Masks

Kendrick Jolly Ibex wrote:

There is no co-relation btw wearing face masks and a reduction in the number of cases which is the whole argument behind wearing face masks.

It's spelled correlation. At least learn how to write it if you want to sound smart. Else use a spellchecker.

And you're wrong, of course, as always. There's a strong correlation:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342198360_Association_of_country-wide_coronavirus_mortality_with_demographics_testing_lockdowns_and_public_wearing_of_masks_Update_June_15_2020

Results show a near perfect correlation between early universal masking and successful suppression of daily case growth rates and/or reduction from peak daily case growth rates, as predicted by our theoretical simulations.
Taken in tandem, our theoretical models and empirical results argue for urgent implementation of universal masking in regions that have not yet adopted it as policy or as a broad cultural norm. As governments plan how to exit societal lockdowns, universal masking is emerging as one of the key NPIs (non-pharmaceutical interventions) for containing or slowing the spread of the pandemic. Combined with other NPIs including social distancing and mass contact tracing, a “mouth-and-nose lockdown” is far more sustainable than a “full body lockdown”, from economic, social, and mental health standpoints.

Kendrick Jolly Ibex wrote: »

Hold my bucket while I vomit. Look at the virtue signalling out of you and 5 likes to show for it. I bet you feel good about yourself showing the internet how compliant you are. What are we turning into indoctrinating kids with this stuff.

There you go mate, do we need to hold your hair as well??

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

What is the big objection to wearing a mask? I am not being smart, I honestly do not understand why it is a thing.

You forget you are wearing it after a few minutes, it's not painful, why is this such a big deal?

I could think of a few reasons.

One of the pettier points against mandatory masks is that they only made them mandatory for bullsh1t reasons. 'Because everyone else is doing it. Wouldnt want to attract attention that way'. Or maybe because 'better play it super safe', or maybe 'because we hear some noise on media the people want them'.
I honestly don't know what the real reason was but if it was COVID itself its yet another dramatic overreaction.

- Because masks are only being worn by any significant number of people for about two weeks. We made it from the beginning of the outbreak in March down to our low numbers of July without them. And while that was partly in lockdown, in supermarkets and later in shops we weren't locking down. That was the one place where we all still met and where thousands of supermarket workers hung around amidst us all. Virtually no supermarket staff infected, no outbreaks, nothing. All without masks.

So now we're down to those small numbers through months of uncertainty and now we make masks mandatory. In shops and supermarkets. :eek:

There are actually two pieces of proof here. a) Masks in shops and supermarkets will have no tangible effect on the outbreak. They are a dramatic overreaction. b) Our government and health advice can be full of sh1t when it suits them.

* And strangely enough cases seem on the increase since the introduction of masks. But of course the counterargument will be that we'd see even more cases without them. Which brings me to the second point.


- The main mask argument is 'that it makes sense'. Sure if we emit droplets and droplets cause infection and masks will significantly reduce droplets than it has to be safer with masks than without them. Rock solid logic. Completely leaving aside the fact that we don't know whether it was unsafe in the first place. Oh hold on, we do know actually, we already know that supermarkets and shops were safe.
So maybe we should wear life vests in supermarkets too. Just in case a sudden tsunami comes rolling in. Can't be safe enough...


- Lastly masks are part of the restrictions and restrictions are a bad thing. They are curtailing our freedoms and exerting control over us - our freedom is one of the most precious things we have. Therefore any restriction must be the absolutely minimal restriction possible. It must be appropriate and proportionate and must require solid justification and stand up to scrutiny. There must be no restriction because it might get us up in the polls a bit or because 'sure everyone else is doing it'. The entire lockdown and the opening up is riddled with examples that would not stand up to any scrutiny and masks are just the most recent one.

Risteard81 wrote: »

Completely idiotic question by you.

No it isn't. It's a genuine question.

Risteard81 wrote: »

Did it ever dawn on you that both the illegal lockdown policy and enforced mask wearing are wrong and immoral policies?

It is wrong and immoral to make you wear underwear in public?

Kendrick Jolly Ibex wrote: »

That’s not evidence and we can see around us that more people are wearing masks and cases are increasing. Likewise with countries that made masks mandatory we can see and increases in cases. You can scroll the internet for studies from (American) websites that show that on a Tuesday at 2pm there was a reduction in cases because 4 extra people wore a mask that day but look around you. Masks do not equal reduced cases, that is the reality.

If you’ve invested so much in trying to argue how great masks are go ahead and see one if it makes you feel better but that’s all it will do.

Lag time!!!!!!!!!
Just because you see someone wearing a mask doesn’t mean cases will drop that day!!
Ffs there’s an incubation period to take into account let alone asymptotic cases.
Cases are going up because SD has significantly reduced and the economy is re opening and because certain people refuse to use masks.

tom1ie wrote: »

Lag time!!!!!!!!!
Just because you see someone wearing a mask today doesn’t mean cases will drop that day!!
Ffs there’s an incubation period to take into account let alone asymptotic cases.
Cases are going up because SD has significantly reduced and the economy is re opening and because certain people refuse to use masks.

Wasting your breath buddy. It's like talking to the pile of bricks here. At least it looks like just a small pile. Hopefully majority of people keep using common sense and simple logic.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Lag time doesn't hold up... the economy has been reopening for the last 6 weeks or so. The numbers only started to increase a week-ish ago. Incubation time is what, 14 days max. Masks in place about the same time.

Cases are going up because we have finally gotten testing to where it should have been in March/April. But even at that it's still not necessarily a problem. What matters is the ICU numbers and the recovery numbers (never spoken of) - not an ever increasing total from day 1. And even at that, there's been no deaths in a week.

The big problem here is that some can't see that as the good thing it is - instead so driven by the fear and what if/whataboutery and reports from the other side of the planet that they have lost all perspective locally.

I understand what your saying but how that doesn’t stand up to what’s happening in the USA Brazil etc.
The virus was let get out of hand there and hospitals and icu’s are swamped.
It stands to reason if more cases develop in Ireland a small percentage will end up in hospital.
Of that small percentage a small percentage will end up in icu.
Of that small percentage (I could be wrong on this but I believe Ireland has a recovery rate in icu of approx 60%) 40% will die.
Therefore the more cases we have the more those small percentages will rise.
In Ireland we have a pinch point that is proper icu capacity, so there is more potential for our icu’s to get swamped sooner as we have lower capacity.
That’s why people are concerned about daily cases going up.