Masks

Tork

Yes: to protect others

The trolls have to delve deeper for their fodder now

CalamariFritti

Another reason why I was always against them. I mean I think all this masks stuff is for the most part totally crazy anyway but lets assume for a moment I'd come around to the masks indoors thing. I always knew it wouldn't end there. There'll always be someone even crazier than that, making noise for masks everywhere even outside. And after that I'm sure someone will make a case for wearing them in your own house.

When I heard that Spain - who seem to have gotten pretty much everything arseways with COVID - made them mandatory outdoors I knew they had to be resisted with every fibre.

Lunatics trying to take over the asylum here too.

Tork

Yes: to protect others

Oh I think you'd be delighted if a rule about wearing masks outdoors was brought in here. It'd give you something new to rant about.

CalamariFritti

It would be final proof that we have lost the plot.

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

Darc19 wrote: »

More misinformed covid police.

In a medical situation including opticians and dental, the people working in the place have their own medical protection. Hence there is no MANDATORY requirement for those attending to wear masks.

I really wish the covid police would engage brain cells first.

Are people really comfortable going to places like this with aerosol a route of transmission? Having to sit in an empty waiting area but you don't know who was there before you and yourself breathing it all in.

McGiver

No: I don't care enough

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

So what about offices? Still only recommended if social distancing is difficult. People will see that as a choice.

I had raised this to my employer - I'm not going back to the office if masks are not mandated.

If masks are mandated by law for shops where one spends 15 minutes, it is absolutely illogical not to mandate masks in offices where dozens/hundreds of people sit in an enclosed packed area with generally poor ventilation for 8+ hours. This is an issue and must be rectified by the government.

McGiver

No: I don't care enough

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Another reason why I was always against them. I mean I think all this masks stuff is for the most part totally crazy anyway but lets assume for a moment I'd come around to the masks indoors thing. I always knew it wouldn't end there. There'll always be someone even crazier than that, making noise for masks everywhere even outside. And after that I'm sure someone will make a case for wearing them in your own house.

When I heard that Spain - who seem to have gotten pretty much everything arseways with COVID - made them mandatory outdoors I knew they had to be resisted with every fibre.

Lunatics trying to take over the asylum here too.

Of course it wouldn't end there. Because mandating masks just in shops is hardly a sufficient measure.

Countries that handled the virus well had universal mask requirement for both indoors and outdoors. When the requirement was lifted cases shot up significantly. Good example of this is Czechia, which has 10 times less deaths and 4 times less cases per capita than Ireland. Mask requirement was lifted end of June and they now have a second wave equivalent in numbers to first one.

Mandating masks in shops and not elsewhere indoors including the workplace is illogical and insufficient.

As for outdoors - I would be OK with masks mandated for city centres, towns centres and built up areas, basically anywhere where there are people around. It's not a rocket science.

And pubs should absolutely not reopen - it's impossible to maintain social distancing or wear a mask in pub and they have been proven to be a vector in the US (Texas) and elsewhere.

bodhrandude

Yes: surgical

Tork wrote: »

Oh I think you'd be delighted if a rule about wearing masks outdoors was brought in here. It'd give you something new to rant about.

Probably wouldn't work in the Irish winter, they (the government) would have to start issuing them free to the general public and weather proof ones at that.

MadYaker

Yes: surgical

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

And if we are ordered to wear them outdoors like in France will you wear one or will you think its over the top?

If my uncle had a fanny he’d be my aunt

Jim Gazebo

No: other

I have no problem wearing a mask in a shop if that the advice given. Outside I'd be reluctant to comply with unless the place was rammed with people. That seems logically over the top to wear a mask everywhere when outside.

As an aside, the vitriol towards those not wearing a mask has to be stopped as well. If they have a reason for not wearing it it is none of your business.

Genuine q, how long is the mask requirement going to be for ? Forever?

MadYaker

Yes: surgical

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Another reason why I was always against them. I mean I think all this masks stuff is for the most part totally crazy anyway but lets assume for a moment I'd come around to the masks indoors thing. I always knew it wouldn't end there. There'll always be someone even crazier than that, making noise for masks everywhere even outside. And after that I'm sure someone will make a case for wearing them in your own house.

When I heard that Spain - who seem to have gotten pretty much everything arseways with COVID - made them mandatory outdoors I knew they had to be resisted with every fibre.

Lunatics trying to take over the asylum here too.

Hong Kong also mandates them outdoors. How would you rate their response to COVID-19?

Anyway it’ll never happen here so untwist your knickers.

Jim Gazebo

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I have no problem wearing a mask in a shop if that the advice given. Outside I'd be reluctant to comply with unless the place was rammed with people. That seems logically over the top to wear a mask everywhere when outside.

As an aside, the vitriol towards those not wearing a mask has to be stopped as well. If they have a reason for not wearing it it is none of your business.

Genuine q, how long is the mask requirement going to be for ? Forever?

Why would it be forever?

Jim Gazebo

No: other

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why would it be forever?

I've seen no mention of it being a temporary measure? The virus isn't going away. In 10 years time we'll still be getting daily numbers and wearing masks from what I can see. There seems to be no plan to get out of this mess, just limit it constantly. It's demoralising.

KerryConnor

Vaccines have been found in 3 countries.. Deployed in UK from November.. Will that not put a big dent in it in 2021?

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I've seen no mention of it being a temporary measure? The virus isn't going away. In 10 years time we'll still be getting daily numbers and wearing masks from what I can see. There seems to be no plan to get out of this mess, just limit it constantly. It's demoralising.

