Some things are objectively addictive. For instance, alcohol is an objectively addictive drug. If you don't have trouble controlling drinking now, that's excellent, but if someone were to somehow force you to drink 6 drinks a day for a year you would certainly start to develop physiological signs of addiction. On day 366 when you were free to not drink, you would feel a craving. There is no such thing as a person who cannot become addicted to it. It is the drug which is addictive, and not some failing/property of the person who became addicted.
In particular with social media, I don't like the framing of it as "what is addictive to someone is harmless for someone other". The addictive-ness is baked into the product whether or not an addiction is manifest in any individual user. Viewing the addictive-ness of say, Facebook, as a problem only "for some people" rather than as a property of Facebook, shifts blame away from the engineers and execs who purposefully make their product addictive, onto users who find themselves (somewhat innocently) addicted to an the addictive thing.
Don't want to be pedantic but I think it's an important point.
I'm not trying to argue about whether hand washing is important. I'm trying to increase my understanding of the transmission, and I hadn't heard before that touch face/nose/mouth is the primary way of the disease spreading as you stated. As you had said earlier in the thread: "Please stop spreading misinformation as it could lead to deaths". If you have a source for stating it is the primary method of transmission, I'd still like to see it. Otherwise, perhaps don't repeat that claim, in the interest of not spreading misinformation.
> In risk communication guidelines for healthcare, however, the WHO states, "COVID-19 appears to spread most easily through close contact with an infected person. When someone who has COVID-19 coughs or sneezes, small droplets are released and, if you are too close, you can breathe in the virus" (emphasis added).9 But wait: Inhalation is not part of the traditional definition of droplet transmission.
> For healthcare organizations, the CDC recommends airborne, in addition to standard (contact) and droplet precautions, for the care of COVID-19 suspected or confirmed patients.10
> For the general public, the CDC describes SARS-CoV-2 transmission as primarily by droplets from coughs or sneezes, which "land in the mouths or noses of people who are nearby or possibly inhaled into the lungs" (emphasis added).11 But, again, inhalation is a new addition to the traditional definition of droplets. In contrast to its recommendations for healthcare, the CDC makes no mention of airborne transmission in public settings.
> The CDC admits some possibility that COVID-19 may be transferred by hands to mouth, nose, or eyes from contaminated surfaces, but notes that "this is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads."11
> hand to nose mouth contact is THE primary vector for this illness
In contrast, Johns Hopkins guide currently states:
"Transmission
- By respiratory droplets and by fomite. Virus found in respiratory secretions and saliva.
- Viral shedding by asymptomatic people described, uncertain to what degree this occurs and abets transmission.
- Stool shedding also described, but uncertain what role, if any, that plays."
https://www.hopkinsguides.com/hopkins/view/Johns_Hopkins_ABX...
In particular with social media, I don't like the framing of it as "what is addictive to someone is harmless for someone other". The addictive-ness is baked into the product whether or not an addiction is manifest in any individual user. Viewing the addictive-ness of say, Facebook, as a problem only "for some people" rather than as a property of Facebook, shifts blame away from the engineers and execs who purposefully make their product addictive, onto users who find themselves (somewhat innocently) addicted to an the addictive thing.
Don't want to be pedantic but I think it's an important point.