You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy
April 27 2024 1.39pm

Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 32 of 256 < 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 >

 

View Ouzo Dan's Profile Ouzo Dan 06 Mar 23 5.28pm Send a Private Message to Ouzo Dan Add Ouzo Dan as a friend

For the absolute last time

Viral particles travel through surgical masks with impunity.

If you want to protect yourself & others wear a fully sealed NBC suit with the correct filter for your respirator.

 


Sex Panther 60% of the time it works every time

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 06 Mar 23 6.22pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Ouzo Dan

For the absolute last time

Viral particles travel through surgical masks with impunity.

If you want to protect yourself & others wear a fully sealed NBC suit with the correct filter for your respirator.

Correct re. surgical, although it would of course stop some level of it eg. large droplets with lots of delicious virus. But to your point it wouldn't really make that much difference as they're so porus. Always made me laugh people walking about with cloth masks on. Absolutely useless.

However, there always seems to be a lot of confusion when this is discussed because for some reason people decide that because better quality masks don't stop all of the virus, then all masks are useless.

This is of course, nonsense.

It's more or less impossible to stop ANY of it getting out or through unless you do decide to go full specimen and wear and NBC suit as you describe.

But, something like an N95 mask, properly worn and sealed does provide a significant benefit to those around you if you have an infection, or if there are viral particles in the air. Why? Masks like that will lower the amount of viral load expelled or inhaled, which also means reduction in the liklihood of you or others catching something (depending on time spend in the vicinity of course, if you're stuck on a busy train for 2 hours then you're screwed either way) or at the very least getting a big hit of it and therefore getting more sick as a result (basically no/light symptoms vs. heavy symptoms).

The other thing people fail to take into account is the behavioural aspect of mask wearing combined with the actual mask wearing itself – it became a signal of caution and awareness that this thing was knocking about and to take a bit more care than usual. If they hadn't of been temporarily adopted then I'd assume infection rates would have been much higher – if we're referring to the latest global studies a lot of the numbers back this up.

This was covered ages ago in the old thread, but ultimately it's wrong to claim 'masks don't stop (all) of the virus therefore masks are pointless'.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (06 Mar 2023 6.23pm)

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 06 Mar 23 7.12pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Ouzo Dan

For the absolute last time

Viral particles travel through surgical masks with impunity.

If you want to protect yourself & others wear a fully sealed NBC suit with the correct filter for your respirator.

If within droplets they don't travel so far, do they? Some will be trapped by the mask. Fully sealed are better, but any barrier, even a hand or a sleeve is better than nothing.

SW19 CPFC has given you a much more comprehensive answer.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 06 Mar 23 8.22pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

Correct re. surgical, although it would of course stop some level of it eg. large droplets with lots of delicious virus. But to your point it wouldn't really make that much difference as they're so porus. Always made me laugh people walking about with cloth masks on. Absolutely useless.

However, there always seems to be a lot of confusion when this is discussed because for some reason people decide that because better quality masks don't stop all of the virus, then all masks are useless.

This is of course, nonsense.

It's more or less impossible to stop ANY of it getting out or through unless you do decide to go full specimen and wear and NBC suit as you describe.

But, something like an N95 mask, properly worn and sealed does provide a significant benefit to those around you if you have an infection, or if there are viral particles in the air. Why? Masks like that will lower the amount of viral load expelled or inhaled, which also means reduction in the liklihood of you or others catching something (depending on time spend in the vicinity of course, if you're stuck on a busy train for 2 hours then you're screwed either way) or at the very least getting a big hit of it and therefore getting more sick as a result (basically no/light symptoms vs. heavy symptoms).

The other thing people fail to take into account is the behavioural aspect of mask wearing combined with the actual mask wearing itself – it became a signal of caution and awareness that this thing was knocking about and to take a bit more care than usual. If they hadn't of been temporarily adopted then I'd assume infection rates would have been much higher – if we're referring to the latest global studies a lot of the numbers back this up.

This was covered ages ago in the old thread, but ultimately it's wrong to claim 'masks don't stop (all) of the virus therefore masks are pointless'.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (06 Mar 2023 6.23pm)

What was wrong was being dishonest with the public and treating them like children and scaring the living sh1t out of the gullible ones.....some of whom went on to cause grief to anyone who wasn't so easily fooled. In fact the knock on effects were much worse but for brevity I'll stick to this narrow point.

What was wrong was allowing the impression to be given that masks were far more effective than the reality. Even surgical masks can only be worn once and then aren't considered effective....can't be touched etc.

What was wrong was arresting and fining people or restricting people for not wearing masks.

Truth dies when the floor is knowingly left to certain voices who only care about their desired outcomes rather than the actual truth.

Everyone was going to get this virus: mask or no mask and lies were told without any consequence.


Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Mar 2023 9.18pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 06 Mar 23 9.00pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

What was wrong was being dishonest with the public and treating them like children and scaring the living sh1t out of the gullible ones.....some of whom went on to cause grieve to anyone who wasn't so easily fooled. In fact the knock on effects were much worse but for brevity I'll stick to this narrow point.

What was wrong was allowing the impression to be given that masks were far more effective than the reality. Even surgical masks can only be worn once and then aren't considered effective....can't be touched etc.

What was wrong was arresting and fining people or restricting people for not wearing masks.

Truth dies when the floor is knowingly left to certain voices who only care about their desired outcomes rather than the actual truth.

Everyone was going to get this virus: mask or no mask and lies were told without any consequence.


Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Mar 2023 8.25pm)

As you know very well, or certainly ought to know, this was never the point.

The point was to delay the spread, using every way that could be imagined, to ensure that the NHS wasn't overwhelmed and whilst the vaccines were being developed.

Once that had been achieved the brakes came off and all of did get the virus, some of us several times. The vaccines that protected us from severe disease were then boosted by the effects of the infection.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 06 Mar 23 9.17pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

As you know very well, or certainly ought to know, this was never the point.

The point was to delay the spread, using every way that could be imagined, to ensure that the NHS wasn't overwhelmed and whilst the vaccines were being developed.

Once that had been achieved the brakes came off and all of did get the virus, some of us several times. The vaccines that protected us from severe disease were then boosted by the effects of the infection.

I won't speak on the vaccines for brevity's sake, as it's a different if related point.

Ok, I'll answer this debunked NHS point yet again....no doubt you will continue to state it but this point is so irritating it's worth it.

But before I do I'll say that looking at the statistics from when masks were first mandated they made no difference to the spread. So your suggestion that they 'delay the spread' doesn't relate to reality (no change there).

Anyway, the NHS was never going to be overwhelmed for covid provision.....No, what happened was that everything else practically stopped....which is some of the reason so many have and are dying later.

We built several new hospitals just for Covid. The amount of provision was based upon high numbers of severely ill that were never reached. Ok, lets imagine in an alternative universe these numbers were hit then guess what genius.

More hospitals and provision would have been provided....covid had an open cheque book in excess of its medical impact.

Let me state it again, just in case you weren't taking it in.

The NHS was never going to be 'overwhelmed' by this virus. The very word suggests something that is so annoyingly misleading it deserves the 'overwhelming' contempt I feel for it.

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Mar 2023 9.26pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 06 Mar 23 9.54pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

What was wrong was being dishonest with the public and treating them like children and scaring the living sh1t out of the gullible ones.....some of whom went on to cause grief to anyone who wasn't so easily fooled. In fact the knock on effects were much worse but for brevity I'll stick to this narrow point.

What was wrong was allowing the impression to be given that masks were far more effective than the reality. Even surgical masks can only be worn once and then aren't considered effective....can't be touched etc.

What was wrong was arresting and fining people or restricting people for not wearing masks.

Truth dies when the floor is knowingly left to certain voices who only care about their desired outcomes rather than the actual truth.

Everyone was going to get this virus: mask or no mask and lies were told without any consequence.


Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Mar 2023 9.18pm)

Yes and no

Definitely agree that giving the impression that pieces of cloth and flimsy surgical masks were more effective than they actually were wasn't honest.

Also agree that arresting people for not wearing them (did this actually happen? and if it did, en masse?) was too far. Fines, sure. If you need to maintain control in such an unprecedented scenario unprecedented steps will be taken. Scrutiny can then be applied later. There's no time for mollycoddling or meekly fiddling while Rome burns.

However I can imagine a scenario where the psychological and behavioural impact of mask wearing also came into the decisions around enforcement at the time – when you're in a corner and you need to think fast, sometimes you've got to make controversial calls that you think will make a difference.

'Everyone was going to get this virus: mask or no mask and lies were told without any consequence.'

Everyone was going to get this virus. Yep, agree. Don't agree on the 'without any consequence' assuming you mean mask wearing and all other preventative measure had no positive impact. Quite a statement... and quite clearly mask wearing and the behavioural impact of restrictions and enforcements such as lockdowns that went with it were designed to slow rate of infection down, and reduce severity of infection until such time as a vaccine was well adopted enough to take up the slack.

Sure, you can debate the ethics of how those rules were decided upon and enforced, whether lockdowns should have lasted as long as they did – all valid, and again should be properly scrutinised to the next time this happens we're able to make better choices... but to suggest none of these things worked? Not sure how you can reach that conclusion.

Ultimately it was decided that the impact of doing nothing far outweighed the temporary impact economic, ethical or otherwise, in a fast moving scenario when 'wait and see' and 'make up your own mind, you're on your own, but your rights are intact so all good' really wouldn't have cut it.

Unique scenario, unique approach.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (06 Mar 2023 9.54pm)

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View eaglesdare's Profile eaglesdare Flag 06 Mar 23 10.10pm Send a Private Message to eaglesdare Add eaglesdare as a friend

Amazing how all the BLM protests and riots at the start of covid were completely safe from covid! Infact they were praised by many tv presenters, pundits politicians, looney lefty woke hypocrites and idiots alike!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 06 Mar 23 10.42pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I won't speak on the vaccines for brevity's sake, as it's a different if related point.

Ok, I'll answer this debunked NHS point yet again....no doubt you will continue to state it but this point is so irritating it's worth it.

But before I do I'll say that looking at the statistics from when masks were first mandated they made no difference to the spread. So your suggestion that they 'delay the spread' doesn't relate to reality (no change there).

Anyway, the NHS was never going to be overwhelmed for covid provision.....No, what happened was that everything else practically stopped....which is some of the reason so many have and are dying later.

We built several new hospitals just for Covid. The amount of provision was based upon high numbers of severely ill that were never reached. Ok, lets imagine in an alternative universe these numbers were hit then guess what genius.

More hospitals and provision would have been provided....covid had an open cheque book in excess of its medical impact.

Let me state it again, just in case you weren't taking it in.

The NHS was never going to be 'overwhelmed' by this virus. The very word suggests something that is so annoyingly misleading it deserves the 'overwhelming' contempt I feel for it.

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Mar 2023 9.26pm)

The vaccines are an integral piece of this and cannot just be dismissed as unconnected.

You are again talking total bs when you claim that masks made no difference to the spread. No-one can possibly know that because we did wear masks, and we don't know what would have happened if we didn't. Even if it could be established that, with hindsight, it was found they made no difference, it was still the right thing to do to mandate them. We needed to take every available step, some would work, others, like the Nightingale Hospitals didn't and weren't needed. Perhaps because other measures, like masks, did work. We were in a crisis, surrounded by unknowns and had to adopt all available measures.

Smart-arses always know best, when what they think never has to be tested, and they are not under pressure to make decisions.

More smart-arse bs about the NHS never going to be overwhelmed. Now as well as being an expert on everything else, you know more than our Chief Scientific Officer and the senior management at the NHS? That risk existed. You don't construct and equip hospitals overnight. The world was scrambling for respirators and if the worst case scenario had been realised, we would have been overwhelmed. Money could not have solved that problem.

It was bad enough as it was, with so much elective surgery having to be delayed as wards were converted to accommodate Covid patients. I don't suppose you have any idea of just what it was like. Having to manage Covid and non_Covid patients in the same hospitals, dividing areas into Red and Green zones, staffing them separately and with large numbers of staff becoming ill, and off work themselves. Only when the vaccines arrived did things begin to ease, but the knock-on effects will be felt for years.

The idea that things would have been better if we had not locked down, and not worn masks, would be funny if it wasn't so embarrassingly pathetic.

Then you wonder why I got so angry with those who refused the vaccines and still do. I find this whole approach irresponsible and selfish.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 06 Mar 23 10.54pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

If wearing a mask is a "lie" why then does my wife, who is a nurse in our local hospital, wear one at all times when facing patients? Is she wasting her time, and our money? Or is she protecting herself, or her patient, from the possibility of a cough or a sneeze overloading the environment close to her? She knows it isn't perfect, but she and her colleagues all wear them without complaint, and they are all trained medical professionals. Are they fools? What do you know better, and what qualifications do you have that have enabled that knowledge?

If my wife, and those she is in contact with derive benefit, why won't others when in contact with other people? She isn't from a unique species.

Yes, she's wasting her time and our money. There is precious little benefit from surgical masks. Even surgeons don't necessarily wear them during invasive surgery. It is purely continued practice which was introduced over a hundred years ago.

You obviously didn't read the Cochrane review. Do you have them on your list of far right conspiracy theorists? You silly sausage.

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 06 Mar 23 11.00pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by Mapletree

Nonsense

There has been far more recent research

A large, randomized trial led by researchers at Stanford Medicine and Yale University has found that wearing a surgical face mask over the mouth and nose is an effective way to reduce the occurrence of COVID-19 in community settings.

2021

You don't trust Cochrane either??? It's a more recent, and worldwide review. Or have you not bothered to read it too?

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 06 Mar 23 11.06pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly

Masks and hand sanitising were important steps to make in areas of highest concentration of persons.
The fact that quite a few people got 'exemption' cards for masks, and then went to highly-populated public areas kind of nullified a lot of the good that these measures were intended for.
Then going round supermarkets in family groups with the kids (who could carry and spread the virus whilst having no symptoms) and 'nana' only served to spread the virus further, especially to vulnerable people who needed to use supermarkets as a necessity.

It brought out a lot of the bad/selfish characteristics in people.

Hand washing probably did help contain the spread. Masks however, really didn't. As simple as that. Read the Cochrane review I posted or TeddyEagle's post.

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 32 of 256 < 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy