I miss the days of not worrying about COVID. I have been a good boy and avoided the hobby for a while, but I am dying to schedule something but worrying about the risks associated with the potential exposure. I enjoy a session with all the things that make the hobby fun and am curious about how others are mitigating the risk. It’s a question for both provider and hobbiest.
To do or not to do?
You can hear debate after debate. You can read the ads, listen to someone convince you that it’s going to be alright.
You do it and you are fine and no one gets sick, great. You do it and you get sick or someone you care about gets sick or worse, it’ll be on you the rest of your days.
In the end it’s all up to you. Good luck.
COVID is not going away for at least 12-18 months. We still do not know how effective a vaccine rollout would be, or how long a complete rollout would take. There is a possibility that COVID never goes away and there will always be a chance to get the disease. If you can wait that long, go for it! Otherwise... wear a mask. Try to meet people who are low-volume/take precautions. A lot of people are taking this seriously. Its certainly not an easy thing to do during COVID, but... there are options.
Unfortunately it's hard to tell for sure until you've met with someone in person, sometimes more than once. I mean, everyone "says" they're being careful these days. And some providers practices change over time as well. Same with hobbyists.Originally Posted by austintx512
Providers who are frequently reviewed and tour/travel should raise an eyebrow as far as potential volume goes. Nobody drives hours away to another city just to fuck one guy per day.
I agree this ailment is here to stay. The exposure is the risk - no way to know the hobbiest or providers history etc. It’s all a risk and difficult to mitigate, short of wearing a mask and avoiding touch as much as possible which makes the visit NO FUN. LOL. It sucks and I’m gathering you’re either all in or out?
Sanitize everything, no kissing, wear gloves, don't face each other, minimize contact etc etc. You will still be near each other and not 6 feet apart. Like everyone else has stated, do your research and weigh your personal risk factor. In the end it is up to you.
This is all so silly (not what you guys said above - I'm talking about the entire SARS-COV-2/COVID-19 issue).
It's much more a social paranoia, delusion, and panic at this point. Not only that, but the cure, which everyone from Nobel prize winning epidemiologists, a Nobel prize winning chemist, an entire dream team of scientists all organized by a Stanford professor chair & leading virologist/bio-statistician, Dr. Ioannidis, economists & sociologists, that plead with Trump many months ago for a meeting (White House never allowed it), whom were all begging for global govts/societies to calm down, is far far far worse than this illness could ever dream of being.
That's exactly why that dream team panel of scientists was pleading to stop this nonsense (though they never got their shot). We now have housing issues, national debt issues (globally), entire industries are gone, we have increased rates of suicide substantially since the lockdowns, increased illicit <forbidden topic> usage, increased depression, anxiety, divorces, we have our young at educational AND physical fitness risk (no PE, far less movement, far less to zero socializing), starvation/hunger issues worldwide, increased rates of crime due to financial issues as well as depressive and anxiety issues and other firms of distress, etc etc etc. There are estimates that this could affect (in considerably devastating ways) untold tens of millions of people around the world. It could even be responsible for multiple millions of deaths (directly or indirectly) when the SARS-COV-2 virus, nor the full blown condition of COVID-19, could never come close to the suggested models/numbers (possibly by a factor ranging from 2-6x less!).
I could literally continue linking sources, verifiable sources, posting quotes, and data, from leading scientists of this opposing view to the point that my fingers were nearly raw or bleeding. That is seriously how much data and scientific support there is out there for this skeptic viewpoint. That's to let you know just in case you somehow think this is all off-the-wall, or if the media, and social media, or friends affected by any of those, which is understandable, it is, but, if it has pushed you so far into the delusion of this macabre morbid hyperfixation of the virus and its supoosed doom-and-gloom please realize how much there is on the other side of the coin. It hasn't gained traction b/c it's just like a huge stock well-off. You simply can't stop a massive moving machine (that many countless millions of people) in its tracks until it exhausts itself. Basically that is what has to happen here (in a very metaphorical sense of course). In reality the exhaustion is going to come from actual social exhaustion but also from a massive insurmountable quantity of evidence, fully peer reviewer, which even the naysayer scientists (many of them whose careers partially ride on their voices & views) won't be able to ignore.
We also have to remember that from from a psychological point of view it makes more sense to err on the side of caution as any form of scientist, particularly in a 2020 world of instant information and massive publicity. If your prediction is over the top but you save lives you will be lauded for it anyway (so long as you didn't cause a much worse condition in doing so; that's the big risk here for scientists who have stayed on the doon & apocalypse side of the fence). If it's totally true then you look like a genius. If you downplay it though and things turn out bad you will lose big-time. So it's not hard to see why in a world where a massive general public has access instant scientific opinions on newly discovered data that those men/women would err to caution. However, it now also means, b/c of the serious calamity it caused socially, economically, even causing potentially many more deaths itself, they must continue that line for as long as they can or else they are ruined in such a public world.
Here are some other snippets and scientists besides the ones mentioned in my posts and COVID-19 skepticisms essay in case you still want more info:
According to Prof Sir David Spiegelhalter, a statistician at Cambridge University: “Many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period.”
Even that idiot Ferguson, whom caused this nonsense with his total BS model predicting ~2-3Mn deaths in the US (months ago supposedly) and another 500K deaths in the UK (they sit @ <42K currently - over half a year later!), had this to say finally:
Sheesh. This is such a ridiculous farce.(Neil Ferguson told the FT at the beginning April he thought it was “plausible” that two-thirds of the people who died of the virus at that point would have died anyway later in the year.)
Michael Levitt is a 2013 Nobel prize winning chemist and biophysicist who had this to say (he was also on the dream team that plead to speak with the White House months ago):
“What we need is to control the panic,” he said. In the grand scheme, “we’re going to be fine.”
Yet another thing many people don't realize is that the model Neil Ferguson used to come up with that initial scary scenario and numbers, which preempted ALL of this nonsense, was based on nearly 15yr old bioinformatics computer code and methodologies! Ugh
-MG
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote