Masks

MadYaker · 31-07-2020 12:17PM

Yes: surgical

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Make up or no make up a lot of people take them off as soon as they sit down, I think most people are astute enough to know that if we didn't have to wear them in March, April and May why do we need them now but are just going along with it rather than be called a 'granny killer'!

That’s not being astute, that’s totally misunderstanding the situation. You’re not the only one.

robinph · 31-07-2020 12:20PM

No: I don't care enough

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

See most of the crowd in the front rows at the snooker are not wearing masks, but there seems to be social distancing between the seats. I wonder what the protocol would be at something like that. Maybe people would be expected to wear them on the way in and out?

Think they are about to be booted out by Boris Johnson in his current press conference and cancelling the pilot of sporting events with spectators.

Graham · 31-07-2020 12:32PM

Interesting to see the UK PM has just announced face masks are to be made mandatory in more settings.

Seanergy · 31-07-2020 12:34PM

Yes: valved

That mention of airborne has been removed from source.

Airborne as a mode of transmission could have been made public back in the middle of March. We got the toned down version of cough and sneeze.

caveat emptor wrote: »

Just found this report from week 12 2020. Week starting 16th of march.

HSE say transmission is airborne but masks not effective. ? huh. WTF.
this shows airborne outbreaks in hospitals

may explain some of the HCW transmission

shows what's reported publicly is not necessarily accurate

https://www.hpsc.ie/notifiablediseases/weeklyoutbreakreport/2020Wk12_Weekly_Outbreak_Report_WEB.pdf

Also everyone on here arguing that it is not airborne and to follow guidelines.

robinph · 31-07-2020 12:36PM

No: I don't care enough

Graham wrote: »

Interesting to see the UK PM has just announced face masks are to be made mandatory in more settings.

Was surprised to hear that it wasn't already required in the likes of museums and cinemas.

GT89 · 31-07-2020 12:39PM

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Paddygreen wrote: »

With the terrifying situation developing in the north of England atm I urge everyone to step it up, think of the vulnerable, and start wearing goggles/ visors and gloves along with their masks.

Why what use is that? Thought the idea of masks was to stop someone asymptomatic spreading it how do gloves and googles stop asymptomatic spread?

boggerman1 · 31-07-2020 12:42PM

Paddygreen wrote: »

With the terrifying situation developing in the north of England atm I urge everyone to step it up, think of the vulnerable, and start wearing goggles/ visors and gloves along with their masks.

Why stop at that .what about the virus getting in through your ears.ear muffs and full hazmat suit for venturing outdoors

joeguevara · 31-07-2020 12:43PM

GT89 wrote: »

Why what use is that?

They are pulling the pi55

Graham · 31-07-2020 12:53PM

I guess the UK are seeing the numbers increasing and are now realising additional precautions like more widespread use of masks are necessary.

You only have to look at restrictions being increased in the North of England to understand why.

Away With The Fairies · 31-07-2020 12:54PM

Yes: valved

Paddygreen wrote: »

With the terrifying situation developing in the north of England atm I urge everyone to step it up, think of the vulnerable, and start wearing goggles/ visors and gloves along with their masks.

What's happening in the north of England at the moment?

froog · 31-07-2020 12:56PM

Yes: surgical

CalamariFritti wrote: »

To all the folks who are so dead sure about their mask conclusion and how it's 'not rocket science' etc. The same was said with the same conviction about smear/surface transmission and how we're all killing grannies by wanting to go to the beach or driving beyond 2km in April.

I'm not anti mask but I'm taking the current public craze for them with a pinch of salt.especially with all the to-ing and fro-ing on them and the still divided expert opinion. Not to mention the non existing spread in shops & supermarkets throughout the height of our community transmission. Its hard to see how their advocates can be so 100% sure and almost ready to burn non-maskers at the stake in the light of that.

Masks may well be a factor in certain scenarios but just because the herd opinion says so right now doesn't make them the must-have silver bullet.

No one ever said they were a silver bullet. It catches some of your spit. Some of your spit that has the virus in it. That's it. Genuinely curious what bit of that people don't understand or believe.

odyssey06 · 31-07-2020 01:13PM

GT89 wrote: »

Why what use is that? Thought the idea of masks was to stop someone asymptomatic spreading it how do gloves and googles stop asymptomatic spread?

Goggles are about protecting one of the mucous membranes through which you can be infected. I don't think they have any role in preventing asymptomatic spreading:
https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=861299427
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dr-fauci-recommends-wearing-goggles-to-prevent-catching-the-coronavirus-2020-07-29

I don't think you shed this virus through sweat etc so don't see how gloves protect you or protect asymptomatic spreading directly.
Some people wear gloves as it's easier to blitz their hands with strong hand sanitiser then.

odyssey06 · 31-07-2020 01:15PM

froog wrote: »

No one ever said they were a silver bullet. It catches some of your spit. Some of your spit that has the virus in it. That's it. Genuinely curious what bit of that people don't understand or believe.

Exactly.
Masks aren't going to get case count or R value down to zero.
But if they get the R value down by a couple of decimal points that can help with keeping it below the all important 1.
There is no one silver bullet here. We're just chucking lots of different weapons at this virus in different settings as 'suppressing fire'.

Graham · 31-07-2020 01:18PM

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

What's happening in the north of England at the moment?

Additional restrictions being put in place due to increasing number of infections.

Probably a good indicator of what's in store here if we get complacent.

Wearing a mask is one of the ways we can reduce the chances of that happening.

odyssey06 · 31-07-2020 01:22PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

To all the folks who are so dead sure about their mask conclusion and how it's 'not rocket science' etc. The same was said with the same conviction about smear/surface transmission and how we're all killing grannies by wanting to go to the beach or driving beyond 2km in April.
I'm not anti mask but I'm taking the current public craze for them with a pinch of salt.especially with all the to-ing and fro-ing on them and the still divided expert opinion. Not to mention the non existing spread in shops & supermarkets throughout the height of our community transmission. Its hard to see how their advocates can be so 100% sure and almost ready to burn non-maskers at the stake in the light of that.
opinion says so right now doesn't make them the must-have silver bullet.

Would you prefer they locked their advice in on 1st March and didn't update it in light of changing information?

Overheal · 31-07-2020 03:13PM

No: I don't care enough

robinph wrote: »

My local Costco has had the staff fully masked up since before the lockdown in March and was restricting entry numbers from that point as well. They have required people to be wearing masks since before the mask rules came in as well, think the only time I was in there without a mask was during the toilet roll shortage phase.

The number of people they let in at once has increased a bit recently, but it's by far the quickest and safest shopping experience around here.

If I lived nearer to the one a city or two over I’d still be a member. It’s just not worth the drive when I don’t have a huge pantry or chest freezer to keep up with 8 lbs of coffee grounds etc.

Overheal · 31-07-2020 03:17PM

No: I don't care enough

fr336 wrote: »

I've noticed with people the only thing that scares them is the weather - killer virus, ah worth the risk, bit of rain? Ooh can't get my hair wet (I say this for both men and women).

Don’t take unnecessary journeys!

Overheal · 31-07-2020 03:23PM

No: I don't care enough

odyssey06 wrote: »

Goggles are about protecting one of the mucous membranes through which you can be infected. I don't think they have any role in preventing asymptomatic spreading:
https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=861299427
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dr-fauci-recommends-wearing-goggles-to-prevent-catching-the-coronavirus-2020-07-29

I don't think you shed this virus through sweat etc so don't see how gloves protect you or protect asymptomatic spreading directly.
Some people wear gloves as it's easier to blitz their hands with strong hand sanitiser then.

My mother says she’s been wearing the goggles. But she also has to encounter home care nurses in her office. They for months have been the “fake news” types, they don’t wear proper PPE, go into patient homes, some who are positively being treated for Covid, and they return to the offices to jaunt around..

Apparently up until last week, when the policy was changed, they’d schedule visits to Covid patients any old time of day and then go visit other non-Covid patients. Now they’ve finally realized hey, maybe we should schedule Covid patients at the back end of the day so care workers can go home, shower etc. at least before mingling with others. Geez. And these people look at my mother with the likes as if she had two heads for insisting they mask up when they’re in the offices. Must be maddening.

Loafing Oaf · 31-07-2020 03:25PM

No: I don't care enough

GT89 wrote: »

Why what use is that? Thought the idea of masks was to stop someone asymptomatic spreading it how do gloves and googles stop asymptomatic spread?

odyssey06 wrote: »

G

I don't think you shed this virus through sweat etc so don't see how gloves protect you or protect asymptomatic spreading directly.

paddygreen is a sppof account, he's not making serious proposals to combat the virus

robinph · 31-07-2020 03:40PM

No: I don't care enough

Overheal wrote: »

My mother says she’s been wearing the goggles. But she also has to encounter home care nurses in her office. They for months have been the “fake news” types, they don’t wear proper PPE, go into patient homes, some who are positively being treated for Covid, and they return to the offices to jaunt around..

