To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Sconsey · 18-06-2021 3:41pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

You gotta be kidding. Did you actually read this?

Besides. Use your head. If their 'helping rate' was anywhere near that we would have had zero covid for months at this point.

Any actual study came out at 'so little its hard to quantify'.

You can print it in black and white:

Experimental and epidemiological data support community masking to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

But the anti-maskers will still refuse to believe, perfer their own form of armchair expertise, and live in their delusional bubble.

'Use your head' you say? Ignore the facts, ignore actual experts and instead listen to illinformed facebook-reading experts? yeah right.

Any actual study came out at 'so little its hard to quantify'???? Ehh no, there is a table at the end listing studies and quantified results. You are living in some kind of mental state that blinds to you the facts that are staring you in the face. You just came out with the exact opposite of the content that is posted...actual studies with quantified results.

gmisk · 18-06-2021 4:32pm

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/dad-detained-singapore-after-video-20845645

What a plonker

xhomelezz · 18-06-2021 5:01pm

gmisk wrote: »

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/dad-detained-singapore-after-video-20845645

What a plonker

Oh I didn't know, I had no idea, I don't believe ...

And now he plays a victim for media.

Seanergy · 18-06-2021 8:10pm

Within hours of the video being on social media, he was arrested.

Did anything beyond 'an investigation' happened for this anti-mask behaviour on the Luas last November?

https://twitter.com/soundmigration/status/1323308792193470464

CalamariFritti · 18-06-2021 10:56pm

Sconsey wrote: »

You can print it in black and white:

But the anti-maskers will still refuse to believe, perfer their own form of armchair expertise, and live in their delusional bubble.

'Use your head' you say? Ignore the facts, ignore actual experts and instead listen to illinformed facebook-reading experts? yeah right.

Any actual study came out at 'so little its hard to quantify'???? Ehh no, there is a table at the end listing studies and quantified results. You are living in some kind of mental state that blinds to you the facts that are staring you in the face. You just came out with the exact opposite of the content that is posted...actual studies with quantified results.

It reads like a clobbered together aggregation of 'clutching at straws'.

2 hair dressers over a 2 week period based on customers who agreed to be interviewed? Seriously?
When you read that kind of ****e in what is supposed be an aggregated case for masks from an official body (CDC) then you know they are desperate.

Funny no mention of the actual study in Denmark with a proper control group. No mention of comparisons of US states with and without mask mandate.

Also in that table. Factor 0.08. Reduction by 1.32%. And so on. Speaking of being blind to facts....

odyssey06 · 19-06-2021 9:03am

CalamariFritti wrote: »

It reads like a clobbered together aggregation of 'clutching at straws'.

2 hair dressers over a 2 week period based on customers who agreed to be interviewed? Seriously?
When you read that kind of ****e in what is supposed be an aggregated case for masks from an official body (CDC) then you know they are desperate.

Funny no mention of the actual study in Denmark with a proper control group. No mention of comparisons of US states with and without mask mandate.

Also in that table. Factor 0.08. Reduction by 1.32%. And so on. Speaking of being blind to facts....

The CDC comparison of US counties showed a reduction which tracked actual mask mandates in effect at county and city level. This is more accurate than state level as state level tracking does not account for bye laws and ordnances.
It is linked a few posts back.

The Danish study showed a small reduction in cases by the wearer and expressly stated it could not assess their use as barriers / indirect protection to others.
You are misrepresenting the Danish study by making claims for it the actual study expressly declared as not valid.

CalamariFritti · 19-06-2021 12:39pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

The CDC comparison of US counties showed a reduction which tracked actual mask mandates in effect at county and city level. This is more accurate than state level as state level tracking does not account for bye laws and ordnances.
It is linked a few posts back.

The Danish study showed a small reduction in cases by the wearer and expressly stated it could not assess their use as barriers / indirect protection to others.
You are misrepresenting the Danish study by making claims for it the actual study expressly declared as not valid.

