Covid19 Part XVI- 21,983 in ROI (1,339 deaths) 3,881 in NI (404 deaths)(05/05)Read OP

Danzy wrote: »

Same largely applies.

It most certainly does not. Show the reduction in infections of C19 due to increased temperature apro pro influenza.

GM228 wrote: »

They didn't stagger the release because the reporting criteria requires all probable cases be reported as COVID-19 deaths.

Will be fun and games when the UK amend theirs. Must be over 30k by now.

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

She's not huge though.

Mary Lou? She is though, I would say morbidly obese range

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Trump up soon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v29QcaYdcI

You're fake news. When you inject the ultra violet rays into yourself after the bleach, you'll have a tremendous orange glow, believe me, many people are saying so and having nuclear, you know my uncle was a nuclear scientist back in the day and back then we use to wear an onion on the belt which was the style at the time and...

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Come back when you're as concerned about the flu

You really don't give a damn do you?

This constant nonsense comparing this to a flu is infantile at this stage

I'm just thankful you are not typical of the majority of decent people taking this seriously, even though it has a huge impact on their lives.

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

You really don't give a damn do you?

This constant nonsense comparing this to a flu is infantile at this stage

I'm just thankful you are not typical of the majority of decent people taking this seriously, even though it has a huge impact on their lives.

Its the schools being off I guess.


He couldn't figure out why people are dying in the UK earlier.

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

She's overweight but not obese.

Come on... google image search, her BMI is easily above 30. Most people that you would not consider fat are actually overweight (because of how we have normalised it)... so anyone that stands out as fat is almost certainly obese.

MipMap wrote: »

If you contaminate yourself when you take the mask off then it implies there is virus on the mask which in turn means it has done it's job to that stage.
If the mask had not caught it it would have gone into your mouth or eyes.!

If you assume that even half the people who have a contaminated mask take it off correctly then you have been 50% successful.

In the general population the odds of your mask being infected has to be extremely low. If it is not then you are crazy to put yourself in that environment, mask or no mask.



No one is looking for 100% guarantees. We are trying to cut the odds down using as many methods as possible. This is one of them.



In a hospital environment the odds of contamination being on your mask is

vastly greater. That is why they are heros.


Comparing the two environments is not appropriate. Even the avid anti-mask brigade agree to that.

I agree with everything you've said. Specifically what's in bold. If the risk is that low of contaminating the mask then the mask is also not much use from the get go, no? I'm not anti mask. I'd prefer to see people wearing them but we don't have the stock or capability to grant access to masks for everyone given the current shortages and other barriers as mentioned. We risk lowering stock even further for staff in facilities who are at much higher risk, in the current set of circumstances.

I'm not comparing the environments for risk of infection either, I'm making a comparison that highly trained staff sometimes don't use the correct technique so I wouldn't expect the general public to do so correctly.

And finally, the thing I'm trying to convey is that gloves (while not a near perfect solution) are low risk, low cost, high availability, easier to use and easily accessed for a lot of people. They play a significant role in the reduction of fomite based transmission. But to add to that gloves risk people not taking hand hygiene so seriously, and further ups their risk.

GM228 wrote: »

I didn't realise some knew Mary Lou's BMI to determine she was obese.....

You absolutely can judge whether somebody is obese or not by their appearance. Mary Lou is obese, most people have a warped perception of what obesity looks like andthink you have to have to be obscenely large like those Walmart scooter crowd to be classified as such

Miike wrote: »

If the risk is that low of contaminating the mask then the mask is also not much use from the get go, no? I'm not anti mask. I'd prefer to see people wearing them but we don't have the stock or capability to grant access to masks for everyone given the current shortages and other barriers as mentioned.

What bothers me Miike is that the Anti-Maskers(not you) including the WHO are trying to deal with the logistics issues of supply and availability issues you refer to by questioning the efficacy of mask wearing as distinct from being honest about it.
Also they are health experts. Issues of supply and demand are none of their concern. This is the business of Government.
It is dangerous when health professionals take it upon themselves to try to manipulate populations by telling them lies for what they think is the common good.
As I have said here twice before - The HSE's last supply of masks was transported to them by Army Truck. Any demand from the public for masks cannot affect that supply.
If a vaccine is discovered but supplies cannot be acquired would it be appropriate for the CMO or the WHO to tell us it does not work?


With regard to the low level of risk of catching the virus this applies just as much to all the other measures as well. Distancing, Hand Washing etc. The point is that you don't just take the risk once. This virus is spreading even despite the lockdown and it is doing it because people are coming into contact with it despite hand washing, distancing etc., Every one of us will have to take those little risks 1,000s of times every month and we need to get lucky every time.
The virus just needs to get lucky once.