I don’t doubt Dr Quattkebaum is smart but he spent a majority of his time last month talking about variants and said Moderna was not yet proven to stop the variants.
According to SCDHEC we’ve had 52 total variant cases in the entire upstate.
Also there are multiple studies now using the actual population in the US showing all three vaccines have been effective against the variants.
Cases are continuing to drop despite the variants existence.
There is little discussion acknowledging herd immunity through a combination of natural immunity post infection + vaccines.
MUSC study published shows upstate counties have as much as 74% of the population immune.
Early on the fear was Covid over running our hospitals. This was a reason Clemson delayed the start of their fall semester.
Little Discussion about the fact that AnMed hospitalizations have dropped from a high of 150 cases in January to just 16 in April/May.
If case counts are low, hospitalizations are low, vaccinated populations and immune populations are up then virus risk is very very low.
Continuing these masks mandates is no longer about following the science , flattening the curve or protecting the vulnerable.
We’ve done all of the above and have the science and numbers to prove it but masks continue in pockets around the state.
I have no problem if you want to wear a mask but don’t insist I have to do so. I’m vaccinated and not at risk for illness. I’m not at risk to give you the illness because I can’t spread it without an infection.
This is all fear and theatrics and not science and data driven.
The reasons why you’d continue to have a mask mandate right now are:
- We’re not at the point where there’s population immunity from infections and immunizations. But we’ll be pretty close to there soon. If you can avoid having any major outbreaks between now and then, it would be great.
- people are most likely to spread virus indoors where they’re spending an extended amount of time. So you might consider tailoring that mandate to indoor spaces.
- mask policies are intended to mitigate risk in the riskiest situations so that you don’t have to close stuff down. If the choice is between something being open at all and requiring masks, then isn’t it better to require masks?
- public health can’t just be about individual choice, or else it won’t work. You have to have broad and nearly universal participation.
- having a mandate makes it easier for private businesses to enforce their own mask rules.
- nobody knows who’s vaccinated, and the vaccines aren’t 100% effective.
On the other hand, while we know that masks are fairly effective at presenting the spread between individuals, mask mandates might not work very well as public health policy because there are lots of places that won’t be subject to a mandate, and mandates are difficult to enforce. At this point, the choice doesn’t really seem like it’s between closing stuff down and wearing masks. And businesses could decide for themselves whether they want to have a mask policy or not (but, then, you’re just back to not liking being told what to do in those businesses). Unfortunately, there seems to be bipartisan agreement about not letting businesses decide for themselves, whether it’s about masks or about requiring proof of vaccination.