So what do you say to my other points?

The fact that the link I was replying to is not much more than an officially stamped looking page with an impressive looking amount of entries that upon closer inspection state pathetic numbers?

I dare say the OP who posted the CDC link never went past looking at the source and the long impressive looking list but didnt quite get around to taking in the actual information.

Sconsey · 19-06-2021 2:08pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

It reads like a clobbered together aggregation of 'clutching at straws'.

Seems like you have not got a clue how scientific conclusions are achieved. You see when enough evidence all points in the same direction we can make conclusions. Sad attempts to discredit the method by calling the process 'cobbered together' only highlight your own ignorance.

hair dressers over a 2 week period based on customers who agreed to be interviewed? Seriously?
When you read that kind of ****e in what is supposed be an aggregated case for masks from an official body (CDC) then you know they are desperate.

The CDC are desperate for what exactly? Do you think there is a massive conspiracy headed by the CDC to fool people into wearing masks? Because that would suggest you are even more deluded than I first thought.
It's funny you focus on that one reference and manage to avoid all the other studies cited in the report.

Funny no mention of the actual study in Denmark with a proper control group. No mention of comparisons of US states with and without mask mandate.

See Odessy06's response. By your logic wouldn't the Danish study just be 'cobbered together'?
Again, funny you don't mention any of the studies in the report other than the 'hair dressers' one? Why is that?

Also in that table. Factor 0.08. Reduction by 1.32%. And so on. Speaking of being blind to facts....

Wayyyhayy you looked at another reference, here are some more... by the way I don't think you understand how significant a DAILY decline of 1.32% could be.

Masking reduced risk of infection by 70% (unadjusted OR 0.30, 95% CI = 0.17-0.52)
Masking reduced risk of secondary infection by 79% (adjusted OR 0.21, 95% CI = 0.06-0.79)
Always having used a mask reduced infection by 77% (adjusted OR 0.23, 95% CI = 0.096-0.60).
A 10% increase in mask wearing tripled the likelihood of stopping community transmission (adjusted OR 3.53, 95% CI = 2.03-6.43).
Estimated daily decline in new diagnoses among HCW of 0.49%
Estimated weekly 24%-46% decline in new diagnoses following mask mandates.
Nationally mandating face masks for employees early in the pandemic could have reduced the weekly growth rate of cases and deaths by more than 10 percentage points in late April and 19%- 47% fewer deaths nationally by the end of May.

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 2:38pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

You gotta be kidding. Did you actually read this?

Besides. Use your head. If their 'helping rate' was anywhere near that we would have had zero covid for months at this point.

Any actual study came out at 'so little its hard to quantify'.

Thejournal.ie is there for you

https://www.thejournal.ie/factcheck-masks-face-coverings-5390212-Jun2021/

Not that I like that news source and especially comments section, but article is good enough with links.

19-06-2021 3:38pm

A large majority of people want masks to continue to be mandatory even when most people have been vaccinated: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-times-poll-public-split-on-pace-of-lifting-covid-19-restrictions-1.4596630

I genuinely believe that masks are popular in Ireland. People appear to enjoy wearing them.

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 3:51pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A large majority of people want masks to continue to be mandatory even when most people have been vaccinated: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-times-poll-public-split-on-pace-of-lifting-covid-19-restrictions-1.4596630

I genuinely believe that masks are popular in Ireland. People appear to enjoy wearing them.

Well, there's no majority of population in Ireland fully vaccinated yet.

Your believe is your believe.

19-06-2021 3:52pm

xhomelezz wrote: »

Well, there's no majority of population in Ireland fully vaccinated yet.

Your believe is your believe.

The majority wants them to be mandatory even when most people have been vaccinated.

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 3:55pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The majority wants them to be mandatory even when most people have been vaccinated.

The most of people are not fully vaccinated yet. Anyone with half brain functioning will wait till we see full impact of vaccination.

