@Cougar,I don't want you to think for a second that my tame language in the posts to Grib in any shape or form are what's going on in my head. Our situations with those we are trying to protect from this disease and those that seek to trivialise and worsen it are regrettably all to similar.
The only "good" thing about my old mum being house bound is that I at least know that the only person coming into regular contact with her is myself. That is not a luxury you have and you can only hope that those she does interact with value her well-being as much as you.
Been told straight out, that might not be the case, well, I'm not going to say what I think on that one. I suspect you probably can't on here either.
I hope this post makes my thoughts clear on Grib and others with a similar attitude. I'd have genuinely not slept well tonight if you thought for even a split second that my motives and measured wording towards Grib allude to something else entirely.
I really don’t get the objection beyond civil disobedience.
Angry people want to be angry.
Essentially some people think they are right and that's enough, when they change their mind they are still right. Disagree with them and you are wrong, do something they disagree with you are wrong. As they are angry people they then let you know in an angry way.
Thank you.
Not required, it's just common sense, the public health teams are dealing with a pandemic, they make decisions trying to find a balance between all the issues with mask wearing etc. Every action has a positive and negative, they do the maths and try and come up with a way forward. I'm absolutely fine with supporting the very well educated, trained and professional people who try and write the advice as well as a lot of sympathy for the politicians making decisions that they know won't be perfect based on that advice. Anyone who looks at the guardian op-ed cycle of "we need to lockdown", " mental health crisis from lockdown", " schools as incubators", " kids are missing out on an education" can see that anyone who has certainty is probably wrong.
But on here I'm a hard right neo facist according to some so you can discount my views at your leisure.
I’d call him The Count, or something like that.
I’d rather you didn’t, I can assure you that it’s not me!
Appropriate PPE has it’s place as long as there is evidence to back up it’s usage. Face coverings aren’t PPE and the evidence doesn’t support mandating their usage in retail environments. I’m absolutely not anti-mask and using them in crowded public transport settings is likely at least slightly beneficial.
So what is it about your comment that has me thinking otherwise? How is a facemask not PPE? Do the letters PPE not stand for Personal Protective Equipment? In the same way that nitrile gloves worn when handling food or anything else likely to be touched by another person is PPE.
And if face coverings aren’t PPE, then why are they worn in hospitals and emergency situations?
People were encouraged to wear face coverings in 1918 during the flu pandemic - sadly, that was so virulent that vast numbers of people died too quickly for face coverings to do much at all in the beginning; people were falling Ill and dying within hours.
We at least have the benefits of remarkable antiviral technology, with mRNA, although sadly, male dominance within the medical research field prevented its full development decades ago, and a new antiviral pill for oral defence has been approved in America, all of which will help defend humans against future similar diseases jumping the species barrier.
In the meantime, any sensible, clear-headed human being should be able to work out that wearing a properly structured piece of cloth over the nose and mouth will not only diminish the risk of inhaling droplets that could easily be carrying the virus, but also spreading them to other, possibly vulnerable people should they be in the early stages of infection.
To behave otherwise is ignorant, stupid and downright bloody selfish.
@poopscoop No apologies required, that never even crossed my mind.
People were encouraged to wear face coverings in 1918 during the flu pandemic
Coughs and sneezes spread diseases.
Have we all just forgotten basic germy hygiene? Is it just yet another thing that we don't teach kids any more? I watched a little hacking her lungs up the other day, tongue literally hanging out of her mouth and spittle flying everywhere, mum never said a damn thing. If I'd have coughed / sneezed as a kid and didn't at least try to get to a hanky / tissue / my hand I'd have been told off.
Would anyone care to offer an opinion on why hospital admissions rose from around 100 a day in May to over 1000 a day in September and currently still around 750 a day?
You mean those admissions that have been consistently falling since the beginning of November?
[URL= https://thumbsnap.com/t/EWPsBAWn.jp g" target="_blank">https://thumbsnap.com/t/EWPsBAWn.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
Similarly patients in hospital rose from around 1000 to almost 10000 between May and November, and patients on mechanical ventilation from around 100 to 1000. Daily deaths were down to single figures in May and are currently around 100.
You mean those deaths that have been consistently falling since the beginning of November?
[URL= https://thumbsnap.com/t/GJygBV5Z.jp g" target="_blank">https://thumbsnap.com/t/GJygBV5Z.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
Data from https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ on 1st December 2021.
Yesterday every customer wore a mask in our shop.
Builders were still going into the bakers unmasked though.
You mean those deaths that have been consistently falling since the beginning of November?
Shhhh! You’re not supposed to post facts like that.
Doesn’t counter the points (or answer the questions) quoted though, does it.
why hospital admissions rose from around 100 a day in May to over 1000 a day in September and currently still around 750 a day?
Daily deaths were down to single figures in May and are currently around 100.
Great news that deaths are falling again. Why are they as high as they are? Because we chose those deaths when we chose to run with high levels of infection this summer and autumn. What additional price we pay this winter is still an unknown. If those deaths keep falling, and we’re back to single figures, we’ll all be pleased. Positively acting towards making that the result we get would be wise. Don’t assume it’s a natural decline that’ll continue at this stage of the pandemic without interventions. The government have made two changes themselves… accelerating the booster programme and mandating masks on public transport and in shops… it’s down to everyone to do their small bit now.
Or even that covid transmission is prevalent in retail?
The virus doesn't care if you're in a shop or not. What it likes is when people are close together indoors. Which can very obviously happen in shops. Even in a sparsely filled supermarket you get two people going for the same.prosuct and getting ose to each other. If one exhales then there's a cloud of micro droplets of moisture in the air for a time and it's these that carry the virus. So the mask is there for these eventualities.
But really it's not a big deal, don't make it into one. Masks work, they've been shown to work, get over yourself. There's a lot of things to be angry about in the world, this isn't one.
It’s also the pure volume of customers going into shops each day, especially this time of the year. The more coming in the more risk an infected person being among them and the more they can spread it on to. Basic hand hygiene and masks help reduce this risk.
You mean those deaths that have been consistently falling since the beginning of November?
Cool so as soon as the graphs start to go down, however slightly and over however short a scale, does that mean everything is fine and we can lick each others faces in shops and sneeze on each other willy nilly?
It's potentially encouraging but claiming it's significant is highly premature.
The period discussed was May-November I think, what is the overall trend during that period?
Piers Corbyn (in pursuit of saving us all from the horrors of facemask-fascism) just did a crime against everything. Especially against music.
https://www.hse.gov.uk/respiratory-protective-equipment/fit-testing-basics.htm
As an old(67)person with a wife who has a low immune system due to ill health and as a volunteer which involves being in close contact with the elderly(older than me!!) I have been wearing a mask whenever needed.
However I am asthmatic and it can quite often become uncomfortable when my asthma is playing up.
Having worked in industry which require the wearing of masks on a regular basis we had to go through the test linked.Sadly this test came in many years too late for a lot of people, myself included.
Why did I post the link? The wearing of masks is pointless if they do not fit or are of the proper grade. As an example a friend of my daughter accepted a lift from a friend of hers. Both were wearing masks. Unknown to the driver of the car at the time she was positive and infected her friend......
Been in the Toon all day probably 95% of folks are wearing them.
The wearing of masks is pointless if they do not fit or are of the proper grade
Incorrect.
^ incorrect is inaccruate.
As an example a friend of my daughter accepted a lift from a friend of hers. Both were wearing masks. Unknown to the driver of the car at the time she was positive and infected her friend……
They’re are a lot of other factors to take in there.
Why did I post the link? The wearing of masks is pointless if they do not fit or are of the proper grade. As an example a friend of my daughter accepted a lift from a friend of hers. Both were wearing masks. Unknown to the driver of the car at the time she was positive and infected her friend……
The link you provided appears to be referring to masks that can actually prevent the virus passing through the mask. That isn't what the average Joe Public mask aims to do, which is to reduce the distance the virus can travel and hopefully any loading.
Your example also isnt a reason to use as masks being pointless. They may well be ineffectual in a small confined space but that doesnt mean they wont inhibit spread in other scenarios, such as passing someone briefly in a shop.
It's not binary, just because effectiveness isnt 100% or even near it does not make them pointless, especially when taking into consideration it is just one of a range of measures all designed to complement each other.
That isn’t what the average Joe Public mask aims to do
It's staggering that people still struggle to understand that. Half the reason we're still in the middle of the absolute shit
Well I was out shopping today and didn't observe any cases of anti mask anger. Just people masked up going about their business.
As an example a friend of my daughter accepted a lift from a friend of hers. Both were wearing masks. Unknown to the driver of the car at the time she was positive and infected her friend……
A mask is not magic. Sitting with someone in a very small space, i.e. a car, the virus will still be in the air as the air exhaled from your mouth has to go somewhere. Passing someone in a shop will stop the direct air but sitting in a confined space not so much. The longer in that confined space obviously the worse it will be, by the minute.
Well I was out shopping today and didn’t observe any cases of anti mask anger. Just people masked up going about their business.
That can’t possibly be right as according to Facebook everyone has had enough of this control and won’t tolerate it, they’ll be riots.
But really it’s not a big deal, don’t make it into one. Masks work, they’ve been shown to work, get over yourself. There’s a lot of things to be angry about in the world, this isn’t one.
That needs to be the next government slogan.
Except that if the government can keep people frothing about masks they won't be listening to the news about the Police Bill.
The REAL scary schizz.... ^^^
I’ll wear a mask when there is some actual solid scientific evidence for it but until then I’ll keep using my exemption.
We get it..... you don't want to wear a mask, but don't try to pretend that it's anything more than just that.
We get it….. you don’t want to wear a mask, but don’t try to pretend that it’s anything more than just that.
Nope I'm exempt.
So it's understandable you would use your exemption, but then you seem to suggest that if there was evidence to satisfy you of their efficacy that you would wear one, despite your exemption. Which is it?
So you wouldn't be able to wear one, even if there was incontrovertible, in your view, evidence that they worked and you really wanted to. Which you don't.
Seems you've done alright out of that situation then eh?
Out of interest, on what grounds is your exemption?
Why are you exempt, out of interest?
easternrider
Free Member
I’ll wear a mask when there is some actual solid scientific evidence for it but until then I’ll keep using my exemption.
My posts gave you the benefit of the doubt on the other thread.
They were unfounded as it's clear you have an agenda.
I'm out.
Why are you exempt, out of interest?
I don't have to tell you or anyone else that and really you should not be asking. All you need to know is that I am exempt.
The Government rules state that you do not need to state a reason for your exemption, nor to show a exemption card or written evidence for this. Nor do you need to seek advice or request a letter from a medical professional about your reason for not wearing a face covering.
All you need to know is that I am exempt.
But you’d wear a mask if you believed that they helped reduce the spread of this virus?
So you're exempt 'cos you don't want to?
Ah the **** exemption
Its the 'cloth hurts facey wacey :(' exemption
Ok.... how about this:
Do you have a medical reason for being exempt? And by "medical reason" I mean: has a doctor (and MD) advised you personally that you should not be wearing a mask?
simple yes/no should do
" I’ll wear a mask when there is some actual solid scientific evidence for it but until then I’ll keep using my exemption."
Yeah, but would you accept that evidence coming from people with phd's and decades in the service, or would you refer to some site that pours scorn and skepticism on them . Brenda on facebook for example.
I think wearing masks are great in this weather, 100% protection from those icy winds 😀 Personally I am exempt. I have asthma and copd, and tend to overheat and sweat a bit when im wearing it, but I see it as my civic duty because it's for the good of other people and i wouldn't like to think I'd been instrumental in spreading it and causing someones demise.
So I am exempt medically, and yet can still wear it and happily too, and not have to make up dumbo excuses that appear to be mired in stupidity and selfishness.
.
" The Government rules state that you do not need to state a reason for your exemption, nor to show a exemption card or written evidence for this. Nor do you need to seek advice or request a letter from a medical professional about your reason for not wearing a face covering."
Yes but thats when in a shop or something like that, and hardly applies in the anonymity of the internet, especially when you are the one claiming they arent needed.
I don’t have to tell you or anyone else that and really you should not be asking.
But should you be be discussing the subject if you don't want to talk about?
"I want to talk about how I won't wear a mask on a thread about wearing masks but I don't want to talk about why I don't wear a mask" doesn't sound like a particularly plausible position to take.
Causing distress appears to be the most commonly accepted legal reason for not wearing a face covering. Judging by your confused and contradictory comments you sound like the sort of person that would be distressed by something which most people have no serious problem dealing with.
I'm with my friend @easternrider on this. I'm also suffering from congenital stupidity and am serendipitously exempt too. The only problem is I can't find my exempt badge of righteousness, (it's a mighty thing indeed) and the top 10 list of excuses from my friends at "exemptions R Us".
Where did I leave it? Has anyone seen my glasses? They're on my head? Really, who put them there?!?!
Anyway, you don't breathe thru your nose so it's okay. I did have my booster jab yesterday but I don't believe in them.
I don’t have to tell you or anyone else that and really you should not be asking. All you need to know is that I am exempt.
I think the problem is people are curious about this condition which responds directly to "solid evidence". It looks to be a fascinating area of research since just think how many outstanding questions could be answered if we could figure out how to apply them to your response to "solid evidence".
whoa whoa whoa, lets just hear what Easternrider has to say.
Having a genuine medical reason why you (personally) shouldn't wear a mask and being an anti masker, are not mutually exclusive - he could be both
I’ll wear a mask when there is some actual solid scientific evidence for it but until then I’ll keep using my exemption.
If you're exempt, scientific evidence shouldn't make a difference, but since you ask....
https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1456188127916306434?s=20
MP Sir Desmond Swayne has asked the government on many occasions for the evidence only to be told that mask wearing has nothing to do with health, it is only about “sending a message’. In other words, to keep the population in fear.
If I was looking for evidence as to the efficacy or otherwise of face masks, that prick would not be the person I was going to.
I’m with my friend @easternrider on this.
+1. Whenever I have a crucial, pandemical, potentially lifesaving scientific/medical/public-health consultation I always first go directly to Talk Radio.
Julian Fartley Brewer has many times compelled me to trust tabloidism, politicians and outrage-bait over medical science and ‘experts’.
That, and the fact that I too am
However, in actual fact:
Professor Peter Openshaw, an expert on respiratory infections at Imperial College London, said there was a “real consensus” that worn properly a mask was “very good” at reducing transmission. “It protects you as the wearer and at the same time it protects others.”
The UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies took a more cautious view after looking at two reports into the effectiveness of masks published within the past month by its Environmental Modelling Group and the UK Health Security Agency’s Respiratory Evidence Panel, which brought together multiple studies from around the world.
Taking all the evidence into account, Sage stated masks were “likely to reduce transmission through all routes by partially reducing emission of and/or exposure to the full range of aerosol and droplets that carry the virus”.
Misconceptions frequently distort people’s views of mask effectiveness, according to Openshaw. “For example, I have heard it said in parliament that the virus particles are too small to be filtered by masks and therefore wearing one is futile,” he said.
“In fact, we are not trying to stop individual viruses but the fine clusters of material that fly through the air from someone who is infectious, carrying hundreds or thousands of virus particles. They can be stopped by the fabric in masks.”
Masks can also help indirectly to influence behaviour by reminding people that there is still a pandemic, said Robert West, professor of health psychology at University College London. “At a time when we need to be doing as much signalling as we can, masks are very helpful,” he said.
Studies attempting to quantify the effectiveness of masks in reducing infection rates established a range of 6 to 15 per cent, according to a review by Paul Hunter and colleagues at the University of East Anglia in Eurosurveillance.
Masks are still mandatory on London Underground but many passengers opt not to wear one © AFP via Getty Images
A randomised controlled trial in Bangladesh involving 340,000 people from November 2020 to April 2021, in which half the participants were encouraged to wear a cloth or surgical mask and half were not, found that face coverings reduced symptomatic Covid by 9.3 per cent.Modelling by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine submitted to Sage found that government-mandated wearing of masks would reduce Covid infections substantially by cutting the R number for the virus, which measures how many people one person with the virus would infect, by 7.5 per cent.
https://www.ft.com/content/b25d1ac3-b35e-453c-918e-731e2f214131
Seriously tho, why choose to be a wrongun?
people are curious about this condition which responds directly to “solid evidence”.
Indeed. I wonder if solid evidence could be used to cure other medical conditions .... such as chronic back pain or prostate cancer?
