To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Sconsey · 11-09-2020 10:30am

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

But but but - The advice changed and studies proved and reduced viral load ....

Not one person ever heard of viral load until masks became mandatory

Well let's see, the Wikipedia page on viral load was first edited in 2011 masks became mandatory in July/August 2020. You are wrong, someone must have heard of it to create the page, and that is just Wiki, it has been around long before that.

It’s a farce the studies can be made to show whatever results you want them to show.

Not proper peer reviewed studies, there is a science in measuring the validity of studies, can't rememeber what it is called but studies can be rated on how objective/accurate/valid they are.

If there was a shortage of masks in the morning for frontline staff you would never hear about viral load again.

Pure conjecture on your part.

You can’t be a bit pregnant.
Somehow a mask makes you get a smaller infection of COVID-19?

You can have various levels of reaction, it looks like a lot of people having bad reactions have been exposed to large viral loads. A viral infection is not the same as pregnancy, stupid comparison.

You either get covid or you don’t

The first right thing you have said.

But it’s to stop you spreading it to others -
That’s like the current advice from NPHET
Assume everyone you meet has the virus assume you have the virus.

Did you ever hear such rubbish.

Unbelievable stuff that’s being rammed into people’s heads.

To be honest your post seems to be the source of the rubbish.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 10:32am

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

Of course you're either pregnant or you're not. However the analogy with viral load is incorrect. You most certainly can have degrees of viral load, as evidence in nursing homes and among healthcare workers has shown.

Yeah true but you either get covid or you don’t.
If you get it wearing a mask or without one it’s still Covid your going to get.

robinph · 11-09-2020 10:35am

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm in 20 to 30 homes per week. I can assure you that Dublin is fecked if we don't change our attitude. The mask debate is pointless compared to how people are behaving when at home. Doomed I says

Don't you mean how people behave when someone from outside enters their home?

Whilst that is important for both you and them that they comply with what you want when you are there to do a job for them, it's more about what they do when people visit socially than someone coming round to service their shower which will determine the spread.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 10:45am

Sconsey wrote: »

Well let's see, the Wikipedia page on viral load was first edited in 2011 masks became mandatory in July/August 2020. You are wrong, someone must have heard of it to create the page, and that is just Wiki, it has been around long before that.

Not proper peer reviewed studies, there is a science in measuring the validity of studies, can't rememeber what it is called but studies can be rated on how objective/accurate/valid they are.

Pure conjecture on your part.

You can have various levels of reaction, it looks like a lot of people having bad reactions have been exposed to large viral loads. A viral infection is not the same as pregnancy, stupid comparison.

The first right thing you have said.

To be honest your post seems to be the source of the rubbish.

Wikipedia must be right apologies.

Tests can be controlled in a controlled environment. Real world situations are uncontrolled

Pro mask will say masks weren’t encouraged March April May due to supply issues.
If those issues returned masks wouldn’t be mandatory

Who’s quantifying these large viral loads your on about?

They’re barely able to get a test result in 48hrs ....

Again you either get covid or you don’t. You can’t say 1 person had 90% infection and another only 30%.
It’s still covid 19 infection.

People in this country have lost the plot with this.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 10:50am

Graham wrote: »

It's as if you study something and learn more about it.

That actually sounds rather sensible now I think about it.

WHO now saying lockdown is/was wrong approach.

Surprise surprise.

This the same group that changed their minds regarding masks.... four months into a so called “pandemic”

Graham · 11-09-2020 10:59am

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

This the same group that changed their minds regarding masks.... four months into a so called “pandemic”

See previous post about learning.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 11:03am

Graham wrote: »

See previous post about learning.

WHO....

Experts making it up as they go along. This is new word for learning.

Remember this organisation has dealt with previous viral outbreaks worldwide.

Obviously didn’t LEARN much

Sconsey · 11-09-2020 11:08am

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Wikipedia must be right apologies.

Tests can be controlled in a controlled environment. Real world situations are uncontrolled

Pro mask will say masks weren’t encouraged March April May due to supply issues.
If those issues returned masks wouldn’t be mandatory

Who’s quantifying these large viral loads your on about?

They’re barely able to get a test result in 48hrs ....

Again you either get covid or you don’t. You can’t say 1 person had 90% infection and another only 30%.
It’s still covid 19 infection.

People in this country have lost the plot with this.

If you bothered to do even the smalles bit of checking...first two results from google lead to a HIQUA report investigating studies on viral loads, and a study published in the Lancet measuring viral loads and their impact on disease severity.
HIQUA report concludes:
There may be an association between higher viral load, detection of viral RNA in blood, longer duration of virus detection and outcomes such as disease severity; however, these relationships were not consistent throughout the literature. More research is required to establish the duration of infectivity of COVID-19, which is key to informing public health policy in managing the pandemic.

Meanwhile you are still questioning if viral loads exist and who is measuring them. You are not very well informed, you are just speculating wildly. You're still going on about Covid infection being an absolute without giving any consideration to disease severity.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 11:23am

Sconsey wrote: »

If you bothered to do even the smalles bit of checking...first two results from google lead to a HIQUA report investigating studies on viral loads, and a study published in the Lancet measuring viral loads and their impact on disease severity.
HIQUA report concludes:
There may be an association between higher viral load, detection of viral RNA in blood, longer duration of virus detection and outcomes such as disease severity; however, these relationships were not consistent throughout the literature. More research is required to establish the duration of infectivity of COVID-19, which is key to informing public health policy in managing the pandemic.

Meanwhile you are still questioning if viral loads exist and who is measuring them. You are not very well informed, you are just speculating wildly. You're still going on about Covid infection being an absolute without giving any consideration to disease severity.

Did you read that at all what you posted.

There may be...
Were not consistent....
More research is required....

If you wore two masks would that reduce the severity by a further 50%

Lad it doesn’t matter about viral load etc.

The fact of the matter is if you get covid you have covid.

Cmo is not going to start reporting today we have x amount of 30% covid as these people wore a mask which may or may not have reduced a viral load which may or may not be proven to have an impact on the outcome of the infection.

Seanergy · 11-09-2020 11:23am

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Pro mask will say masks weren’t encouraged March April May due to supply issues.

If those issues returned masks wouldn’t be mandatory.

People in this country have lost the plot with this.

If the issues(poor HSE mask policy) returned why would face coverings no longer be mandatory?

BTW supply wasn't an issue in May, Leo and Holohan were dragging their heals on masks/face coverings in May and come to think of it gov were still dragging their heals in June and July.

odyssey06 · 11-09-2020 11:25am

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Yeah true but you either get covid or you don’t.
If you get it wearing a mask or without one it’s still Covid your going to get.

Which person are you talking about though?
Infected or uninfected.

Masks on an infected person as a barrier reduce the droplets.
If the uninfected person doesn't inhale the droplets, no infection.
So they can make a difference between whether an uninfected person gets covid or not, fullstop.

They also reduce the viral load so in other cases can make the difference between a severe and mild infection.
The latter statement does not invalidate the first statement.

Viral load is an established medical concept in other diseases such as influenza.
We can't conduct controlled trials ethically on subjects exposed to coronavirus so we are relying on other viruses as a guide.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 11:27am

Seanergy wrote: »

If the issues(poor HSE mask policy) returned why would face coverings no longer be mandatory?

BTW supply wasn't an issue in May, Leo and Holohan were dragging their heals on masks/face coverings in May and come to think of it gov were still dragging their heals in June and July.

Would be no longer mandatory for public as frontline workers would take priority and rightly so.

We were told that the use of masks was inconclusive.

It still is but we just made it mandatory anyways.

Graham · 11-09-2020 11:38am

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

We were told that the use of masks was inconclusive.

It still is but we just made it mandatory anyways.

That's an interesting unqualified guess.

Fortunately for all of us, it's not your call which is a relief. It does bring home why the mandatory aspect is necessary.

Mrs OBumble · 11-09-2020 11:41am

John O.Groats wrote: »

Really? I think the opposite will be the case. Mask wearing is beginning to become ingrained into society and as time goes on it will become more and more unacceptable not to be wearing one in public. The new normal you might say.

Wait til the muggings increase, as scummers realise that disguising your identity is now normal.

As masks came in, shops stopped enforcing occupancy limits. People stopped distancing. Almost no one (including me) uses a fresh mask every time or sanitises their hands after every mask-touch. Men are wearing them over beards.

Ya, masks are makings things soooo much better alright.

gozunda · 11-09-2020 11:42am

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Would be no longer mandatory for public as frontline workers would take priority and rightly so.

We were told that the use of masks was inconclusive.

It still is but we just made it mandatory anyways.

So you are saying masks work for frontline staff - but nobody one else. Really - how that work?

Ireland now has a decent stockpile of PPE for frontline staff.

So yup your argument is rubbish.

Current research shows that masks / face coverings do indeed help reduce transmission.

And you're only tieing yourself up in knots now

It's simple: Wear your mask.

https://news.llu.edu/health-wellness/infectious-disease-physician-breaks-down-coronavirus-mask-myths

gozunda · 11-09-2020 11:49am

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Wait til the muggings increase, as scummers realise that disguising your identity is now normal.
As masks came in, shops stopped enforcing occupancy limits. People stopped distancing. Almost no one (including me) uses a fresh mask every time or sanitises their hands after every mask-touch. Men are wearing them over beards. Ya, masks are makings things soooo much better alright.

True. There will always be eejits and 'scummers' ..

However that doesn't mean that those wearing a mask correctly don't benefit from doing so.

Even if 80% of the population does it properly - then that's a win.

“What you want is 100 percent of people to wear masks, but you’ll settle for 80 percent,” ... In one simulation, researchers predicted that 80 percent of the population wearing masks would do more to reduce COVID-19 spread than a strict lockdown.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

odyssey06 · 11-09-2020 11:51am

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Wait til the muggings increase, as scummers realise that disguising your identity is now normal.

As masks came in, shops stopped enforcing occupancy limits. People stopped distancing. Almost no one (including me) uses a fresh mask every time or sanitises their hands after every mask-touch. Men are wearing them over beards.

Ya, masks are makings things soooo much better alright.

That's not my experience in Dublin supermarkets re: occupancy limits and distancing.

The most likely source of contamination on the mask is from the wearer themselves.
Advice on use of masks as PPE to protect an uninfected person caring for an infected person is different to the essentials of masks as a barrier to contain the droplets from an infected person.
The most likely source of contamination on the mask in such circumstances is from the infected person not the carer.
The standard of mask and their use as PPE is much higher.

You can sanitise your hands after touching your mask when you're done shopping.
You don't get infected just by touching something, you can then have to transfer the virus to a mucous membrane in your mouth or nose.
Touching the outside of your mask won't do that.

You can't sanitise your lungs if you have inhaled droplets.
This is a respiratory virus. Fomite \ contact \ touching transmission can occur but masks are about protecting against the main threat - inhaled droplets in the air.

Graham · 11-09-2020 11:53am

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

As masks came in, shops stopped enforcing occupancy limits. People stopped distancing. Almost no one (including me) uses a fresh mask every time or sanitises their hands after every mask-touch. Men are wearing them over beards.

Ya, masks are makings things soooo much better alright.

So wash your hands, change your mask and keep your distance.

No point whining they're not making things better if you're not doing it.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 12:01pm

Graham wrote: »

That's an interesting unqualified guess.

Fortunately for all of us, it's not your call which is a relief. It does bring home why the mandatory aspect is necessary.

Same as your guess on the other side.

Keep your faith in those making all the decisions. After all them decisions they’re making make so much sense. :pac::rolleyes:

Some of these experts decisions wouldn’t even make an episode of FatherTed

Sconsey · 11-09-2020 12:02pm

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Did you read that at all what you posted.

There may be...
Were not consistent....
More research is required....

If you wore two masks would that reduce the severity by a further 50%

Lad it doesn’t matter about viral load etc.

The fact of the matter is if you get covid you have covid.

Cmo is not going to start reporting today we have x amount of 30% covid as these people wore a mask which may or may not have reduced a viral load which may or may not be proven to have an impact on the outcome of the infection.

Yes I did read it, thats why I posted it. I was very careful to post the full quote and not just pick and choose pieces as you are doing. They found that there may be a link between viral loads ans disease severity, and more research is required.
Meanwhile you started by saying viral load is a made-up concept (wrong), then you jump to speculating if anyone is measuring viral load (they are), to now concluding it doesn't matter (even though the report clearly says it may matter). What makes you a more reliable source than the HIQUA report? Have you contacted them to enlighten them?

Just because you keep repeating your mantra does not make it right. Do you accept that some people react with different levels of severity to the disease?

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 12:05pm

gozunda wrote: »

So you are saying masks work for frontline staff - but nobody one else. Really - how that work?

Ireland now has a decent stockpile of PPE for frontline staff.

So yup your argument is rubbish.

Current research shows that masks / face coverings do indeed help reduce transmission.

And you're only tieing yourself up in knots now

It's simple: Wear your mask.

https://news.llu.edu/health-wellness/infectious-disease-physician-breaks-down-coronavirus-mask-myths

Very simple really

Maybe perhaps hospitals are where maximum exposure is/was

Maximum exposure is not running in to a shop for two minutes to pay for fuel etc.

I thought you may have understood this by now.