19-06-2021 4:00pm

xhomelezz wrote: »

The most of people are not fully vaccinated yet. Anyone with half brain functioning will wait till we see full impact of vaccination.

So if there continues to be cases and deaths post-vaccination, which there will be because covid isn't going anywhere, do you believe masks should continue to be mandatory?

_Kaiser_ · 19-06-2021 4:04pm

Gortanna wrote: »

So if there continues to be cases and deaths post-vaccination, which there will be because covid isn't going anywhere, do you believe masks should continue to be mandatory?

Nope.. if someone wants to continue to wear a mask to protect them from something that statistically is little to no threat to them or those around them anyway (and even less so when they've been vaccinated), then work away I guess...

But the rest of us will get on with living and socialising like a normal person.

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 4:06pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So if there continues to be cases and deaths post-vaccination, which there will be because covid isn't going anywhere, do you believe masks should continue to be mandatory?

I'm just gonna wait and see. Don't really get what's your point.

19-06-2021 4:06pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Nope.. if someone wants to continue to wear a mask to protect them from something that statistically is little to no threat to them or those around them anyway (and even less so when they've been vaccinated), then work away I guess...

But the rest of us will get on with living and socialising like a normal person.

I agree, but the majority wants them to stay. And it's a large majority as well.

The rest of us won't be able to do much if they're still mandatory everywhere. That's the problem.

odyssey06 · 19-06-2021 4:08pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Nope.. if someone wants to continue to wear a mask to protect them from something that statistically is little to no threat to them or those around them anyway (and even less so when they've been vaccinated), then work away I guess...
But the rest of us will get on with living and socialising like a normal person.

Pretty obvious debating trick there with the 'normal person' angle and attempt at othering the people you disagree with.
People take precautions against risks all the time. It affects what products we can buy etc

Its entirely normal reaction to take precautions, especially those which arent costly to take and stil allow you to continue the activity.

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 4:10pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Nope.. if someone wants to continue to wear a mask to protect them from something that statistically is little to no threat to them or those around them anyway (and even less so when they've been vaccinated), then work away I guess...

But the rest of us will get on with living and socialising like a normal person.

The rest of us point is funny, isn't it.

Terry.. · 19-06-2021 4:14pm

Masks are fine for married people etc that dont need to be out circulating

Different story for singles and i'd say they don't want masks to continue

_Kaiser_ · 19-06-2021 4:18pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I agree, but the majority wants them to stay. And it's a large majority as well.

The rest of us won't be able to do much if they're still mandatory everywhere. That's the problem.

That reminds me. Did they formally sign the extension into law in the end?

Last I read it technically has expired

odyssey06 · 19-06-2021 4:20pm

Terry.. wrote: »

Masks are fine for married people etc that dont need to be out circulating
Different story for singles and i'd say they don't want masks to continue

I dunno... a whole new angle to blind dating!
* Sorry couldnt resist

The first mask mandate to come in was on public transport. I can see it continuing there for long time especially as capacity will need to come back to normal and people of all ages rely on it to access essential services.
Likely also to continue in healthcare settings.

_Kaiser_ · 19-06-2021 4:21pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

Pretty obvious debating trick there with the 'normal person' angle and attempt at othering the people you disagree with.
People take precautions against risks all the time. It affects what products we can buy etc

Its entirely normal reaction to take precautions, especially those which arent costly to take and stil allow you to continue the activity.

And why would we need to take precautions to engage in activities that we did without them before the whole covid thing?

Why would we need to protect against a virus that doesn't significantly affect the overwhelming majority of people anyway, and especially when we have vaccinated the vulnerable and indeed a large proportion of perfectly healthy younger people as well?

"just in case" isn't enough of a reason to continue with enforcing the current measures

19-06-2021 4:28pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

That reminds me. Did they formally sign the extension into law in the end?

