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.
Graham wrote: » Interesting to see the UK PM has just announced face masks are to be made mandatory in more settings.
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.
GT89 wrote: » Why what use is that?
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.
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?
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.
Away With The Fairies wrote: » What's happening in the north of England at the moment?
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.
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.
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).
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=861299427https://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 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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