Graham · 11-09-2020 12:10pm

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Maybe perhaps hospitals are where maximum exposure is/was

Would I be correct to assume you don't see the logic to preventing transmission in the community where it's actually happening

Richard Hillman · 11-09-2020 12:11pm

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

You can also keep the mask on if you're going in and out of shops. You should try it, it doesn't hurt.

I was finding it very irritable. I have a very sensitive nose, it's gets very itchy.

I also have asthma. Strolling around a shop is OK but walking at a pace with a mask on his very constrictive

robinph wrote: »

You want to actually catch the flu? Why is that?

And then if you do happen to catch it you actively want to continue spreading it to others?

Are you going to wear a mask every winter for the rest of your life?

Sconsey · 11-09-2020 12:11pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Wait til the muggings increase, as scummers realise that disguising your identity is now normal.

They have been mandatory for weeks now, do you think the scumbags have yet to realise? no sign of the tsunami of muggings yet.

As masks came in, shops stopped enforcing occupancy limits. People stopped distancing. Almost no one (including me) uses a fresh mask every time or sanitises their hands after every mask-touch. Men are wearing them over beards.

My local is still enforcing occupancy limits. What people stopped distancing? Thats a hell of a sweeping generalisation you are making there.

Ya, masks are makings things soooo much better alright.

I don't really know if they are helping or not, I suspect they are. How do you know they are not helping when all you have are generalisations based on what you percieve to be happeing?

odyssey06 · 11-09-2020 12:12pm

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I was finding it very irritable. I have a very sensitive nose, it's gets very itchy.
I also have asthma. Strolling around a shop is OK but walking at a pace with a mask on his very constrictive

Have you tried the blue surgical masks?
I found some of the other face coverings were itchy but not those ones.

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 12:12pm

Sconsey wrote: »

Yes I did read it, thats why I posted it. I was very careful to post the full quote and not just pick and choose pieces as you are doing. They found that there may be a link between viral loads ans disease severity, and more research is required.
Meanwhile you started by saying viral load is a made-up concept (wrong), then you jump to speculating if anyone is measuring viral load (they are), to now concluding it doesn't matter (even though the report clearly says it may matter). What makes you a more reliable source than the HIQUA report? Have you contacted them to enlighten them?

Just because you keep repeating your mantra does not make it right. Do you accept that some people react with different levels of severity to the disease?

More research is also required to address the effectiveness of masks. Does a mask give people a false sense of security and lead to more transmission of this virus ??

You keep repeating your own mantra. And repeated again that there MAY be a link.
I never said viral loading was a made up concept. I said nobody ever heard of it until masks were made mandatory. It’s wasn’t ever mentioned.

Graham · 11-09-2020 12:14pm

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

I never said viral loading was a made up concept. I said nobody ever heard of it until masks were made mandatory. It’s wasn’t ever mentioned.

See previous post about learning...

Pitch n Putt · 11-09-2020 12:18pm

Graham wrote: »

Would I be correct to assume you don't see the logic to preventing transmission in the community where it's actually happening

Cmo states differently.

Private house gatherings been his latest source of transmission.

Cases are going to happen if you want to live along side this virus.

That’s Inevitable

Cases are just cases once hospital admission is stable there is no need for this over cautious restrictive approach.

It’s delaying the natural spread of the virus through society.

Leading to long drawn out economic destruction.

Richard Hillman · 11-09-2020 12:19pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

Have you tried the blue surgical masks?
I found some of the other face coverings were itchy but not those ones.

Those are the ones I have been using. I have a bit of nerve damage along my nose. Light brushing off my nose really makes it really itchy.

I have a pain in my hoop with them. And I'm definitely not wearing one for Winter Flu season.

Sconsey · 11-09-2020 12:21pm

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

More research is also required to address the effectiveness of masks. Does a mask give people a false sense of security and lead to more transmission of this virus ??

There is a pile of research out there that says mask reduce the risk of spreading the virus, that is proven not speculation. If future research sufficiently contradicts that then the guidance should change, but right now all you have is your own speculation.

You keep repeating your own mantra. And repeated again that there MAY be a link.
I never said viral loading was a made up concept. I said nobody ever heard of it until masks were made mandatory. It’s wasn’t ever mentioned.

Nobody ever heard of it implies it does not exist. So you are saying it can exist without anyone ever hearing of it

I think you are saying viral load is a made up excuse to enforce masks? If that is the case you need to do some research, that is only one of many reasons to wear a mask in certain situations.

To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Comments