Paulson Adebo. . . . - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Paulson Adebo. . . . (/thread-20429.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Paulson Adebo. . . . (/thread-20429.html)
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Phogge - 09-14-2020
I listen to the medical experts. I could care less what some athlete says. But if they were near me and not masked I would say something. I use the best method to steer clear. I stay home unless I have to go out. One of the perks of near-retirement. On the street in out little town almost everyone is masked and if not I will cross Highway One to avoid.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Mick - 09-14-2020
(09-14-2020, 01:58 PM)Phogge Wrote: I listen to the medical experts. I could care less what some athlete says.
I don't generally like to listen to athletes, and that's based purely upon my direct experience with them. Most of them, to me, have a much higher ego combined with less intelligence, less common sense, less general inquisitiveness and less openness to new ideas or concepts.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - oldalum - 09-14-2020
(09-14-2020, 03:25 PM)Mick Wrote: athletes . . . Most of them, to me, have a much higher ego combined with less intelligence, less common sense, less general inquisitiveness and less openness to new ideas or concepts.Hey! in the immortal words of Curly, I resemble that remark! :)
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - BostonCard - 09-14-2020
(09-14-2020, 03:25 PM)Mick Wrote:(09-14-2020, 01:58 PM)Phogge Wrote: I listen to the medical experts. I could care less what some athlete says.
I don't generally like to listen to athletes, and that's based purely upon my direct experience with them. Most of them, to me, have a much higher ego combined with less intelligence, less common sense, less general inquisitiveness and less openness to new ideas or concepts.
Unfortunately, it's not just athletes these days...
BC
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - BostonCard - 09-14-2020
(09-14-2020, 10:36 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-14-2020, 08:33 AM)FarmBoy Wrote: I don't think it's reasonable to be anti-mask.
I think it is at least somewhat reasonable to doubt the efficacy of masks. As BC pointed out at the beginning of this epidemic there wasn't really compelling data either way. At present, the data favoring masks is still not conclusive to the point we can say how much good they do. That said, the mandate to wear them isn't some kind of conspiracy to limit our freedom. It is the best estimate at present of what we can do to limit the spread of the disease given what we know now. It isn't political.
We all have to follow regulations and laws with which we may have some doubts. They may be "incorrect" in some sense. However, in order to make society "work", we have to comply. It is perfectly fine to think masks aren't very useful. It is not perfectly fine to not wear them. It may turn out that at the end of they day they didn't help much, but as of now they required. That is just how it is.
Right. Obviously this is a new virus, and it is hard to prove that masks work. You would have to randomize people to masks versus no masks and look to see what proportion of each group develop COVID-19 (but even then, masks' best efficacy is probably in preventing the wearer from infecting someone else instead of protecting the wearer. Instead, what you have is a lot of circumstantial evidence that suggests that masks work, from studies looking at droplet emissions through masks, to animal studies, to observational studies, to ecological studies, to studies in other (related) diseases. The studies generally and consistently support mask wearing, but all the studies have weaknesses. It's enough for me to wear masks routinely and to encourage others to wear them, especially, as someone else mentioned in this thread, when you consider the risk/benefit. There is basically no risk, and a potentially large benefit, so it looks like it should be a no-brainer.
BC
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - teejers1 - 09-14-2020
(09-14-2020, 06:37 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-14-2020, 10:36 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-14-2020, 08:33 AM)FarmBoy Wrote: I don't think it's reasonable to be anti-mask.
I think it is at least somewhat reasonable to doubt the efficacy of masks. As BC pointed out at the beginning of this epidemic there wasn't really compelling data either way. At present, the data favoring masks is still not conclusive to the point we can say how much good they do. That said, the mandate to wear them isn't some kind of conspiracy to limit our freedom. It is the best estimate at present of what we can do to limit the spread of the disease given what we know now. It isn't political.
We all have to follow regulations and laws with which we may have some doubts. They may be "incorrect" in some sense. However, in order to make society "work", we have to comply. It is perfectly fine to think masks aren't very useful. It is not perfectly fine to not wear them. It may turn out that at the end of they day they didn't help much, but as of now they required. That is just how it is.
Right. Obviously this is a new virus, and it is hard to prove that masks work. You would have to randomize people to masks versus no masks and look to see what proportion of each group develop COVID-19 (but even then, masks' best efficacy is probably in preventing the wearer from infecting someone else instead of protecting the wearer. Instead, what you have is a lot of circumstantial evidence that suggests that masks work, from studies looking at droplet emissions through masks, to animal studies, to observational studies, to ecological studies, to studies in other (related) diseases. The studies generally and consistently support mask wearing, but all the studies have weaknesses. It's enough for me to wear masks routinely and to encourage others to wear them, especially, as someone else mentioned in this thread, when you consider the risk/benefit. There is basically no risk, and a potentially large benefit, so it looks like it should be a no-brainer.
BC
I would only add that common sense militates in favor of wearing a mask because it's hard to see it not helping. It may not be preventive, but it has to help reduce spread . . . some.
lex24 - lex24 - 09-14-2020
(09-14-2020, 08:19 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(09-14-2020, 06:37 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-14-2020, 10:36 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-14-2020, 08:33 AM)FarmBoy Wrote: I don't think it's reasonable to be anti-mask.
I think it is at least somewhat reasonable to doubt the efficacy of masks. As BC pointed out at the beginning of this epidemic there wasn't really compelling data either way. At present, the data favoring masks is still not conclusive to the point we can say how much good they do. That said, the mandate to wear them isn't some kind of conspiracy to limit our freedom. It is the best estimate at present of what we can do to limit the spread of the disease given what we know now. It isn't political.
We all have to follow regulations and laws with which we may have some doubts. They may be "incorrect" in some sense. However, in order to make society "work", we have to comply. It is perfectly fine to think masks aren't very useful. It is not perfectly fine to not wear them. It may turn out that at the end of they day they didn't help much, but as of now they required. That is just how it is.
Right. Obviously this is a new virus, and it is hard to prove that masks work. You would have to randomize people to masks versus no masks and look to see what proportion of each group develop COVID-19 (but even then, masks' best efficacy is probably in preventing the wearer from infecting someone else instead of protecting the wearer. Instead, what you have is a lot of circumstantial evidence that suggests that masks work, from studies looking at droplet emissions through masks, to animal studies, to observational studies, to ecological studies, to studies in other (related) diseases. The studies generally and consistently support mask wearing, but all the studies have weaknesses. It's enough for me to wear masks routinely and to encourage others to wear them, especially, as someone else mentioned in this thread, when you consider the risk/benefit. There is basically no risk, and a potentially large benefit, so it looks like it should be a no-brainer.
BC
I would only add that common sense militates in favor of wearing a mask because it's hard to see it not helping. It may not be preventive, but it has to help reduce spread . . . some.
Agree. And perhaps if the message to those who don’t wear masks, was to base it on a risk benefit analysis as opposed to the basic “you idiots that don’t wear masks are selfish, zealot, cretins” more that don’t now wear masks, would. Talking “to”people is generally more effective than talking “at people.”
RE: lex24 - CowboyIndian - 09-14-2020
(09-14-2020, 09:54 PM)lex24 Wrote: Talking “to”people is generally more effective than talking “at people.”
Unfotunately they are equally ineffective with anti-maskers and anti-vaxers. Your assumption is that reason will prevail but these folks have left reason behind a long time ago. It amazes and appalls me that people can be so proud of their ignorance that they strut it like a new hat.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Phogge - 09-15-2020
(09-14-2020, 05:05 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-14-2020, 03:25 PM)Mick Wrote:(09-14-2020, 01:58 PM)Phogge Wrote: I listen to the medical experts. I could care less what some athlete says.
I don't generally like to listen to athletes, and that's based purely upon my direct experience with them. Most of them, to me, have a much higher ego combined with less intelligence, less common sense, less general inquisitiveness and less openness to new ideas or concepts.
Unfortunately, it's not just athletes these days...
BC
Yeah if you listen to the Troglodytes on TOS you would think we were living during the Inquisition.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Goose - 09-15-2020
(09-14-2020, 06:37 PM)BostonCard Wrote: The studies generally and consistently support mask wearing, but all the studies have weaknesses. It's enough for me to wear masks routinely and to encourage others to wear them, especially, as someone else mentioned in this thread, when you consider the risk/benefit. There is basically no risk, and a potentially large benefit, so it looks like it should be a no-brainer.I completely agree with this analysis. However, I believe that it is CRITICAL that our society understand and honor another point. Even if I remained unconvinced masks help, I would wear them. There are regulations in place saying I have to do so when going to the store etc. While it would be great if everyone would wear masks because they were convinced it was a good idea, or at least not a bad idea, society can't function that way. Some people are going to disagree. These people may be totally irrational. In this case, one can even rationally question the benefit. That doesn't matter. We can't successfully live together if everybody believes they have the right to in each and every case chose what policy they will follow.
BC
Unfortunately at present our society at large appears to believe that if they don't personally endorse a given policy, it is their unconditional right to simply ignore that policy. This problem crosses the entire political spectrum, left, right whatever. No society can function without rules. Our society attempts to have as few rules as possible, which I think most of us endorse. However, that isn't "no rules". Some things you have to do because that is the decision our chosen leaders have made. Period. Wearing masks is one of those rules.
(09-14-2020, 08:19 PM)teejers1 Wrote: I would only add that common sense militates in favor of wearing a mask because it's hard to see it not helping. It may not be preventive, but it has to help reduce spread . . . some.While I totally agree with you here, we have to be a bit careful. There are quite a few examples in history of things that were basically regarded as "common sense" turning out to be completely wrong. Even the "no down side" argument could turn out to be wrong (though I don't see how, but...). I for one think that it is a good idea to wear a mask. I even do it outside, more as a symbol than a necessity. The important point is that public policy right now is that you must wear one in public when social distancing is impossible, i.e. when shopping etc. Even if I think it is stupid, I still have to do it.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Papa John - 09-15-2020
(09-15-2020, 08:07 AM)Phogge Wrote: Yeah if you listen to the Troglodytes on TOS you would think we were living during the Inquisition.
I wasn't expecting the Inquisition...
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Phogge - 09-15-2020
Yeah the headquarters are not in Europe but in a protected community in Florida.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Papa John - 09-15-2020
Sorry, Phogge, but you missed the cue. The Inquisition of which I am thinking originated in Spain.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - BostonCard - 09-15-2020
(09-15-2020, 08:10 AM)Goose Wrote: Unfortunately at present our society at large appears to believe that if they don't personally endorse a given policy, it is their unconditional right to simply ignore that policy. This problem crosses the entire political spectrum, left, right whatever. No society can function without rules. Our society attempts to have as few rules as possible, which I think most of us endorse. However, that isn't "no rules". Some things you have to do because that is the decision our chosen leaders have made. Period. Wearing masks is one of those rules.
There was a good piece in the Economist about differences in political economy between liberal market economies (lmes) such as America, Britain and Canada and co-ordinated market economies (cmes) such as Germany, the Nordic countries, Austria and the Netherlands.
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2020/09/12/which-is-the-best-market-model
Basically...
Quote:CMEs such as Germany have generally had a more coherent strategy for containing the spread of the virus. Lockdowns may not seem like incremental change, but reducing working hours to limit social contact, apportioning the costs across society and gaining public consent for restrictive measures are all easier when there are already institutions in place which allow collective action. Success may be generated more by unity and consistency than by the strength of the intervention that is chosen.
(even Sweden, which didn't impose a lockdown at all, had high level support for its strategy and a fair bit of buy-in on voluntary social distancing; one could argue that while the policy was a failure compared to its Nordic neighbors, had that policy been pursued someplace like the US, it would have been a nationwide disaster)
In contrast LMEs, such as the US, are generally not very good at getting the population to follow a cohesive strategy, and so things look very disjointed and ineffective. On the other hand, almost all of the most promising vaccines are coming from the US and the UK, not to mention effective treatments (remdisivir coming from the US, dexamethasone proven effective in the UK), and that is a factor of its more (classically) liberal political economy.
It would obviously be ideal if we could somehow harness the benefits of each system.
