Coronavirus (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
BlueJay  UK 15 Jul 20 4.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
You realise water droplets don’t behave like this when exhaled? Precisely. Plus people don't breathe like that anyway and if he'd done this with the same force without wearing a mask he'd ironically have projected it a very significant distance. I'm getting a bit fed up with this "oh but SAGE says this" and when that's refuted, suddenly none of that even matters and a video of some nobhead on Twitter vaping is now apparently the profound thought we all need to keep in mind, or a video from April. An obstinate peppering of any old nonsense to validate a view that has no scientific or rational basis. Put ego aside and look at the body of research, not 'what straw can I clutch at next' to disagree. What a silly stance to keep pushing. Just get on with it. Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2020 4.19pm)
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| BlueJay UK 15 Jul 20 4.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Basically how I see it.. if face coverings make 1% of difference surely it’s still worth it?
Yes, of all of the times for people to decide that they're not going to stand for the government telling them what to do, this is a bad choice. Ironically it's one of the few examples of the government actually doing the right thing for the right reasons for a long time despite its lack of popularity. It's culturally alien, and the advice has been all over the place, I get that, but people need to combine the available science with common sense and just get on with it. We've already treated old people in homes for instance in a remarkably neglectful way during this. Now the most important thing to some is to ignore new mask rules and stroll down a supermarket aisle with pride, putting their own ego above vulnerable peoples health and peace of mind. Incredibly selfish. There is a remarkable difference in even slight changes in the reproduction rate of the virus. As I said before, in Florida with 10-15,000 cases daily, and hospitals full, how exactly do you get that down without serious measures that grind life to a standstill once again. Better to be careful while numbers are low and accept that what are minor inconveniences like putting on a mask where appropriate are' not the be-all and end-all of whats important right now. Of course currently stateside, in the face of horrendous numbers and falling approval ratings, the government has now ordered hospitals to stop sending case and death data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and instead insist its sent only to their 'central database' in Washington. Look forward to being locked out of the reality of the situation if that happens. If people are going to get angry about something, get angry about that callous polls over people style approach, not being asked to take basic steps to keep others safe.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Rudi Hedman  Caterham 15 Jul 20 4.22pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
Clearly if people take the time to wear a quality mask or even wrap a scarf around their mouth or something, they are taking a positive step to protect themselves and others. You've spend your time saying how you bought into it all, and now your eyes are open. No, you've just lurching this way and that and rolling your eyes at people taking reasonable steps to keep themselves and others safe. For the sake of a minor inconvenience, and the difference it could make to the health and peace of mind of others, especially the elderly, it's not much of a sacrifice to make. Good hygiene, distancing where possible, masks in shops. It's basic stuff. I don't want another lockdown or for numbers to start moving in the wrong direction. Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2020 3.44pm) It isn’t just SAGE. If you cannot admit there’s either no scientific evidence or they’re lying to fit the political decisions then I can’t be bothered to argue with you. If you think a piece of loose plastic or a piece of loose cloth that is no different to a hanky is of any use in trapping minuscule particles then that’s for you. All while shop workers won’t be wearing them and neither will anyone eating or drinking in public funnily enough. The masks haven’t changed to produce better protection. Oh actually they have. Some are even thinner, looser, or hanging more off the chin or transferring more germs onto shelves, trolleys and card readers. Unless we wear FFP3 masks we may as well just distance and wash and not touch mouths and noses, which I’ve been doing the whole time thanks, because I’m not waiting for the government to make up the next step in relaxing or tightening this nonsense. Protect the vulnerable, don’t risk them getting infected by this enforcement that lulls everyone into a false sense of security. Have you seen Rishi Sunak’s cloth mask with a valve that’ll allow air particles to escape.... so he can actually breathe, or prove how pointless it is possibly.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 15 Jul 20 4.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Will we be wearing them in the gym then? Doubt it. It’s economic/political, and flawed on the economic seeing as it’ll kill retail, even if it’s just impulse buying.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 15 Jul 20 4.36pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Apparently if you’re buying a takeaway you won’t need to wear a mask. So, places you don’t need to wear a mask, based on science, or economics or politics are: Pubs Places you do have to wear a mask: Supermarkets you have nobody near you Glad that’s all cleared up then. I can take my mask off in the beer and spirits aisle and near the hot food counter if there is one. How utterly fvcking stupid do they think we are? It’s like this stuff has been made up after nursery by some 4 year olds.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| BlueJay UK 15 Jul 20 4.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
It isn’t just SAGE. If you cannot admit there’s either no scientific evidence or they’re lying to fit the political decisions then I can’t be bothered to argue with you. So we go from SAGE's opinion being especially relevant to you, to it not mattering at all when their evaluation of the science and situation is that we should wear them, to there being 'others' that refute mask wearing, and no scientific evidence that they work. If you immediately discard the latest findings and advice of an organisation you're presenting as important moments earlier just because it no longer fits your outlook, that's your own problems not theirs. It doesn't magically invalidate what they say. And yes, some masks are more effective than others. If someone is especially vulnerable then I would suggest they get the most effective that's available to them. Maybe you'd prefer to skip the mask and go straight to the tin foil hat. Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2020 5.05pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| BlueJay UK 15 Jul 20 4.54pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
I can take my mask off in the beer and spirits aisle and near the hot food counter if there is one. How utterly fvcking stupid do they think we are? It’s like this stuff has been made up after nursery by some 4 year olds. Outside of a Pen and Teller routine it's not possible to enjoy a pint while wearing a mask. You do what you can. Clearly restaurants and pubs can't simply stay closed for further months, as such they open with sensible and workable additions in place. The preference to order by app where possible, more people drinking and dining outside, screens up to protect people somewhat, hand sanitiser and that will have to do as it will likely make some difference which is better than none. Clearly people can't wear masks as it's unworkable in that environment, whereas in shops it's not. You make the best of each situation and it's all a matter of degrees with the goal of keeping the number of cases down. Not everyone is present in all of these environments. Clearly if someone is vulnerable or elderly going to the pub might be riskier for them than others. That doesn't mean that they don't go out to do their weekly shop though, as many old people aren't on the internet they likely head to a supermarket. I'm not going to throw a paddy about taking basic steps to help to protect their health and peace of mind while they're in that environment. I would prefer to be considerate. If your answer come next week is to enter that environment without a mask still, well aren't you the big man! If your answer is not to go there at all, then order online, and if you decide to shop with a mask on then there's little point annoying yourself about it in the first place Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2020 5.14pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
.| BlueJay UK 15 Jul 20 4.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman It’s economic/political
It's an unpopular decision. A rare example of the government putting the science and public health above their poll numbers. As we can see, the reaction to it from some let's us know why they typically don't even bother and why people frequently get the government they deserve.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 15 Jul 20 5.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
So we go from SAGE's opinion being especially relevant to you, to it not mattering at all when their evaluation of the science and situation is that we should wear them, to there being 'others' that refute mask wearing, and no scientific evidence that they work. If you immediately discard the latest findings and advice of an organisation you're presenting as important moments earlier just because it no longer fits your outlook, that's your own problems not theirs. It doesn't magically invalidate what they say. And yes, some masks are more effective than others. If someone is especially vulnerable then I would suggest they get the most effective that's available to them. Maybe you'd prefer to skip the mask and go straight to the tin foil hat. Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2020 5.05pm) In summary. It’s junk science to fit the politics. If you want to protect yourself you’d get an FFP3 mask for £25, if you can find one. A loose poxy mask achieves virtually fvck all.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 15 Jul 20 5.28pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
Outside of a Pen and Teller routine it's not possible to enjoy a pint while wearing a mask. You do what you can. Clearly restaurants and pubs can't simply stay closed for further months, as such they open with sensible and workable additions in place. The preference to order by app where possible, more people drinking and dining outside, screens up to protect people somewhat, hand sanitiser and that will have to do as it will likely make some difference which is better than none. Clearly people can't wear masks as it's unworkable in that environment, whereas in shops it's not. You make the best of each situation and it's all a matter of degrees with the goal of keeping the number of cases down. Not everyone is present in all of these environments. Clearly if someone is vulnerable or elderly going to the pub might be riskier for them than others. That doesn't mean that they don't go out to do their weekly shop though, as many old people aren't on the internet they likely head to a supermarket. I'm not going to throw a paddy about taking basic steps to help to protect their health and peace of mind while they're in that environment. I would prefer to be considerate. If your answer come next week is to enter that environment without a mask still, well aren't you the big man! If your answer is not to go there at all, then order online, and if you decide to shop with a mask on then there's little point annoying yourself about it in the first place Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2020 5.14pm) There’s about one person in every other aisle in a supermarket at the most at the moment. It’s purely political and to suggest it’s economic, which it is too, is flawed seeing as it’ll put people off going browsing on the high street or impulse buying.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 15 Jul 20 5.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Basically how I see it.. if face coverings make 1% of difference surely it’s still worth it?
1% difference of infections is barely anything on mortality rates and anyway, it’s going to create and leave germs elsewhere. Worse is it lulls people and the stupid into thinking the people who are at risk now somehow won’t be, which is why shielding and isolating is the only guarantee of avoiding infection. I’ve already heard people say they’ll be safe with these masks on either them or others - because it’s come from the government. It’s so stupid and irresponsible but there we have it. The hospitalisations and deaths are what’s important, and like I say, shielding will minimise that, not a crappy t shirt tied to your face. Oh no, the science of that. I wonder which t shirt they used or how loose the plastic mask was in their tests. What a joke. Maybe you should tell all the shop workers who won’t be wearing them or the stores who’ve already said they won’t be enforcing it.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 15 Jul 20 5.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
It's an unpopular decision. A rare example of the government putting the science and public health above their poll numbers. As we can see, the reaction to it from some let's us know why they typically don't even bother and why people frequently get the government they deserve. I'll leave you to it, as it's not like discussing it changes anything really. I wish you and yours the best of health, and everyone else too at this uncertain time. Edited by BlueJay (15 Jul 2020 5.04pm) Same to you. There’s an air of, ‘I want my family or relatives to be safe after people wear these face coverings’, which isn’t the case at all. For gran and grandad to be safe I’m afraid you can’t go near them. People waiting and acting on the government to give them something that leads them to believe or hope this isn’t what id advise. I spoke to an older retired nurse earlier. She said it’s absolutely stupid and reckons it’s mainly people thinking wearing one now benefits them. But then as this started I tried to arrange a telephone appointment at Brighton hospital instead of the old Victorian outpatients building and waiting room. The receptionist claimed they ‘weren’t a hotspot area’. Well that’s ok then. Nope, I just didn’t go. Brighton had a Covid problem soon after, probably brewing in that packed waiting room.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.