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

I hope this is true. And all the more reason to make them mandatory in every indoor setting. Masks reduce viral load, isn't that what we want? To prevent people from over-crowding the hospitals? But sure, they'll force a lockdown and close small businesses instead of just getting on with the most obvious.

This thread has been around since March, all the science and talk has been posted here and yet here we are in August fapping about, making them mandatory in shops and bingo halls. But nothing about offices or other places of work.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-face-mask-symptoms-protect-severe-mild-immune-monica-gandhi-a9662226.html%3famp

RoYoBo

Yes: valved

Just on the point of wearing masks on the street - if you're out shopping and going in and out of different stores then it's actually more sensible to keep the mask on.

Taking it off and putting it back on (not to mention storing it in bags or pockets between visits) risks contamination and is actually more bother than keeping it on.

Same for people in their own cars. While it looks odd on the 'face of it', it actually makes more sense to put it on, adjust it and keep it there if you're doing short journeys with a few stops in between.

dwayneshintzy

Yes: to protect myself and others

MadYaker wrote: »

Hong Kong also mandates them outdoors. How would you rate their response to COVID-19?

Anyway it’ll never happen here so untwist your knickers.

I brought this up previously in the thread, and was told that Hong Kong people have no issue with it as they are "compliant"........which is a bit laughable considering everything that's gone on in Hong Kong over the past year.

boggerman1

McGiver wrote: »

Of course it wouldn't end there. Because mandating masks just in shops is hardly a sufficient measure.

Countries that handled the virus well had universal mask requirement for both indoors and outdoors. When the requirement was lifted cases shot up significantly. Good example of this is Czechia, which has 10 times less deaths and 4 times less cases per capita than Ireland. Mask requirement was lifted end of June and they now have a second wave equivalent in numbers to first one.

Mandating masks in shops and not elsewhere indoors including the workplace is illogical and insufficient.

As for outdoors - I would be OK with masks mandated for city centres, towns centres and built up areas, basically anywhere where there are people around. It's not a rocket science.

And pubs should absolutely not reopen - it's impossible to maintain social distancing or wear a mask in pub and they have been proven to be a vector in the US (Texas) and elsewhere.

How do some of ye function at all.masks masks everywhere,24/7.eye goggles next Twitter crusade.since the whole mask crap started I see less use of the hand sanitizers.but hey the masks crowd know best.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

boggerman1 wrote: »

How do some of ye function at all.masks masks everywhere,24/7.eye goggles next Twitter crusade.since the whole mask crap started I see less use of the hand sanitizers.but hey the masks crowd know best.

I'll be making full use of the legislation.

A mask causes me "severe distress", case closed.

pjohnson

Hunky Monster wrote: »

I'll be making full use of the legislation.

A mask causes me "severe distress", case closed.

:rolleyes:


What a suprise.

dwayneshintzy

Yes: to protect myself and others

boggerman1 wrote: »

How do some of ye function at all.masks masks everywhere,24/7.eye goggles next Twitter crusade.since the whole mask crap started I see less use of the hand sanitizers.but hey the masks crowd know best.

Wearing a mask isn't as difficult as you seem to think.

robinph

No: I don't care enough

Whilst wearing masks in offices would help with reducing the transmission, the purpose of masks is also to prevent spreading to unknown people which then complicates tracing. Perfectly sensible to wear a mask in the workplace, but I can see why they haven't made it compulsory.

Making it compulsory would have more people objecting to them and then also not wearing them when out and about.

odyssey06

Hunky Monster wrote: »

I'll be making full use of the legislation.
A mask causes me "severe distress", case closed.

Severe distress? People with severe asthma can wear them and want you to do likewise.
Inconvenience and a bit of difficulty isn't severe distress.
Which box do you really fall into?

People who abuse the "severe distress" clause are as bad as people who park in disabled spaces without legitimate reason and deserve as much contempt.

extra gravy

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

As an aside, the vitriol towards those not wearing a mask has to be stopped as well. If they have a reason for not wearing it it is none of your business.

If it's a valid reason, then fine. But if they're just being a big baby and pretending it causes them "severe distress", then they deserve the vitriol.

ExMachina1000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Was in a shop in a Dublin shopping centre
on Sunday. I had no mask on even though I wear one everyday during work.

Young fellow came over to me to tell me since the shop is small I need to have a mask on. I noticed the near by staff were all standing ,watching and waiting for my reaction.

No bother says I, you are dead right. My bad.

End

odyssey06

robinph wrote: »

Whilst wearing masks in offices would help with reducing the transmission, the purpose of masks is also to prevent spreading to unknown people which then complicates tracing. Perfectly sensible to wear a mask in the workplace, but I can see why they haven't made it compulsory.
Making it compulsory would have more people objecting to them and then also not wearing them when out and about.

A lot of offices will likely consider making them compulsory as a company rule.
That's more difficult per retail outlet.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Are people really comfortable going to places like this with aerosol a route of transmission? Having to sit in an empty waiting area but you don't know who was there before you and yourself breathing it all in.

Please listen to what is actually happening. You are not let inside the door of a practice without a mask and all staff are masked. Give them some credit rather than falling for drivel from trolls.

average_runner

odyssey06 wrote: »

A lot of offices will likely consider making them compulsory as a company rule.
That's more difficult per retail outlet.

Most offices already have.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

Hunky Monster wrote: »

I'll be making full use of the legislation.

A mask causes me "severe distress", case closed.

Sure you will. You're such a hard man standing up for freedom. You're a credit to the country.

How about thinking about the possibility that you could actually help by wearing one?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

Sure you will. You're such a hard man standing up for freedom. You're a credit to the country.

How about thinking about the possibility that you could actually help by wearing one?

It’s not helping and if it is...your wearing a mask right?