Masks are good; and inside, among non-vaccinated ppl, they're great.
But governments need to give Americans an off-ramp to the post-pandemic world. Ending outdoor mask mandates would be a good place to start.
To be clear: I don't support immediately lifting mandates in places with outbreaks, like Michigan.
But dozens of states that currently have outdoor mask mandates should mark an imminent threshold—in, say, local hospitalization rate—below which the mandates will be lifted.
The best case for KEEPING the mask mandates are
1. Masks are easy, and they work 2. Requiring masks outside makes them handy when people go inside 3. Masks build a sense of social solidarity.
I think I can imagine better counter-arguments for all three.
1. “Masks work”:
Yes, but in most outdoor areas, they’re not *doing* work. The odds of getting COVID inside is 19X higher than outside. People just aren’t getting this disease from walking in parks or passing strangers on sidewalks. And vaccines shrink the outdoor risk to ~0.
2. “Mandate masks outside to enforce them inside”:
I don’t really get this. Making meaningless rules because they might hypothetically help us enforce meaningful rules is not a good standard of law-making.
And as @JuliaLMarcus said … well, you can read what she said :)
3. “Mask mandates are good for solidarity”
Why are we sure that regulating the outdoors is a pure social good? Don't just think about the spillover BENEFITS of mask mandates; think about spillover COSTS for the less fortunate, who have less space where they can live unmasked.
We're approaching the stage of the pandemic where outdoor mask mandates will be almost akin to hygiene theater
I'm tired of fighting the virus where it mostly doesn't live. Let's win by fighting the virus where it actually lives: Ventilation + Vaccines.
To be clear: If some people want to wear masks forever, I won't scream at them. If they want to stop wearing masks outside this summer and keep masks handy for the flu/rona winter, I'm with them.
I am for reducing unnecessary private anxiety and unhelpful public shame.
Hyper-neuroticism is a mitzvah during a pandemic. But we don’t have to live like this forever, and it’s okay for more people to say so.
Let’s tell people the truth about COVID and trust they can take it. Let’s plan for the end of outdoor mask mandates.
To be fair, CDC is only reporting documented breakthroughs. There are probably more asymptomatics that aren't reported. Let's say actual breakthrough rate is 250x higher.
Well, those are the odds that a 20something driving 17 miles *every weekday* gets into an accident this year
I DM'd with a university mathematician before tweeting to make sure the math was rightish. He points out rightly that drives and immune systems are pretty heterogenous, so this is apples/oranges. But the point stands.
In a Media Insight Project survey of the moral values of news audiences, the value drawing the least support was "the idea that a good way to make society better is to spotlight its problems—only about 3 in 10 agree."
1. From my perspective, audiences love reading about society's problems. They consume the hell out of "problem spotlighting" from gender/race inequality to threats of anti-democratic right (MSNBC) to purported migrant dangers (FNC)
2. I, personally, have no idea What Americans Want, and it's very possible that the vast majority of ppl who I don't know and will never meet actually don't want so much problem-spotlighting, and they're being over-served a lot of Sad World Journalism.
Evidence for surface transmission of COVID-19 is truly pathetic. But unlike the actual coronavirus, performative cleaning rituals are very much alive on surfaces across America.
The surface-transmission theory of COVID-19 is basically dead. But hygiene theater lives:
- on subways
- in schools
- in stores
- in offices
- and ... sigh ... at The Atlantic
I want to directly address this point because I think it represents a plausible-sounding but probably wrong objection to my hygiene theater critiques.
The objection is basically: Hey but isn't hygiene theater actually, you know, pretty hygienic?
I'm mildly obsessed with the question of whether the decline of organized religion has ironically pushed religious thinking into every other nook and cranny of "secular" life
No surprise that @DouthatNYT has smart things to say on it
To the extent that there's a sort of god gene that must do *some* work for secular ppl, I buy the case that organized religion has partly dissolved into:
2. quasi-religious political movements (you know the type)
(Don't take "god gene" literally. That's I'm-running-out-of-Twitter-characters shorthand for "assuming without evidence that even religiously unaffiliated groups have a sort of baseline level of non-rational spirituality, and that energy has to flow somewhere, where does it go?")