BC
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Phogge - 09-15-2020
I got the clue but just wanted to say that Savanarola’s heir lives in Florida and the whips, chains and racks are in storage waiting for all who wear masks in defiance of the current Pope in D.C.
Get ready to be stretched.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Mick - 09-15-2020
(09-15-2020, 09:33 AM)Papa John Wrote: Sorry, Phogge, but you missed the cue. The Inquisition of which I am thinking originated in Spain.
I think the Inquisition was worst in Spain where it lasted for 200 years and resulted in 32,000 executions. But I think it got its start in southern France when Lucius III sent agents to track down heretics (Catharists) in 1184. He sent agents to pursue Waldensians in southern France, Germany and northern Italy at about the same time. The actual Inquisition started in 1229 (Council of Toulouse) and 1231, Pope Gregory formally charged the Franciscan and Dominican orders to track down heretics. I don't think the Spanish Inquisition happened until 1478. Could be wrong.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Phogge - 09-15-2020
Spain and France were in Europe then I believe.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Maple Leaf - 09-15-2020
(09-15-2020, 09:34 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-15-2020, 08:10 AM)Goose Wrote: Unfortunately at present our society at large appears to believe that if they don't personally endorse a given policy, it is their unconditional right to simply ignore that policy. This problem crosses the entire political spectrum, left, right whatever. No society can function without rules. Our society attempts to have as few rules as possible, which I think most of us endorse. However, that isn't "no rules". Some things you have to do because that is the decision our chosen leaders have made. Period. Wearing masks is one of those rules.
There was a good piece in the Economist about differences in political economy between liberal market economies (lmes) such as America, Britain and Canada and co-ordinated market economies (cmes) such as Germany, the Nordic countries, Austria and the Netherlands.
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2020/09/12/which-is-the-best-market-model
Basically...
Quote:CMEs such as Germany have generally had a more coherent strategy for containing the spread of the virus. Lockdowns may not seem like incremental change, but reducing working hours to limit social contact, apportioning the costs across society and gaining public consent for restrictive measures are all easier when there are already institutions in place which allow collective action. Success may be generated more by unity and consistency than by the strength of the intervention that is chosen.
(even Sweden, which didn't impose a lockdown at all, had high level support for its strategy and a fair bit of buy-in on voluntary social distancing; one could argue that while the policy was a failure compared to its Nordic neighbors, had that policy been pursued someplace like the US, it would have been a nationwide disaster)
In contrast LMEs, such as the US, are generally not very good at getting the population to follow a cohesive strategy, and so things look very disjointed and ineffective. On the other hand, almost all of the most promising vaccines are coming from the US and the UK, not to mention effective treatments (remdisivir coming from the US, dexamethasone proven effective in the UK), and that is a factor of its more (classically) liberal political economy.
It would obviously be ideal if we could somehow harness the benefits of each system.
BC
I wonder if there could be a correlation between the level of education, specifically science education and the CMES countries.
RE: Paulson Adebo. . . . - Papa John - 09-15-2020
You guys are killing me. I said that I wasn't expecting the [Spanish] Inquisition.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj8n4MfhjUc
Richard@agnich.com - Mudhead - 09-16-2020
(09-12-2020, 01:10 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: I wonder why no one has called him out on this board for sharing his, relatively contrarian, position. Kerry Walsh Jennings was branded as stupid by multiple people here. Two Stanford athletes sharing their thoughts and opinions yet treated completely differently. Anyone? 2006? Gailtate?late to the thread I know and not up on Spanish Inquisition so apologies. I don’t pretend to know how important masks are and “following the science” requires more zigging and zagging than I’m into. With that said, hats off to Adebo for daring to differ from Bay Area dogma. Whether he is right or wrong, he is not just joining the crowd. I don’t agree with much of what our athletes say..they are young and have a narrower experience than most by dint of their commitment to their sport. But they are entitled to speak and they don’t need my assent to do so .
In case you missed his twitter feed, here's a link:
https://twitter.com/paulsona17
What i can hope for is that they exercise independent judgement in arriving at their beliefs and do not fear standing apart from the crowd. I want to believe we all have more respect for someone who differs totally with us after thinking through an issue than one who agrees with us because of the crowd. Hats off to one who not afraid to stand apart.