Coronavirus - the killer flu that will wipe us out? (Vol. 7)
Discussion
Alucidnation said:
isaldiri said:
otolith said:
Yes, I'm asking him if he will change his position if evidence to the contrary emerges.
Until then unless absolutely required by law there's no chance I'm wearing a mask/face covering as long as I'm not symptomatic.isaldiri said:
Alucidnation said:
What if you are asymptomatic?
Then I'm not shedding enough of the virus simply by breathing to be very infectious and I don't tend to stand right up to people and speak in their faces. given estimated over 50% of covid cases are asymptomatic lots of people should still have been getting infected in public transport/supermarkets/shops if asymptomatic transmission in general settings was an issue and that clearly has not been the case. Quite the opposite in fact....
isaldiri said:
Alucidnation said:
What if you are asymptomatic?
Then I'm not shedding enough of the virus simply by breathing to be very infectious and I don't tend to stand right up to people and speak in their faces. given estimated over 50% of covid cases are asymptomatic lots of people should still have been getting infected in public transport/supermarkets/shops if asymptomatic transmission in general settings was an issue and that clearly has not been the case. Quite the opposite in fact....
Edited by markyb_lcy on Sunday 12th July 12:53
Alucidnation said:
isaldiri said:
Alucidnation said:
What if you are asymptomatic?
Then I'm not shedding enough of the virus simply by breathing to be very infectious and I don't tend to stand right up to people and speak in their faces. given estimated over 50% of covid cases are asymptomatic lots of people should still have been getting infected in public transport/supermarkets/shops if asymptomatic transmission in general settings was an issue and that clearly has not been the case. Quite the opposite in fact....
isaldiri said:
Alucidnation said:
isaldiri said:
Alucidnation said:
What if you are asymptomatic?
Then I'm not shedding enough of the virus simply by breathing to be very infectious and I don't tend to stand right up to people and speak in their faces. given estimated over 50% of covid cases are asymptomatic lots of people should still have been getting infected in public transport/supermarkets/shops if asymptomatic transmission in general settings was an issue and that clearly has not been the case. Quite the opposite in fact....
markyb_lcy said:
Indeed. The numbers speak for themselves. Infections, deaths, hospitalisations (all the markers) have been in decline for months now and all without mandating masks. I do believe mandating them would have some small effect (even now) however the timing seems completely off to me ... if such a thing was to have been done it would have been better to do it when prevalence was high, therefore getting a bigger benefit.
I think the government was worried everyone would buy up the PPE and surgical masks etc at the start so didn’t recommend them. Edited by markyb_lcy on Sunday 12th July 12:53
They likely seem to do some good and all these measures are all small parts of reducing spread and saving lives. Each on their own can be ridiculed or objected to by some that are looking hard enough to but I don’t see any harm and actually a likely benefit.
Seems odd on here that some think it’s an attack on their individual freedom.
El stovey said:
markyb_lcy said:
Indeed. The numbers speak for themselves. Infections, deaths, hospitalisations (all the markers) have been in decline for months now and all without mandating masks. I do believe mandating them would have some small effect (even now) however the timing seems completely off to me ... if such a thing was to have been done it would have been better to do it when prevalence was high, therefore getting a bigger benefit.
I think the government was worried everyone would buy up the PPE and surgical masks etc at the start so didn’t recommend them. Edited by markyb_lcy on Sunday 12th July 12:53
They likely seem to do some good and all these measures are all small parts of reducing spread and saving lives. Each on their own can be ridiculed or objected to by some that are looking hard enough to but I don’t see any harm and actually a likely benefit.
Seems odd on here that some think it’s an attack on their individual freedom.
Vanden Saab said:
Going by that logic we can assume that you are in favour of all cars being fitted with devices that limit their speed to that of the speed limit you are driving through and personal trackers so we can solve all crimes. All for the greater good of course...
No I’m not in favour of that. That’s a bit binary isn’t it? To think that someone in favour of wearing a mask to possibly reduce virus transmission would be in favour of personal trackers. grumbledoak said:
i4got said:
We don't need to argue about masks any more. The BBC have just had an Oxford professor on to say there is clear evidence that masks reduce the spread of CV. Only problem is that her speciality is sociology.
Yes, but Oxford. You can't question her views. Shut up and obey!El stovey said:
Vanden Saab said:
Going by that logic we can assume that you are in favour of all cars being fitted with devices that limit their speed to that of the speed limit you are driving through and personal trackers so we can solve all crimes. All for the greater good of course...
No I’m not in favour of that. That’s a bit binary isn’t it? To think that someone in favour of wearing a mask to possibly reduce virus transmission would be in favour of personal trackers. You are happy to mandate that everyone should wear a mask but against speed limiters on cars. There are many people who would be happy with car limiters. Personally I am against both as I see them both as attacking my personal freedoms. I also believe if we accept wearing masks then in the future other freedoms will be removed for the 'common good'
The difference in this case compared to say wearing a seat belt is that I do not have to drive or be a passenger in a car while avoiding wearing a mask is almost impossible unless you do not go out.
Vanden Saab said:
El stovey said:
Vanden Saab said:
Going by that logic we can assume that you are in favour of all cars being fitted with devices that limit their speed to that of the speed limit you are driving through and personal trackers so we can solve all crimes. All for the greater good of course...
No I’m not in favour of that. That’s a bit binary isn’t it? To think that someone in favour of wearing a mask to possibly reduce virus transmission would be in favour of personal trackers. You are happy to mandate that everyone should wear a mask but against speed limiters on cars. There are many people who would be happy with car limiters. Personally I am against both as I see them both as attacking my personal freedoms. I also believe if we accept wearing masks then in the future other freedoms will be removed for the 'common good'
The difference in this case compared to say wearing a seat belt is that I do not have to drive or be a passenger in a car while avoiding wearing a mask is almost impossible unless you do not go out.
Vanden Saab said:
Not really I was just pointing out that different people have different limits as to where they think personal freedom ends.
You are happy to mandate that everyone should wear a mask but against speed limiters on cars. There are many people who would be happy with car limiters. Personally I am against both as I see them both as attacking my personal freedoms. I also believe if we accept wearing masks then in the future other freedoms will be removed for the 'common good'
The difference in this case compared to say wearing a seat belt is that I do not have to drive or be a passenger in a car while avoiding wearing a mask is almost impossible unless you do not go out.
I keep hearing stuff like this.You are happy to mandate that everyone should wear a mask but against speed limiters on cars. There are many people who would be happy with car limiters. Personally I am against both as I see them both as attacking my personal freedoms. I also believe if we accept wearing masks then in the future other freedoms will be removed for the 'common good'
The difference in this case compared to say wearing a seat belt is that I do not have to drive or be a passenger in a car while avoiding wearing a mask is almost impossible unless you do not go out.
I presume you voted for Johnson?
If so what do you think has changed?
It is that he's suddenly decided that "personal freedoms" don't matter so much any more?
Or is it that there's a global pandemic so there's a bit of temporary hardship for all of us and sadly some permanent hardship for some of us?
I'm sorry but every time I look in on one of these threads there are a section of people who seem hysterical.
I know this thing takes its toll on people in different ways but I'd urge a little perspective.
Vanden Saab said:
Not really I was just pointing out that different people have different limits as to where they think personal freedom ends.
You are happy to mandate that everyone should wear a mask but against speed limiters on cars. There are many people who would be happy with car limiters. Personally I am against both as I see them both as attacking my personal freedoms. I also believe if we accept wearing masks then in the future other freedoms will be removed for the 'common good'
The difference in this case compared to say wearing a seat belt is that I do not have to drive or be a passenger in a car while avoiding wearing a mask is almost impossible unless you do not go out.
How’s it attacking your personal freedoms? Do you think it will become permanent? How do you think it will lead to other freedoms removed? You are happy to mandate that everyone should wear a mask but against speed limiters on cars. There are many people who would be happy with car limiters. Personally I am against both as I see them both as attacking my personal freedoms. I also believe if we accept wearing masks then in the future other freedoms will be removed for the 'common good'
The difference in this case compared to say wearing a seat belt is that I do not have to drive or be a passenger in a car while avoiding wearing a mask is almost impossible unless you do not go out.
If the government wanted to take (More of) your personal freedoms, why bother with face masks first? Do you think they’re trying to get us to accept masks and then go for something more sinister like gps tracking etc?
These measures are obviously to try and reduce virus transmission, what does it have to do with your other personal freedoms?
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 12th July 14:47
El stovey said:
How’s it attacking your personal freedoms? Do you think it will become permanent? How do you think it will lead to other freedoms removed?
If the government wanted to take (More of) your personal freedoms, why bother with face masks first? Do you think they’re trying to get us to accept masks and then go for something more sinister like gps tracking etc?
These measures are obviously to try and reduce virus transmission, what does it have to do with your other personal freedoms?
Reduce virus transmission to what? what is the outcome we are looking for here and when is the time you can say "yep masks are no longer mandatory"?If the government wanted to take (More of) your personal freedoms, why bother with face masks first? Do you think they’re trying to get us to accept masks and then go for something more sinister like gps tracking etc?
These measures are obviously to try and reduce virus transmission, what does it have to do with your other personal freedoms?
Edited by El stovey on Sunday 12th July 14:47
I've had everything from "until we have a vaccine" to "make it mandatory every flu season to help save more lives"
gottans said:
Chuckling quietly to yourself due to other people's behaviour is diverting from the question about yourself, I get the feeling 'sod everyone else' is where it is at in light of any info to the contrary.
I get the feeling you are blinkered to only things that are infront of your face. Which is why, as they are in the news, only covid lives matter.Vanden Saab said:
El stovey said:
Vanden Saab said:
Going by that logic we can assume that you are in favour of all cars being fitted with devices that limit their speed to that of the speed limit you are driving through and personal trackers so we can solve all crimes. All for the greater good of course...
No I’m not in favour of that. That’s a bit binary isn’t it? To think that someone in favour of wearing a mask to possibly reduce virus transmission would be in favour of personal trackers. You are happy to mandate that everyone should wear a mask but against speed limiters on cars. There are many people who would be happy with car limiters. Personally I am against both as I see them both as attacking my personal freedoms. I also believe if we accept wearing masks then in the future other freedoms will be removed for the 'common good'
The difference in this case compared to say wearing a seat belt is that I do not have to drive or be a passenger in a car while avoiding wearing a mask is almost impossible unless you do not go out.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 12th July 15:04
smashing said:
Reduce virus transmission to what? what is the outcome we are looking for here and when is the time you can say "yep masks are no longer mandatory"?
I've had everything from "until we have a vaccine" to "make it mandatory every flu season to help save more lives"
I don’t know, there must be some point where there isn’t (m)any new cases etc? I've had everything from "until we have a vaccine" to "make it mandatory every flu season to help save more lives"
Like how we had pubs closed and now they’re open again or quarantines and now loads of exemptions, how we were asked to avoid restaurants but now are being encouraged to go to them etc
These pandemic measures are obviously temporary and the government look to get rid of them as soon as possible.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff