CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 3)

[rjg48]

ant1973 said:

garyhun said:

Elysium said:

sambucket said:

The irony is, Boris hates masks and is pressured into doing this because of the balance of scientific opinion is shifting too much to ignore. And yet everyone is saying it's a political decision.

I'm wondering, what decision if any has been made re this pandemic that isn't political. Can you name a single decision that was informed primarily by science?

The scientific opinion has not shifted at all. Not even slightly.

There is a small benefit if masks are made of the right materials and worn correctly. Most will not be.

That’s the full extent of the scientific consensus. Nothing more has been learned.

People like you are calling for this because it happened in other countries and you don’t like the idea that we are missing out on something that would help you ‘feel’ safe. It’s emotional.

Listening to a Times podcast this morning and some Scottish lady (Linda McKay possibly) stated that now that there was plenty of clinical information around masks, not just lab/modelling, WHO had changed its stance to one of stating that masks were beneficial and should be used. She also stated that there was scientific consensus on this now.

I have no idea what to believe any more but you need to be careful with phrases such as that in bold above which may not be the absolute that you claim.

Personally I’m all for opening up the economy as normal.

I’ve also just read the Telegraph this morning and note that the Premier League have been told off by government for players not socially distancing when celebrating goals as it sets a bad example

All fking ridiculous imo.

Edited by garyhun on Saturday 11th July 11:15

It's nonsense to say that WHO supports the use of masks in public settings by members of the public.

The 6th June advice has not been altered.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviru...

There is no evidence that they work according to WHO.

And why were you listening to a Podcast for the position of the WHO regarding the use of masks?

A rather large queue outside my Local Scaremongers this morning.

[s2art]

n3il123 said:

s2art said:

Alternatively (with added risk) TVR are offering 8.5% on a 5 year bond.

The 2019 Griffith 500

Naturally Aspirated 5.0-litre
Cosworth-enhanced V8 Engine
200 MPH
0-60mph under 4 Secs
400bhp/tonne
Gordon Murray's Innovative iStream Design
Side Exhaust System
Super Light weight under 1250kg
Perfect 50:50 Weight Distribution
£90,000 List Price
Loyal Fan Base already Securing TVR's 1st Year Order Book

How have I missed this amazing opportunity? 5 years should have us all well used the the new 1 metre distanced mask wearing normal

Must admit I am tempted. Would love to see TVR roar back into life. The new Griffith is awesome.

[Cold]

You'd be better off investing in some cheap cotton sheets and a sewing machine.

[s2art]

Cold said:

You'd be better off investing in some cheap cotton sheets and a sewing machine.

Doubt I could compete with China at that level of technology. (or many other eastern countries)

[Elysium]

garyhun said:

Elysium said:

sambucket said:

The irony is, Boris hates masks and is pressured into doing this because of the balance of scientific opinion is shifting too much to ignore. And yet everyone is saying it's a political decision.

I'm wondering, what decision if any has been made re this pandemic that isn't political. Can you name a single decision that was informed primarily by science?

The scientific opinion has not shifted at all. Not even slightly.

There is a small benefit if masks are made of the right materials and worn correctly. Most will not be.

That’s the full extent of the scientific consensus. Nothing more has been learned.

People like you are calling for this because it happened in other countries and you don’t like the idea that we are missing out on something that would help you ‘feel’ safe. It’s emotional.

Listening to a Times podcast this morning and some Scottish lady (Linda McKay possibly) stated that now that there was plenty of clinical information around masks, not just lab/modelling, WHO had changed its stance to one of stating that masks were beneficial and should be used. She also stated that there was scientific consensus on this now.

I have no idea what to believe any more but you need to be careful with phrases such as that in bold above which may not be the absolute that you claim.

Personally I’m all for opening up the economy as normal.

I’ve also just read the Telegraph this morning and note that the Premier League have been told off by government for players not socially distancing when celebrating goals as it sets a bad example

All fking ridiculous imo.

I think you need to read beyond the words in bold:

Elysium said:

There is a small benefit if masks are made of the right materials and worn correctly

That is the scientific consensus and it has been for some time. That's why some scientists are recommending them now. Small benefits can add up across massive numbers of people.

However, most of the masks I have seen people wearing are not made of suitable materials and are not worn correctly.

[anonymous-user]

Elysium said:

garyhun said:

Elysium said:

sambucket said:

The irony is, Boris hates masks and is pressured into doing this because of the balance of scientific opinion is shifting too much to ignore. And yet everyone is saying it's a political decision.

I'm wondering, what decision if any has been made re this pandemic that isn't political. Can you name a single decision that was informed primarily by science?

The scientific opinion has not shifted at all. Not even slightly.

There is a small benefit if masks are made of the right materials and worn correctly. Most will not be.

That’s the full extent of the scientific consensus. Nothing more has been learned.

People like you are calling for this because it happened in other countries and you don’t like the idea that we are missing out on something that would help you ‘feel’ safe. It’s emotional.

Listening to a Times podcast this morning and some Scottish lady (Linda McKay possibly) stated that now that there was plenty of clinical information around masks, not just lab/modelling, WHO had changed its stance to one of stating that masks were beneficial and should be used. She also stated that there was scientific consensus on this now.

I have no idea what to believe any more but you need to be careful with phrases such as that in bold above which may not be the absolute that you claim.

Personally I’m all for opening up the economy as normal.

I’ve also just read the Telegraph this morning and note that the Premier League have been told off by government for players not socially distancing when celebrating goals as it sets a bad example

All fking ridiculous imo.

I think you need to read beyond the words in bold:

Elysium said:

There is a small benefit if masks are made of the right materials and worn correctly

That is the scientific consensus and it has been for some time. That's why some scientists are recommending them now. Small benefits can add up across massive numbers of people.

However, most of the masks I have seen people wearing are not made of suitable materials and are not worn correctly.

Which brings us right back to the issue of the messaging being ‘massaged’ by those in the press and in power to create a narrative that’s not quite true (miles from to be accurate).

[ant1973]

garyhun said:

Elysium said:

garyhun said:

Elysium said:

sambucket said:

The irony is, Boris hates masks and is pressured into doing this because of the balance of scientific opinion is shifting too much to ignore. And yet everyone is saying it's a political decision.

I'm wondering, what decision if any has been made re this pandemic that isn't political. Can you name a single decision that was informed primarily by science?

The scientific opinion has not shifted at all. Not even slightly.

There is a small benefit if masks are made of the right materials and worn correctly. Most will not be.

That’s the full extent of the scientific consensus. Nothing more has been learned.

People like you are calling for this because it happened in other countries and you don’t like the idea that we are missing out on something that would help you ‘feel’ safe. It’s emotional.

Listening to a Times podcast this morning and some Scottish lady (Linda McKay possibly) stated that now that there was plenty of clinical information around masks, not just lab/modelling, WHO had changed its stance to one of stating that masks were beneficial and should be used. She also stated that there was scientific consensus on this now.

I have no idea what to believe any more but you need to be careful with phrases such as that in bold above which may not be the absolute that you claim.

Personally I’m all for opening up the economy as normal.

I’ve also just read the Telegraph this morning and note that the Premier League have been told off by government for players not socially distancing when celebrating goals as it sets a bad example

All fking ridiculous imo.

I think you need to read beyond the words in bold:

Elysium said:

There is a small benefit if masks are made of the right materials and worn correctly

That is the scientific consensus and it has been for some time. That's why some scientists are recommending them now. Small benefits can add up across massive numbers of people.

However, most of the masks I have seen people wearing are not made of suitable materials and are not worn correctly.

Which brings us right back to the issue of the messaging being ‘massaged’ by those in the press and in power to create a narrative that’s not quite true (miles from to be accurate).

They think that people will return to the shops if they believe it is safe - and that illusion of safety is apparently driven by the perceived benefits of wearing a mask. They are delusional. The terrified will see the adoption of masks as being a negative message rather than anything positive. People like me hate the idea of it because it appears to be political and pointless. Moreover, wearing a mask is not suddenly going to encourage people to stop WFH. Shops are empty in city centres mainly because of the success of WFH. Batten down the hatches until the Spring is my view.

[Stay in Bed Instead]

If the Government thinks it's dangerous enough that a mask is needed to enter a shop why should I risk my life to go and buy a t-shirt?

[ant1973]

You only have to read this to see the scale of the problems facing pubs

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/11/p...

50% of usual turnover
Higher than normal costs
Rent coming back on stream

Give it 2-3 months and they will be done.

The Covid Secure stuff is almost as bad as lockdown. Losing 50% of your business or 100% still comes to the same thing ultimately: insolvency.

9 months to end social distancing (i.e. surprise, surprise, Spring next year) is going to have appalling consequences.

[Red 4]

The masks thing is an arse covering exercise.

Boris wants everyone back to work and things back to as close to normal as possible tomorrow.
However, he knows the risks.

He wants to be able to say we did everything we could, we even insisted people wear masks (even if their use is questionable).

It's (largely) politics, not science. Plus most other countries are doing it and we wouldn't want to be the odd ones out.

[EddieSteadyGo]

ant1973 said:

It's nonsense to say that WHO supports the use of masks in public settings by members of the public.

The 6th June advice has not been altered.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviru...

There is no evidence that they work according to WHO.

I think we lose the argument when trying to argue whether they work or not. The question should be whether they are necessary or not.

We have in depth random sampling which seems to be able to detect (to a high level of accuracy) covid, even at very low prevalence.

We have made a number of changes to lockdown recently allowing pubs etc to open, albeit with certain restrictions.

In my view, the logical approach would be to continue for the time being to monitor prevalence via the ONS sampling study. Look for any uptick. And be ready for masks as the next line of defence if it looks like spread is reoccurring more generally.

[TTmonkey]

Went out for the day yesterday, to the zoo. We wore masks because it’s not too much of an inconvenience. I’m in my 50s with some of those things that would make getting cv19 dangerous.

I was amazed to see maybe 3-4 thousand people many of them in the 50-60-70 age range, and barely another mask to be seen, anywhere.


This was in hants, where the R rate is supposed to be still quite high.

[anonymous-user]

TTmonkey said:

Went out for the day yesterday, to the zoo. We wore masks because it’s not too much of an inconvenience. I’m in my 50s with some of those things that would make getting cv19 dangerous.

I was amazed to see maybe 3-4 thousand people many of them in the 50-60-70 age range, and barely another mask to be seen, anywhere.


This was in hants, where the R rate is supposed to be still quite high.

I’ve always said that animal lovers are the sanest of people

[EddieSteadyGo]

TTmonkey said:

This was in hants, where the R rate is supposed to be still quite high.

Whatever the R number, the prevalence (according to the ONS stats) is something like 1 in 3,900 in England.

And bearing in mind a good number of those people with the infection will have symptoms and will be at home self isolating, the chance of you running into someone who is infectious for long enough to get infected is very low.

By the way, I'm not criticising your right to wear a mask if you feel it gives you additional protection - my problem is those who insist on it for everyone else, when it appears (based on current evidence) that we can now keep the virus suppressed with modest social distancing measures.

[Elysium]

EddieSteadyGo said:

TTmonkey said:

This was in hants, where the R rate is supposed to be still quite high.

Whatever the R number, the prevalence (according to the ONS stats) is something like 1 in 3,900 in England.

And bearing in mind a good number of those people with the infection will have symptoms and will be at home self isolating, the chance of you running into someone who is infectious for long enough to get infected is very low.

By the way, I'm not criticising your right to wear a mask if you feel it gives you additional protection - my problem is those who insist on it for everyone else, when it appears (based on current evidence) that we can now keep the virus suppressed with modest social distancing measures.

R is much more spiky at lower levels of infections.

If you have 1 case that infects 2 people then R=2

If you have 1000 cases that infect 200 people then R=1.2

Worrying about R being 0.9 or 1.1 at this point is meaningless. Its not directly calculable from cases anyway as we only see a fraction of what is going on.

If you calculate the R that matters, which is the one that leads to deaths, then it has been below 1 since 8th April.

[MikeT66]

BBC loving it as usual.
"Coronavirus: Calls for government to clarify face coverings in England"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53371441 (apologies if already posted)

More scare-mongering, not one dissenting or questioning voice. WTF is going on?!

As Mrs.T66 just said - "If this comes in, I'm not going shopping anywhere where I have to wear one. I'll shop online instead."

Vote with your wallets/buying options - it's the only way of putting pressure on to stop the fking panic.

[Newc]

I'm on the tube a couple of times a week. That's the London tube, where masks are compulsory and have been for a few weeks now. Compliance is maybe 60%, and that's during working hours in the nice parts of town. A good chunk of the 60% are wearing them as chinstraps or hanging off one ear, etc.

No TFL staff are paid enough to care about enforcing any kind of compliance against civil refusal.

[scottyp123]

This seems a good compromise.

[rjg48]

Newc said:

I'm on the tube a couple of times a week. That's the London tube, where masks are compulsory and have been for a few weeks now. Compliance is maybe 60%

Don't blame me, can't remember the last time I went on the Tube, thankfully.

If it is a matter of life and death, are they giving people masks to wear, or not?

[vixen1700]

Went round the shops in Wanstead today, each shop we walked into we had sanitiser squirted on our hands by staff in perspex visors.

Had a drink in the Spoons which now has seperation screens between tables and big perspex screens at the bar. Still cheap though.