POLL: Britain has announced an end to mask and other mandates by the end of the month. Is it time for the US to end similar mandates?

Britain has announced an end to mask and other mandates by the end of the month. Is it time for the US to end similar mandates?

Britain has announced an end to mask and other mandates by the end of the month. Is it time for the US to end similar mandates?
1872 votes

Also read:


  1. blank
    Scott Hooper

    This asks a question without any of the information people would need to give more than an emotional answer.

    The UK is down to about half the daily cases they had at the peak of Omicron, and their cases are declining. Their hospitalizations are now below half their peak, and they may have data or models showing they’re nearing herd immunity, all of which would support the lowering of restrictions.

    In the US, we’re still near our peak, and it’s not clear whether our cases are going up or down, Hospitalizations are at an all time high, and still increasing.

    We may get to where they are–we’re a week or two behind on Omicron, and we tend to have higher per-capita infections because of the anti- political crowds.

    Maybe February, but we’re not ready now.

    1. blank
      David Kay

      That’s great for the UK! However, per the words of a professional statistician, numbers are cooked to push narratives (and make money). There is so much fake news out there it’s hard to believe real news if you stumble upon it!

      1. blank

        Scott would keep us masked until the end of time if that is what King Inslee dictates. The masks are worthless and unnecessary. Its beyond time to let it go.

  2. blank

    From the beginning, the concept of wearing a mask to “keep other people safe” was a losing proposition. Lately, it’s been admitted by some government officials that the common “cloth” masks are not effective (and have never been effective). They do not protect the user nor do they protect bystanders.

    The “official” policy of “no masks required” then “wear masks but use ineffective ones” was based on hiding the reality that effective masks were in short supply and that they were being held back for hospital workers and “first responders” only. Fair enough, but why lie about it? Initially, we were asked to “lock down” … so the general public didn’t (necessarily) actually need masks if they followed the lock-down protocols.

    Once supplies “improved” then the Government should have come clean and given proper advice. e.g. (in retrospect) “Masks of the N95 type, if fitted and worn properly, may provide some protection from contracting COVID-19.” Of course this has yet to be announced. (There are “respirator masks” available that filter 99% of particles (“N100”), generally used in work situations with extreme dust and/or toxic exposures (depending on filter element used). These respirator masks are “illegal” for use against COVID-19 because they use a valve the lets exhaled air freely exit the device (and thus are much less unpleasant to breathe through). These are expensive, at about $35 for the basic device plus the cost of filter elements.

    The government’s initial response was “botched” — the government public health officials (bureaucrats, rather than practicing physicians) thought that COVID-19 might be corralled and blocked from spreading. By the time it was first detected in the U.S. that opportunity, if it ever existed, had likely already passed. (It didn’t help that Federal Officials blocked industry from developing and deploying test kits, until after the government laboratories failed to quickly develop such tests (that other countries had already developed and deployed). Note too, that China had blocked all domestic (within China) movement out of Wuhan — while continuing to allow international travel out of the Wuhan airport. This policy ensured that the disease would not be contained to its origin. (And there are signs that the disease may have begun its expansion 2 to 3 months before it was “officially” recognized.)

    In fighting the disease, step one was to develop an effective vaccine. The U.S. created 3 vaccines that were initially quite effective and have probably saved many lives. But no vaccine is 100% effective and Corona viruses are known to be subject to genetic variations (both “the flu” and the common cold are Corona viruses). No one who’s studied medical science should be surprised that a new “variant” that partially or wholly defeats the vaccine(s) appeared…

    Step two is to work on promising therapeutics — which should have begun in concert with the vaccine development. The government, since the beginning, has downplayed this aspect, instead pushing for vaccination of an ever increasing proportion of the population to achieve “herd immunity.” But herd immunity does not eradicate a disease, it simply turns it “endemic” from “pandemic” — meaning that it’s still there and still infects, but it no longer “runs rampant” through the population. Most viral diseases become endemic once a sufficient number of survivors have become resistant to re-infection. But the potential for a genetic variation always exists to start the process all over again.

    FWIW, of all the human infectious diseases, only Smallpox (with a 30% death rate) has been fully eradicated (in the wild). Egyptian mummies from 300 BCE have been observed showing signs of smallpox infection. Inoculation for the disease appears to have started in the 1500s in China, while Europe started this practice in the 1700s, in 1796, Edward Jenner introduced the first modern Smallpox vaccine. This disease was eradicated in 1977 (last “wild” case), though the virus is retained in various laboratories around the world. This is the only virus affecting humans that has been eradicated … 181 years after an effective vaccine was developed.

    Note: Polio is still endemic in some locations, but is close to being eradicated (political instability in some areas complicate eradication). A virus that affected “bovine” (both domestic and wild) animals (not humans) was eradicated in 2011.

  3. blank

    President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal employees was blocked on Friday by a federal judge.
    Biden does not have the authority to impose such a mandate, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown wrote in a 20-page ruling obtained by The Epoch Times.
    “The Supreme Court has expressly held that a COVID-19 vaccine mandate is not an employment regulation. And that means the President was without statutory authority to issue the federal worker mandate,” -U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown
    see full article

    Meanwhile, in WA , state employees have faced mandates, and lost their jobs for not obeying the gubernatorial proclamation for mandatory vaccination On behalf of those state employees Senator Linda Wilson has sponsored SB 5864 which would “allow people who lost their jobs due to the governor’s vaccine mandate to qualify for unemployment benefits. Normally, people who are terminated from a job and are seeking new employment are eligible for benefits; the governor’s decision to forbid benefits for people who became unemployed due to his mandate seemed overly harsh.”

  4. blank

    In August, just before the mask mandates, Clark County had a new case rate (per 100,000 residents) of 288. Last week, at the peak of the omicron variant, we had a new case rate of 1,679. The mask mandate hasn’t prevented virus transmission. And no, it wouldn’t “have been worse” without the mandate. We fared no better than states no mask mandate. As policy, the mask mandate has been a failure,

    As for vaccine mandates, the pharmaceutical industry came up with vaccines that are effective at reducing symptoms but ineffective at preventing transmission. This means that getting a vaccine should be a personal health decision based on each person’s own risk-benefit analysis.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *