RX Reven' said:In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
The fewer planes there are in the sky, the less likely it is that you'll have a midair collision even if you're not actively taking precautions to avoid it.
Wearing a mask reduces the number of bugs in the air so mistakes (ops, I rubbed my eyes) will have a lower likelihood transmission.
This I understand. Thank you!
In reply to RX Reven' :
Thanks. Makes sense. I knew the theory, just not the words! Ground school, and touch and go's, were over 40 years ago, and ain't been in a small plane again; well a few times as passenger, only
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:RX Reven' said:In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
The fewer planes there are in the sky, the less likely it is that you'll have a midair collision even if you're not actively taking precautions to avoid it.
Wearing a mask reduces the number of bugs in the air so mistakes (ops, I rubbed my eyes) will have a lower likelihood transmission.
This I understand. Thank you!
There's also a bit of "the devil you know" in there too.
It's usually better deal with a known risk (landing "blind" at an airport you know you can get to) vs creating unknown risks by trying to get to another airport. What if you get there and are still blind? What if you don't have enough fuel? What if you miscalculate the heading and miss it? Etc etc etc
I don't know how that piece relates to masks or if it wasn't even meant to lol
In reply to Robbie (Forum Supporter) :
Hold my beer...
Masks make communication difficult (dead radio), impair visibility (fogged glasses), and restrict breathing (low on fuel).
How did I do 
Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:I don't know how that piece relates to masks or if it wasn't even meant to lol
I think it may have started as a somewhat condescending answer to a filppant statement I made; but since I was in the wrong, I took no offense. And hey the forum made it fit, and I learned something!!! All good!!!
I will also say this has been a reason for me to not let my inlaws come over, and that's not a bad thing
Patrick (Forum Supporter) said:I will also say this has been a reason for me to not let my inlaws come over, and that's not a bad thing
I didn’t marry till I was 45, and when I did, I ended up with in-laws I liked! So blessed! They are both gone now, and I miss ‘em!
My dad went 2 years ago, so he missed this crazy, and Mom is in a safe (mostly) retirement apartment.
As mentioned, my life is even safer, so life is good... if a bit crazy!
This is the sort of propaganda stuff our government does that gives us all the warm fuzzies.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703
Patrick (Forum Supporter) said:I will also say this has been a reason for me to not let my inlaws come over, and that's not a bad thing
My wife may or may not have used this as an excuse to not visit her mother this year.
volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:This is the sort of propaganda stuff our government does that gives us all the warm fuzzies.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703
The fact that this is necessary because of all of the antivaxxers is a condemnation of the stupidity of the average citizen.
volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:This is the sort of propaganda stuff our government does that gives us all the warm fuzzies.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703
Coming back to this... Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. But the government doing studies to figure out which delivery method of a scientifically supported message that will get us back to "normal" sooner than anything else, restoring the economy and mental health faster than anything else... Yes, this does give me the warm fuzzies. They're taking it seriously.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:This is the sort of propaganda stuff our government does that gives us all the warm fuzzies.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703
The fact that this is necessary because of all of the antivaxxers is a condemnation of the stupidity of the average citizen.
"Think about how stupid the average person is, then realize half of them are stupider than that."
- George Carlin
So, I took two tests- a drivethrough CVS one (swab goes WAY back in the sinuses) and a Pixel home one (swab goes just into the nose). My Pixel test came back negative, I'm still waiting on results from the other. Probably still going to quarantine for two weeks since it would really mess up a lot of Sara's life if she got it.
Quarantining in my own home has taken me straight back to high school- I only go to my room, my desk, and the garage, and I keep my distance from the girl I like as if our lives depend on it.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:This is the sort of propaganda stuff our government does that gives us all the warm fuzzies.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703
Coming back to this... Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. But the government doing studies to figure out which delivery method of a scientifically supported message that will get us back to "normal" sooner than anything else, restoring the economy and mental health faster than anything else... Yes, this does give me the warm fuzzies. They're taking it seriously.
Yes, I am being sarcastic. The fact that they have to try out "messaging" and figure out which method of propaganda will work best ought to be shocking.
Did you read the link? And, have you ever talked to an anti-vaxxer? Now, do you think that any of the "messaging" they're trying out is going to be effective on them?
"Messaging" is what parents do to children. The fact that the government's trying to figure out the best way to sing "a spoonful of sugar" to me is insulting. I, and everyone else here, ought to make their decisions on whether to get an eventual vaccine based on facts, not based on how slick the advertising messaging is.
volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:mtn (Forum Supporter) said:volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:This is the sort of propaganda stuff our government does that gives us all the warm fuzzies.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703
Coming back to this... Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. But the government doing studies to figure out which delivery method of a scientifically supported message that will get us back to "normal" sooner than anything else, restoring the economy and mental health faster than anything else... Yes, this does give me the warm fuzzies. They're taking it seriously.
Yes, I am being sarcastic. The fact that they have to try out "messaging" and figure out which method of propaganda will work best ought to be shocking.
Did you read the link? And, have you ever talked to an anti-vaxxer? Now, do you think that any of the "messaging" they're trying out is going to be effective on them?
"Messaging" is what parents do to children. The fact that the government's trying to figure out the best way to sing "a spoonful of sugar" to me is insulting. I, and everyone else here, ought to make their decisions on whether to get an eventual vaccine based on facts, not based on how slick the advertising messaging is.
Yes, I read the entire link, including the tabular view. Twice actually. And yes, I have talked to anti-vaxxers. I've ended relationships over it. I would hope the messaging would be impactful to them, but it is everyone who they talk to that isn't an antivaxxer but is susceptible to their message and could become one that I am worried about.
This is not propaganda. Propaganda is, by definition, biased or misleading information to publize a particular political cause or point of view. This is not biased. It is not misleading. This is NOT political. If you're making it political, shame on you.
volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:Yes, I am being sarcastic. The fact that they have to try out "messaging" and figure out which method of propaganda will work best ought to be shocking.
Why? I work in marketing, and messaging is the hardest part. You can have the greatest product in the world, but if you can't convince people why they should buy it, it will fail. Why should the government use tactics that are any different? It's all about reaching a mass audience with a message that will resonate and get them to change their behavior.
I fail to see the problem.
In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
I never made it political. That's your interpretation. And if you fail to see how the information could be biased, then shame on you.
volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
I never made it political. That's your interpretation. And if you fail to see how the information could be biased, then shame on you.
Except you did. You called it propaganda.
Explain to me how this could be biased? It is biased in the same way as "If you have chest pain for no reason, you go to the ER" is biased.
In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
Nothing in there about politics.
Its concerning to me that they're already trying to figure out messaging before they even have a vaccine. It's concerning to me that they're "fast tracking" a vaccine. It's concerning to be that they're already spreading "messaging", because everywhere I turn I hear people saying the exact same thing- "Well, we may not be able to open up again until there's a vaccine".
LET ME BE CLEAR: I AM NOT AN ANTIVAXXER. I just have a healthy skepticism when I suddenly start hearing all the same people start saying all the same thing at the same time. None of this is "facts", no matter how hard they might want to think and hope it is.
There was an article in The Atlantic recently about how we may not want to pin all our hopes on there being a vaccine. Now, as far as bias goes, the Atlantic is _slightly_ to the left (sarcasm here). So this isn't right-wing "Ain't no Wuhan Flu here" stuff. A vaccine may not ever be developed. It may not be that effective. A lot of people may not get it- the last time we went though this, with H1N1, only about 1/4 of the population did- hardly enough for "herd immunity". These are all real possibilities.
Google's dictionary disagrees. I've personally always associated propaganda with politics.
Ultimately, this isn't propaganda. Marketing, sure. Messaging, yes. But people have proven over and over again they're dumbasses, i.e. only 1/4 of the population getting the H1N1 vaccine. That is why this is necessary.
There's a lot of "air" between "antivaxxer" and "we ought to get every vaccine for every disease that comes down the pike".
volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:There's a lot of "air" between "antivaxxer" and "we ought to get every vaccine for every disease that comes down the pike".
I never said "we ought to get every vaccine for every disease that comes down the pike". I never implied it either.
In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
Let's see...Google vs. Merriam Webster.
No further comment needed on that.
As for H1N1, despite only 1/4 of the population getting the vaccine, what happened to H1N1? I sure don't ever hear about it anymore.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:volvoclearinghouse (Forum Supporter) said:There's a lot of "air" between "antivaxxer" and "we ought to get every vaccine for every disease that comes down the pike".
I never said "we ought to get every vaccine for every disease that comes down the pike". I never implied it either.
Fair. However this is usually how the conversation gets framed. And it ought to be apparent, if one steps outside the bubble of the media, that "marketing" a vaccine that doesn't even exist yet, certainly could lead one to see this as "doesn't matter what the vaccine is, just take it".
Worth some thought:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/coronavirus-vaccine-hunt-could-go-horribly-wrong
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
