Has CDC burned its bridges? If there's a surge can they persuade people to put their masks back on?

[Ms. Toad]

69. There are a number of issues with it.

First - the data was gathered in the current setting - one in which mitigation measures are still being taken.

If you are vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine, you are 95% protected (it doesn't work quite that way - but it is helpful to see the error in the CDC's reasoning). That means out of 20 exposures that would give an unvaccinated person COVID, only one will give you COVID. (For J&J, one out of four that would give an unvaccinated person COVID).

Whle we are still masking, still social distancing, still avoiding large indoor crowds (taking mitigation measrures), we are subjected to very few of those exposures. Once people feel free to abandon the mitigation measures, those of us who are vaccinated will reach that 20th expousre a heck of a lot faster than the data collected while mitigation measures are in place would indicate. 5% of 10 COVID-creating exposures (low becaue of the mitigation) is a heck of a less than 5% of 1000 COVID-creating exposures (high because all of the mitigation measures are being dropped).

So our personal risk goes up when, for example, Trader Joes says unvaccinated people can shop without masks - and, oh, by the way, it's on the honor system. My personal risk goes up June 2 when Ohio drops all health orders (no more masking, no more limits on gatherings, etc.) There will be a lot more breakthrough cases because we will be forced into more situations that would give an unvaccinated person COVID - and 5% of dramatically more expoosures is also dramatically more breakthrough cases.

And that only looks at their assessment of the personal risk to a single vaccinated person. It doesn't take into account that the variants impact children more (both infection and severity of infection) - and children under 12 are not yet eligible to be vaccinated. Again - currently our children are protected (solely) by the community mitigation efforts. Once those mitigation are removed - before children are permitted to be vaccinated - they will have no protection. Same for people who can't be immunized or - if immunized - cannot develop immunity. Their safety - and freedom from death or life-long consequences depends on taking community mitigation measures (For example. the heart damage that is being recorded in children in even asymptomatic cases ("Case studies also show MIS-C can strike seemingly healthy children without warning three or four weeks after asymptomatic infections" ) .

So, while there are flaws at the CDC's micro-view of the vaccinated person's risk - the most significant problem is that this new proclamaton is being perceived as permisson to remove mitigation measures across the board (both for vaccinated and *wink-wink" non-vaccinated people, as well) - and anyone with half a brain could have predicted it would be taken that way. The county board of health acted in reliance on it the day it was issued, by removing all mitigation measures in the county - citing the CDC's myopic verson of the science of transmission.