I can reiterate as well -- you chose to use the word "whim". Second, pages 7 to 31 of the ruling focus on the meaning of the word "sanitize", which directly speaks to how the masks operate to control disease and its spread.

(Written on 20/04/2022)(Permalink)

The effectiveness of masks directly relates to your accusation that the CDC's mandate was a whim. Let's also remember that the CDC, which Congress created, is the Center for Disease Control. It's all about controlling disease. And the idea that masks do not (cannot) *sanitize* the breath exhaled by someone who's shedding virus by trapping and containing liquid droplets that contain the virus is preposterous. I think people broadly understand that. After all this law, passed in 1944, post-dated the 1918 influenza outbreak during which masks were commonly warn to control disease and prevent its spread. Like much other analysis I've read, it seems that Judge Mizelle wanted to strike it down and twisted her reasoning around the word "sanitize" to achieve her aim. That's the very definition of an activist judge.

(Written on 20/04/2022)(Permalink)

I'm guessing you're not a lawyer. I'm not. But a couple of errors in your comment. First, mask mandates are not a whim, the evidence that they're effective at limiting spread of an airborne virus such as COVID is substantial (a frequent poster here's frequent citing of the so-called "Danish study" notwithstanding). I've perused Mizelle's ruling and she relies on the narrowest possible interpretation of the word "sanitize" and its various forms to achiever her apparent goal of striking down the mask mandates involving travel. Second, the Constitution does not prohibit Congress from empowering federal administrative agencies to manage large swaths of administrative law. Congress, after all, is not expert in public health, the control of disease, the intricacies of aviation, and so forth, so they've created agencies to manage the details of all these.

(Written on 19/04/2022)(Permalink)

I'm guessing you're not a lawyer. I'm not. But a couple of errors in your comment. First, mask mandates are not a whim, the evidence that they're effective at limiting spread of an airborne virus such as COVID is substantial (a frequent poster here's frequent citing of the so-called "Danish study" notwithstanding). I've perused Mizelle's ruling and she relies on the narrowest possible interpretation of the word "sanitize" and its various forms to achiever her apparent goal of striking down the mask mandates involving travel. Second, the Constitution does not prohibit Congress from empowering federal administrative agencies to manage large swaths of administrative law. Congress, after all, is not expert in public health, the control of disease, the intricacies of aviation, and so forth, so they've created agencies to manage the details of all these.

(Written on 19/04/2022)(Permalink)

Douglas refers to 5G spectrum, not 5G technology. The band is entirely separate from that designated for radar altimeters. Furthermore, you say "cannot just suddenly change out". But Douglas rightly points out that the only reason it's "suddenly" is because the FAA and the equipment manufacturers have ignored the issue for 7 years. Where would we be if they'd gotten their act together back then?

(Written on 26/02/2022)(Permalink)

Would you recognize an intelligent, "cogent" argument if it bit you on your posterior? The evidence that masks reduce the spread of COVID has only been increasing. But you think you heard what you wanted to hear from the "Danish study" that you cite every chance you get. Apparently you're too afraid to follow the science. That's not how intelligent people act.

(Written on 18/02/2022)(Permalink)

That's simply not true. Here's what the CDC says: "Cloth masks will not protect you from wildfire smoke. Cloth masks that are used to slow the spread of COVID-19 by blocking respiratory droplets offer little protection against wildfire smoke. They might not catch small, harmful particles in smoke that can harm your health. N95 and KN95 respirators can provide protection from wildfire smoke and from getting and spreading COVID-19. KN95 respirators are commonly made in China and are similar to N95 masks commonly used in the United States. Look for KN95 masks that meet requirements similar to those set by CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for respirators." Source: https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/covid-19/wildfire_smoke_covid-19.html

(Written on 18/02/2022)(Permalink)

99.99% is an entirely made-up number, which means it's useless for calculations and policy.

(Written on 01/01/2022)(Permalink)

Oh, and one other thing. Do you really think that your survival rate for flying is less than 99.989%!?!?!? 4.5 billion passengers fly annually. Do you really think 4,950,000 (almost 5 million) die as a result of flying?

(Written on 01/01/2022)(Permalink)

Neither vaccines nor masks are 100% but they both contribute to greater safety. You can't think in these binary terms. Anti-lock brakes, air bags, and seat belts all contribute to greater safety and yet someone can kill themselves pretty easily in a car that features all of them. COVID has killed 1% of Americans 65 or over and 3% of Americans 85 or over. So it's not less than 1% for all groups of people. And even if you survive it, you could pass it on to someone who'll die from it. We have to think beyond first-level effects and second-, third- and other level effects. And that includes hospitals in some areas unable to provide adequate care for all those who come through the doors.

(Written on 01/01/2022)(Permalink)