https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2020/05/21/40-of-americans-wont-fly-until-theres-a-covid-19-vaccine/

With headlines like this I think it's in the airlines' best interest. It makes business sense.

This isn't hard. They didn't say "no masks." If you remember correctly, they said "only masks for essential medical personnel."

They knew there was a shortage. They didn't want the public to panic hoard all the available masks at the outset. This was intentional. CDC has basically admitted this point now that it's passed.

So don't be intentionally obtuse. There was a very good reason to tell people no masks initially. It was to secure dwindling PPE for essential medical personnel.

I had to go all the way to page 2 of a google search to find this. Nitpickers will say this is the Surgeon General and not CDC. CDC has arguably been more careful in their wording that masks were to be reserved for healthcare workers, not that they didn't work. However, they still were "against them before they were for them."

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/su...article_inline

I'm simply pointing out the credibility problem that officials have created for themselves with their tactics and messaging. Hopefully my family will get COVID to teach me a lesson.

Agreed. But it won't be long before there's a physical altercation onboard between masked pax and the one guy ( you just know it's gonna be a guy) refusing to wear one...

Again. Not what I said. It is what you inferred from what I said. If you would like to argue that lockdown didn’t reduce transmission over the period then please do.

So if we executed a lockdown, increased mask usage and a few other things and R dropped by .5, then it is likely that lockdown contributed something to the drop in R. So if you’d like to argue that we would have reached the decreased R without lockdown, given the other measures we took; then go ahead.

That’s what it would take to invalidate my statement. Unless you can argue that lockdown did not contribute to a decrease in R.

Ok. I'll let you back out of it.

I would suggest most people read it the way I did; particularly when read in context. But hey, work on your written communication if that's the case. Makes a discussion mute if its not clear.

Meh

Moot?

Good luck to us all. Hopefully we avoid further lockdowns.

Moot... Thats the one.

This! The authorities countermanded themselves. Its leadership 101. Tell the truth, Admit when you dont know.

The masked Karens and soy boys would probably be afraid to mix it up with "that guy". They'd have to get within 6' of him, and he's probably bigger than they are anyway.

But sounds like the airlines may set policies banning pax who board with a mask on and then refuse to wear it in flight. That should mostly solve the problem. "That guy" probably would tend to scare off some other pax from flying.