deaths and overwhelmed hospitals to stopping all risk of illness, which is a completely new standard. 

The goalposts have moved from stopping  mass deaths and overwhelmed hospitals to stopping all risk of illness, which is a completely new standard. 

Maybe, maybe not.  The risk of spikes causing mass deaths and overwhelmed hospitals is still out there.  But as more are vaccinated, certainly that risk will dissipate.  At that point, then some of these requirements/recommendations will certainly be rolled back.  But until then, why contribute to that risk when the simple act of following a few expert recommendations can help mitigate the risk until all who want the vaccinations have had them.  After the demand for vaccinations have ebbed, and only those refusing them are left, then yeah, they should assume all the risk and let the rest of us go back to our normal lives.

Tucker Carlson speculates the COVID vaccine “doesn't work and they're simply not telling you that”

I don’t think that’s what Carlson is doing. At least, I don’t believe he thinks the vaccine doesn’t work. This is a rhetorical device. He’s following the logic of irrational recommendations to an obvious conclusion. He’s pushing Fauci and others to say “yes, the vaccine works.” But when they do that, they have to resolve the conflict of them saying “keep wearing masks” and “continue to social distance.”

As Carlson correctly points out, these restrictions makes no sense. The whole point of getting the vaccine was so we could save lives without having to do all that stuff.

Someone needs to ball gag Fucker Carlson.

Have to wonder if any of them would be questioning the vaccine if Trump were still president?

So maybe it doesn't work and they're simply not telling you that. 

Good grief what drives some to come to such stupid, conspiracy theory conclusions?      ( Blind partisanship. )

How about this Tucker, the authorities might want to get hard data that the vaccinations have collectively achieved herd immunity before taking down the precautions.

This is the same guy whining that Trump wasn’t getting his due credit for the vaccine in the first place.

So Trump failed then? I mean am I supposed to be praising him for single handed lay creating the vaccines that will (hopefully) end the pandemic, or am I now supposed to blame him for making vaccines that don’t work? Or did he now have no hand whatsoever in the creation of the vaccine and thus is entirely blameless?

Come on Fucker Carlson, get your goddamn messaging straight.