Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't find it "interesting" at all that a particular group of people has decided to err on the side of caution in both cases. It's entirely consistent.

This is how critical thinking works. If an organization advises something you think might be risky, you question it, and maybe don't do the potentially-risky thing until you have more information. But if an organization advises you to do something they claim reduces risk, you go ahead and do it. If information later comes out that this risk-reducing thing wasn't useful, then you stop doing it; you haven't lost anything by trying it.

Regardless, we've all seen what happens in places where restrictions were lifted earlier than they should have been. Being cautious is the right move.

As for myself, I'll be fully protected by the vaccine in about two weeks. I'll likely continue wearing a mask in public in order to help others around me feel more comfortable (because they have no idea if I've been vaccinated or not), but among people I know, I'll take the mask off. Once the vaccination rate is high enough around here, I'll leave it off in public, too, assuming state/local mandates allow it.



> If an organization advises something you think might be risky, you question it

My point is that last year, the party line was "the CDC is above questioning."

> If information later comes out that this risk-reducing thing wasn't useful, then you stop doing it; you haven't lost anything by trying it.

Pretty much every COVID mitigation has some negative effect, so I don't think "you haven't lost anything" is accurate.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: