OldRio wrote: » I thought you were sweating? Had trouble breathing? Lacking in concentration?
odyssey06 wrote: » You don't know if you are sick. You can have this, be infectious and not know it. What are your chances of being in a car accident? And do you still wear a seat belt? Why would weaing a masks to protect others be different?
_Kaiser_ wrote: » And that's the crux of the issue. Insisting upon masks, at this stage of the progression, is not a justified proportional response. The time for that was March/April, not 3/4 months later when the numbers are down to minimal levels anyway.
Graham wrote: » Perhaps you'll answer this time. How does wearing a mask incorrectly increase the risk when compared to not wearing a mask at all?
GazzaL wrote: » I've answered this question so often, I could have trained a parrot. If someone is wearing a mask incorrectly, fidgets and touches their mask and their face, they are at higher risk of infecting themselves than someone who isn't wearing any mask and doesn't touch their face. This is in the WHO guidelines. Why do so many pro-mask people on here have no regard for the WHO guidelines?
Graham wrote: » Just the type of person you want panting next to you unmasked while you do the weekly shop. :eek:
_Kaiser_ wrote: » Yep. And for what? There's so many exceptions to this "mask up" notion and it only applies in certain situations anyway that if you're going to catch the virus you likely will I'm afraid.
xhomelezz wrote: » Something like this American idiot
_Kaiser_ wrote: » Are the pro-mark zealots (because that's what some of these posts read like to be honest!) REALLY so fearful of "the virus" that they will lash out whenever someone questions it, or doesn't agree? Or is it just Irish begrudgery/curtain-twitching that some seem to be "getting away with" something they're not? I'm actually serious. Given the extremely low rates of new cases and deaths that we continue to have, coupled with the again declining "R number" (because I know that's another favourite used to validate it), why do we need masks NOW when we didn't at any point up until now - and yet somehow still managed to "flatten the curve" to the aforementioned minimal new cases? I'm just back from the weekly shop and it was a thoroughly unpleasant experience. Couldn't breathe properly, sweating, and even trouble concentrating by the time I got out of the place. I also spent about half what I normally would so there's that element too. But of course, I fully expect this real world feedback to be dismissed with "just get on with it" or whatever. Twitter and the culture it's bred (this "need" to be on-message and validated, coupled with an aggressive "with us or against us" stance) has a LOT to answer for generally, but particularly in how some people are treating others during this situation.
_Kaiser_ wrote: » Guess which one I'm doing?
Graham wrote: » The medical profession disagree. I'll go with their advice.
GazzaL wrote: » I've repeatedly posted the WHO guidelines only to be dismissed by the same bunch of eejits on here. Huge numbers of people are wearing face masks incorrectly, putting themselves and others at higher risk.
bodhrandude wrote: » Video doesn't play.
_Kaiser_ wrote: » That's why the responses need to be proportional to an evolving situation, and I can see no reason why we MUST wear masks now, but didn't at the height of the cases 2 months ago, beyond politicians abdicating their responsibility to NPHET and with an eye on the polls.
_Kaiser_ wrote: » I can see no reason why we MUST wear masks now
xhomelezz wrote: » https://youtu.be/uoxmSFvi5JA
_Kaiser_ wrote: » The medical profession can't even agree among themselves what the right course is most of the time - for every case saying x, there'll be one saying y that seems just as valid.
odyssey06 wrote: » That's a total cop out argument that can used to justify anything, from anti-vax to anti-mask. It's a non-argument. In one post you say if NPHET brought in mandaory masks in april you would agree. In another you say this.
Overheal wrote: » _Kaiser_ what’s your stance on vaccines so
_Kaiser_ wrote: » Insisting on them at this point is a classic example of closing the stable door after the horse or bolted
Graham wrote: » Has the virus suddenly stopped spreading?
_Kaiser_ wrote: » No, I'm asking why DIDN'T we have masks in April when the virus was at FAR higher levels of infection and transmission than it is now. Insisting on them at this point is a classic example of closing the stable door after the horse or bolted, or (another Irish favourite) doing something to be seen to do it, but with little practical benefit. Again, the key point is that these measures must be weighed against the reality of where we are now - not where we were, or are terrified we might end up when the numbers over the last month - despite reopening - don't indicate any massive surge at all.
Really? Do you want to throw in 5G as well? Maybe Trump? Brexit? :rolleyes:/QUOTE] Rolls eyes? That doesn't impress anyone. It was your statement. Own it. It is blank cheque that can justify anything. Here's a radical concept.. it's possible to be for one thing that the "other" side might support, but against another. Y'know, individual thought and decision-making. Not when it comes to public health. same as it was for smoking in plublic places. Same as it was for drink driving. If you want to take health risks with your own body you can. But when it comes to the safety of others, that's no longer the case.
Here's a radical concept.. it's possible to be for one thing that the "other" side might support, but against another. Y'know, individual thought and decision-making.
_Kaiser_ wrote: » Did I claim that it had? Or did I say that it's at minimal levels thanks to the efforts of people - almost entirely without masks incidentally! - and as such masks NOW are not a proportional response. It would be great if people could read full posts before hitting reply.
Graham wrote: » Does someone need to explain exponential growth?
odyssey06 wrote: » We didn't have the masks. We didn't have the information we have now on their effects on case reductions. It's not just in Ireland so that argument is redundant. Masks being rolled out across Europe. Asia. To prevent a re-surge.
Rolls eyes? That doesn't impress anyone. It was your statement. Own it. It is blank cheque that can justify anything.
Not when it comes to public health. same as it was for smoking in plublic places. Same as it was for drink driving. If you want to take health risks with your own body you can. But when it comes to the safety of others, that's no longer the case.
_Kaiser_ wrote: » What exponential growth? The country has (mostly) been reopened a month now and the numbers every day continue to be minimal
Graham wrote: » On March 22nd we had around 900 cases. Here's what it looked like in the weeks that followed. 906 2,615 4,994 9,648 15,244 19,255 I can't honestly believe there are people arguing for us to do a Florida on it.
_Kaiser_ wrote: » No need, because I am not at any significant risk to need to do anything beyond good hygiene and social distancing - and as I don't generally hug random people in supermarkets, or get so close to them that even in normal circumstances it'd be odd, that level of risk is virtually zero. And as I've said before, life IS risk. Virtually everything we do carries some chance that something may go wrong. But we don't generally worst-case preparations before we engage in those things. If we did we probably would never leave the house at all.
