Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Havors said:

I want to know when it was decided masks can save us from covid. We been using them for over a year now and it's never stopped a wave. Like masks or no masks on the 19th is going to make any real difference...

Now if they issued everyone free FFP3 masks or whatever one was proven to work. Then that's a different matter. 

All this palaver over useless masks is tiresome now.

The biggest problem is the original lack of supply of IIR masks and telling people it was good enough to make their own and now a lot of people are still wearing single layer fabric masks which do fuck all. 
If everyone wore 3 ply fluid resistant masks it would have had more of an impact. 
And don’t get me started on people wearing those plastic visors, might as well use a tennis racquet as an umbrella. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Havors said:

I want to know when it was decided masks can save us from covid. We been using them for over a year now and it's never stopped a wave. Like masks or no masks on the 19th is going to make any real difference...

Now if they issued everyone free FFP3 masks or whatever one was proven to work. Then that's a different matter. 

All this palaver over useless masks is tiresome now.

Face masks with other measures help stop the spread, and some masks are better than others. But even cloth ones help stop you spreading it to someone else. If there is one mitigation we are going to keep surely masks in some public inside place is the easiest. Would be good if better masks were widely available and cheap/free...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Havors said:

I want to know when it was decided masks can save us from covid. We been using them for over a year now and it's never stopped a wave. Like masks or no masks on the 19th is going to make any real difference...

Now if they issued everyone free FFP3 masks or whatever one was proven to work. Then that's a different matter. 

All this palaver over useless masks is tiresome now.

Masks aren’t very effective unless there’s widespread compliance, but if most people wear them, they can help to stop transmission and infection and even the severity of symptoms.

Here’s a summary. Bit lengthy, but it’ll help clarify things:  https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

 

Edited by kalifire
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Havors said:

I want to know when it was decided masks can save us from covid. We been using them for over a year now and it's never stopped a wave. Like masks or no masks on the 19th is going to make any real difference...

Now if they issued everyone free FFP3 masks or whatever one was proven to work. Then that's a different matter. 

All this palaver over useless masks is tiresome now.

This is one of my pet peeves that I've avoided mentioning for about a week so it's roughly time. Masks do work, but the messaging in this country surrounding them is so awful as to be near useless.

Very approximately speaking (with a more accurate and detailed summary here)- Respirator masks (of which FFP3 is the top level) absolutely do protect both the wearer and the people around them. Surgical masks (of which IIR is the top grade) protect the people around you.

There's three problems with this though - Firstly that the above relies on the masks being fitted and handled correctly which isn't always the casse. Secondly that it also relies on the masks meeting the standards to be labelled as such and there's a lot of fakes/non-compliant ones around at the moment.

But really the biggest issue is that the Government have been actively avoiding the conversation about what types of face coverings are effective in order to "simplify" the message. As a result there's still a lot of people (I reckon about 40% around here, it may vary in other areas) using Fabric masks which can't be assumed to provide any protection at all and often aren't worth shit.

It's especially annoyed me recently to see people (not on here, but in the wider world) make a point of saying that they're going to continue wearing a mask because they "respect others". Except that I can see they're wearing a Fabric mask, so they're mainly wearing it to feel superior.

Edited by incident
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kalifire said:

Masks aren’t very effective unless there’s widespread compliance, but if most people wear them, they can help to stop transmission and infection and even the severity of symptoms.

Here’s a summary. Bit lengthy, but it’ll help clarify things:  https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

 

Masks have been required here for ages in certain settings and compliance has been fairly high - other than those who have deemed themselves exempt. Maybe nobody bothered to tell the virus mask wearers were off limits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, incident said:

This is one of my pet peeves that I've avoided mentioning for about a week so it's roughly time. Masks do work, but the messaging in this country surrounding them is so awful as to be near useless.

Very approximately speaking (with a more accurate and detailed summary here)- Respirator masks (of which FFP3 is the top level) absolutely do protect both the wearer and the people around them. Surgical masks (of which IIR is the top grade) protect the people around you.

There's three problems with this though - Firstly that the above relies on the masks being fitted and handled correctly which isn't always the casse. Secondly that it also relies on the masks meeting the standards to be labelled as such and there's a lot of fakes/ around at the moment.

But really the biggest issue is that the Government have been actively avoiding the conversation about what types of face coverings are effective in order to "simplify" the message. As a result there's still a lot of people (I reckon about 40% around here, it may vary in other areas) using Fabric masks which can't be assumed to provide any protection at all and often aren't worth shit.

It's especially annoyed me recently to see people (not on here, but in the wider world) make a point of saying that they're going to continue wearing a mask because they "respect others". Except that I can see they're wearing a Fabric mask, so they're mainly wearing it to feel superior.

Don't most people wear a mask (of any sort) to comply with the rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Havors said:

I want to know when it was decided masks can save us from covid.

That happened in 1878 when Captain Phlegm spotted that when you cough, sneeze, shout etc., an as-yet-unnamed substance was released.  The fact that you're referring to FFPwhatever masks indicates that, despite a year of TV presenters patiently trying to explain it to you, the ball still hasn't got over the net: face covering are to protect everyone else - not the wearer.  A simple cloth barrier will catch some droplets.  If I'm at the infectious stage of Covid/influenza/TB/whatever then me coughing in your face would generally be deemed a bad thing to do, and even you would, given the choice, prefer there were a thin cotton barrier between us.  No, it's not a guarantee (because aerosols aren't attenuated by face coverings) but being saved from at least some of the virus-rich droplets going straight into your eyes/nose/mouth will definitely reduce the chance of you being infected.  That's never been in any dispute throughout this pandemic - only shrouded in fog by people who are grimly determined to ignore the "they're not for personal protection" and "they're not for aerosols"  facts.

No need to reply though - help is on its way.  We're nearly at the crack of 2.30pm, so Barrie Fish will be having his cornflakes and getting ready for another 24 hour online marathon pulling off that tricky balancing act: convincing everyone he's got a job and is a devoted father to his poor mask-traumatised daughter whilst spending the entire day online telling his opinion to strangers.  He's a trooper.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Masks have been required here for ages in certain settings and compliance has been fairly high - other than those who have deemed themselves exempt. Maybe nobody bothered to tell the virus mask wearers were off limits.

Presumably you didn’t bother looking at the link in my post. The science is in. Masks are effective with high compliance. 

Edited by kalifire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Toxic Avenger said:

No need to reply though - help is on its way.  We're nearly at the crack of 2.30pm, so Barrie Fish will be having his cornflakes and getting ready for another 24 hour online marathon pulling off that tricky balancing act: convincing everyone he's got a job and is a devoted father to his poor mask-traumatised daughter whilst spending the entire day online telling his opinion to strangers.  He's a trooper.

His poor ‘daughter’. Tommy Tadpole is such an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Toxic Avenger said:

No need to reply though - help is on its way.  We're nearly at the crack of 2.30pm, so Barrie Fish will be having his cornflakes and getting ready for another 24 hour online marathon pulling off that tricky balancing act: convincing everyone he's got a job and is a devoted father to his poor mask-traumatised daughter whilst spending the entire day online telling his opinion to strangers.  He's a trooper.

😂😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Toxic Avenger said:

That happened in 1878 when Captain Phlegm spotted that when you cough, sneeze, shout etc., an as-yet-unnamed substance was released.  The fact that you're referring to FFPwhatever masks indicates that, despite a year of TV presenters patiently trying to explain it to you, the ball still hasn't got over the net: face covering are to protect everyone else - not the wearer.  A simple cloth barrier will catch some droplets.  If I'm at the infectious stage of Covid/influenza/TB/whatever then me coughing in your face would generally be deemed a bad thing to do, and even you would, given the choice, prefer there were a thin cotton barrier between us.  No, it's not a guarantee (because aerosols aren't attenuated by face coverings) but being saved from at least some of the virus-rich droplets going straight into your eyes/nose/mouth will definitely reduce the chance of you being infected.  That's never been in any dispute throughout this pandemic - only shrouded in fog by people who are grimly determined to ignore the "they're not for personal protection" and "they're not for aerosols"  facts.

No need to reply though - help is on its way.  We're nearly at the crack of 2.30pm, so Barrie Fish will be having his cornflakes and getting ready for another 24 hour online marathon pulling off that tricky balancing act: convincing everyone he's got a job and is a devoted father to his poor mask-traumatised daughter whilst spending the entire day online telling his opinion to strangers.  He's a trooper.

😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kalifire said:

Presumably you didn’t bother looking at the link in my post. The science is in. Masks are effective with high compliance. 

Wrap up warm it must be cold on that lofty perch of yours. 

Compliance with the rules would appear to be high where I live... Didn't stop it being top of the charts for a while during the pandemic. 

In the fullness of time I suspect socio-economic similarities of the badly effected areas will far outweigh the mask compliance anecdotes. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Wrap up warm it must be cold on that lofty perch of yours. 

That’s not an argument. 

Which part of the link I sent you do you take issue with? Or are you just going to assume you’re entitled to your opinion no matter how badly you’ve established it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Scaremongering from some scientists

The scientist in question was actually talking about the effects of the pandemic being felt for 10-15 years so the 1m deaths to COVID are for that total period. The Tweets you’ve shared aren’t a fair account of that article.

Here’s the relevant part just to give the full picture:

“The problem with a pandemic is that it’s not like a tap and you can’t just turn it off,” said Professor Lucy Easthope of Durham University, who advises the Cabinet Office and specialises in disaster response. “When planning for a pandemic it is generally accepted that the effects will last for between ten and 15 years. I don’t think we have been very honest with the public about this. When you are swimming for the shore, it is important to tell people how long the swim is.”

Easthope predicts the ultimate UK death toll could reach a million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...