Apparently up until last week, when the policy was changed, they’d schedule visits to Covid patients any old time of day and then go visit other non-Covid patients. Now they’ve finally realized hey, maybe we should schedule Covid patients at the back end of the day so care workers can go home, shower etc. at least before mingling with others. Geez. And these people look at my mother with the likes as if she had two heads for insisting they mask up when they’re in the offices. Must be maddening.

Yet my kids primary school who were looking after key worker kids through the initial lockdown period were able to figure out right from the start to do things like all the staff covering those children being on a two week rotation so that if there was a case amongst the kids (whose parents were potentially working in hospitals) or the staff they could contain things more easily and limit the spread to anyone else.

These are not tricky things to figure out.

bodhrandude · 31-07-2020 03:45PM

Yes: surgical

Paddygreen wrote: »

With the terrifying situation developing in the north of England atm I urge everyone to step it up, think of the vulnerable, and start wearing goggles/ visors and gloves along with their masks.

You might as well get the Jude Law bubble suit then.

Tork · 31-07-2020 04:04PM

Yes: to protect others

Paddygreen is some sort of spoof account. Don't mind him.

timetogo1 · 31-07-2020 08:24PM

No: I don't care enough

Nice twitter thread (not just the first post) countering most of the arguments seen on this thread. Obviously the same arguments will be repeated ad nauseum but if only one person reads it and finally have it click in their brain it'll be worth it.

https://twitter.com/RussInCheshire/status/1289197070373416960?s=19

Loafing Oaf · 31-07-2020 08:53PM

No: I don't care enough

timetogo1 wrote: »

Nice twitter thread (not just the first post) countering most of the arguments seen on this thread. Obviously the same arguments will be repeated ad nauseum but if only one person reads it and finally have it click in their brain it'll be worth it.

https://twitter.com/RussInCheshire/status/1289197070373416960?s=19

"A mask is an infringement of my liberty"

You also aren't at liberty to visit a primary school with your willy out.

xhomelezz · 31-07-2020 09:17PM

Yes: valved

In case somebody still didn't get the message:D Amazing we still running Masks thread at this stage. By now there shouldn't be too many questions left. But thickness is prevailing in some.

Paddygreen · 01-08-2020 09:07AM

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

We need a solution revolution guys. Masks are great and I love them but we can’t stop there. Eyeballs are vulnerable incubation points for CV, warm, moist, a perfect spot for a very frightening virus to land and set up shop. Visors don’t cut it, too much space around the visor for the virus to get in, a bit like building a chocolate fence around a five year old, they give people a false sense of security. Goggles guys, we need goggles, goggles beat visors hands down. The terrifying virus can also hitchhike on people’s cloths, high time people started wearing disposable overalls.

timetogo1 · 01-08-2020 09:16AM

No: I don't care enough

Paddygreen, what's the goal of your posts?
Are you being funny (or making an attempt) or do you believe what you post?

Paddygreen · 01-08-2020 09:19AM

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

timetogo1 wrote: »

Paddygreen, what's the goal of your posts?
Are you being funny (or making an attempt) or do you believe what you post?

With every fiber of my being. The war on Coronavirus needs warriors.

moonage · 01-08-2020 09:57AM

froog wrote: »

No one ever said they were a silver bullet. It catches some of your spit. Some of your spit that has the virus in it. That's it. Genuinely curious what bit of that people don't understand or believe.

The problem is that if a mask catches large droplets containing virus, it will quickly dry out on the inside of the mask in seconds or minutes, will turn into dust particles which will then be expelled from the sides of the masks into the environment as the mask wearer breathes in and out. The dust particles contain the virus and might be inhaled by people.

The science is weak on whether they have any effect at all. Therefore they shouldn't be mandatory.

But even if they did stop the spread of the virus a tiny bit, is that necessarily a good thing? The policy of supression and elimination is futile. The virus is going to stay with us and we have to live with it and get on with our lives.

Ficheall · 01-08-2020 10:01AM

Yes: surgical

moonage wrote: »

The problem is that if a mask catches large droplets containing virus, it will quickly dry out on the inside of the mask in seconds or minutes, will turn into dust particles which will then be expelled from the sides of the masks into the environment as the mask wearer breathes in and out. The dust particles contain the virus and might be inhaled by people.

The science is weak on whether they have any effect at all. Therefore they shouldn't be mandatory.

But even if they did stop the spread of the virus a tiny bit, is that necessarily a good thing? The policy of supression and elimination is futile. The virus is going to stay with us and we have to live with it and get on with our lives.

I was going to ask for a reliable source for your first paragraph, but once I got to your third paragraph I realised there was zero point.

Masks

Comments