Away With The Fairies wrote: » It's not a surprise when masks/coverings aren't mandatory.
Away With The Fairies wrote: » Other countries making mask wearing mandatory... Can somebody please explain how Ireland is different with this virus? Just saw a bus pass by and no one with a mask on it. How will distancing help if somebody sneezes on a bus?
Boggles wrote: » 99% of commuters 'ignoring advice' on face masks according to transport workers Add to the fact large swathes of people are now acting like there is no pandemic, it will be a fúcking miracle if this thing doesn't flair up again in the next 6 weeks.
ednwireland wrote: » considering other countries are handing them out at the entrances to public transport, ireland nah - sort yourself out not that i have nay problem with that but if you want to make an initial point there should have been people handing them out bus stops, luas stops, on monday and tuesday. plenty of public sector workers on full pay around not working
kowloonkev wrote: » Which countries are handing out free masks?
McGiver wrote: » I'd predicted that. Let's wait 4-6 weeks. Second wave is coming and we'll be in another lockdown. More deaths, more deficit, more unemployment. We'll all pay. And that only because the government is full of clowns and cowards. "You may choose to wear a mask" was never going to work in Ireland.
McGiver wrote: » .... If someone talks and breathes on the bus. Sneezing and coughing are not the only ways of transmission. Coronavirus is proven to be spreading by breathing and talking. Obviously less than a cough but it still does.
weldoninhio wrote: » Jesus wept. Some people just love projecting their fears onto other people. It’s ridiculous. The virus is currently at about R0.4-R0.6 in Ireland according to failed journalism student Harris. Yet people are freaking out about people not wearing masks. Grow up and take a long hard look at yourself. The virus is pretty much gone from the community in Ireland. “ Modelling data published by the Department of Health suggests that at the moment, the spread of the virus in the community is substantially under control.” Denmark has reopened and scientists can’t explain how it hasn’t spiked again. “A second wave of the new coronavirus is unlikely in Denmark as the reproduction rate has stayed below a key threshold since restrictions were eased a month ago, a top health expert said Tuesday. The reproduction rate has fallen from 1.0 at the end of April to 0.7 in the first week in May, according to the state-run infectious disease prevention agency SSI, the nation's top institute of its kind.“
weldoninhio wrote: » The virus is pretty much gone from the community in Ireland.
Wibbs wrote: » The peak time for masks was well over a month ago and Ireland and others missed it, hence our high number of deaths per population compared to others who brought them in(and border control, quarantine, tests etc). We should be at around 200 dead, not around 1600 and that was down to many failings of our so called authorities from the get go, their position on masks being one of them.
Wibbs wrote: » I suspect the long talked about second wave - much, if not most of it down to erroneously applying the 1918 pandemic to this one, including by scientists who should know better - is unlikely to happen. The "trick" being to subdue community transmission in the first place. It may pop up again come winter cold/flu season if there's enough of a reservoir in the population to sustain it until then.
Boggles wrote: » Isn't that exactly what happened with the Spanish Flu?
Wibbs wrote: » Yes and no B. The conditions for it to do so were very different, as was how the virus was positively selected for lethality when it came back. There was a large reservoir in military forces that kept it going through the summers and the same forces selected for a much more lethal strain. In "normal" viral pandemics or even flu seasons mutations select for more mild illness. IE if you come down with it bad, you stay home in bed and limit spread. If you have a mild or asymptomatic case you live life as normal out in the world so the mild variant spreads more and is more selected to survive. In 1918 the reverse happened among troops. The mild ones stayed at their posts, the severe were sent back to already overcrowded field hospitals and from there into the wider community. So when it came back it was far more lethal. It was definitely the same virus, only slightly changed. We know that because people who caught it early on were immunised against the later version. That even happened with countries that had the spread of the early mutation. Coronaviruses mutate at much slower rates and we're seeing that with this dose and it's mild, even asymptomatic for the vast majority who catch it. In the vast majority it also kills those we would expect it to kill. Old people, more men than women, more the already chronically sick etc. The 1918 lethal strain stood out because it almost reversed that trend. The very young and elderly were less affected, but it killed those in the prime of life in droves. I've said it before that we've been very "lucky" in this case. The virus is of low lethality(I'm sticking with my early on prediction of 0.5 CFR) and isn't killing young healthy people except in extremely rare circumstances and almost all of them it subsequently turns out had underlying conditions. It's also not nearly as contagious as some viruses like measles. It should be a wake up call for the world that this pretty "mild" virus has led to hospitals being overrun, medical science caught on the hop, the WHO ditto, most governments outside of a few running around like headless chickens, populations panicking and being blase in equal amounts and a massive hit to personal, national and international economies. We've been hit bad, but if it were like the more lethal 1918 flu we would have been in serious trouble. If it was a novel version of smallpox, where a third would be dead we'd have been utterly screwed.
Boggles wrote: » I'd be very wary to suggest that this thing has been defeated to the point it is behind us apart from the odd flair up, hopefully I am wrong, but I have been basing my opinions since the start on sound science and I will be sticking with that going forward.
Boggles wrote: » The reality is though, the reasons you outlined for essentially the spread of the virus back then still very much exist in large parts of our planet. War, mass displacement, over run camps, humanitarian crises, in some ways are worse now.
Wibbs wrote: » Not nearly as heavily focused though. For example between 1917-18 the US alone had over two million troops overseas, the majority to Europe.
Markomlm wrote: » There seems to be alot of hysteria on here about face coverings. I did my shopping all throughout the peak of the pandemic without wearing a face mask, and I just don't believe there is a real reason to wear them especially now that the virus has effectively been eradicated from the community.
I was in Tesco yesterday and I estimate that out of approx 50 people in store, only around 10 were wearing face masks. They do no harm, but are certainly no substitute for good hand hygiene and cough etiquette.
sumonz wrote: » Does anyone know where to get masks? I've seen some of the big companies advertising them but I'd prefer local to try and support small businesses if at all possible. Thanks in advance!
ctopher wrote: » I think there’s a few local designers making and selling masks. I’d say Instagram is a good bet to search. I got mine from a designer David Houghton and it’s great. I think was the website was Davidhoughton.ie!