Last I read it technically has expired

I've been wondering about that as well. I heard it had expired and that it hadn't been extended. But maybe it was extended.

Terry.. · 19-06-2021 4:29pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

I dunno... a whole new angle to blind dating!
* Sorry couldnt resist

The first mask mandate to come in was on public transport. I can see it continuing there for long time especially as capacity will need to come back to normal and people of all ages rely on it to access essential services.
Likely also to continue in healthcare settings.

Ya there's the pubs and nightclubs festivals etc

Dating is ****ked up with covid

Seanergy · 19-06-2021 4:34pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

That reminds me. Did they formally sign the extension into law in the end?

Last I read it technically has expired

Gortanna wrote: »

I've been wondering about that as well. I heard it had expired and that it hadn't been extended. But maybe it was extended.

Hear no BS, see no BS at play.

Where did you read it technically had expired?

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 4:37pm

Terry.. wrote: »

Masks are fine for married people etc that dont need to be out circulating

Different story for singles and i'd say they don't want masks to continue

Well , this is first post on the mask thread saying something like that.

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 4:43pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And why would we need to take precautions to engage in activities that we did without them before the whole covid thing?

Why would we need to protect against a virus that doesn't significantly affect the overwhelming majority of people anyway, and especially when we have vaccinated the vulnerable and indeed a large proportion of perfectly healthy younger people as well?

"just in case" isn't enough of a reason to continue with enforcing the current measures

Poor attempt.
Edit: actually like that part of perfectly healthy younger people. About the same level of whatever it is, as other poster put himself into speaking for others.

_Kaiser_ · 19-06-2021 4:45pm

Seanergy wrote: »

Hear no BS, see no BS at play.

Where did you read it technically had expired?

According to this...

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/president-asked-to-sign-draconian-emergency-covid-19-bill-early-1.4584345%3fmode=amp

It was to go to Higgins to sign but did he actually do so?

_Kaiser_ · 19-06-2021 4:50pm

xhomelezz wrote: »

Poor attempt.

Factually accurate given our population age and the numbers who have gotten seriously ill or unfortunately died in the last 15 months.

We now have a tiny number in hospitals with a very small number of those in ICU yet NPHET and some of the population are still behaving as though there's a deadly mass killing virus out there.

Thankfully covid was not that. The only thing we're protecting right now is the waste and inefficiency of the HSE and Tony Holohan's ego.

Seanergy · 19-06-2021 4:52pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

According to this...

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/president-asked-to-sign-draconian-emergency-covid-19-bill-early-1.4584345%3fmode=amp

It was to go to Higgins to sign but did he actually do so?

Nothing expired according to that. You misread it or posted falsely, which was it?

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 4:52pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Factually accurate given our population age and the numbers who have gotten seriously ill or unfortunately died in the last 15 months.

We now have a tiny number in hospitals with a very small number of those in ICU yet NPHET and some of the population are still behaving as though there's a deadly mass killing virus out there.

Thankfully covid was not that. The only thing we're protecting right now is the waste and inefficiency of the HSE and Tony Holohan's ego.

As I said poor attempt.

Unicorn Milk Latte · 19-06-2021 5:58pm

Gortanna wrote: »

A large majority of people want masks to continue to be mandatory even when most people have been vaccinated:

Followed by a link that has nothing to do with people 'wanting' to wear masks, and everything to do with strategic decisions on how exactly to proceed with opening up.

The bottom line is: which percentage of people need to be vaccinated for which specific steps in the re-opening?

Gortanna wrote: »

I genuinely believe that masks are popular in Ireland. People appear to enjoy wearing them.

Wow, this is bizarre. Why would anyone enjoy wearing a mask? This is so completely detached from reality.

Most people wear masks in specific indoor settings, because they understand what masks do, they understand that, when 40% of the population are vaccinated, 60% are still unvaccinated, and can still get sick.

They understand that when you open up and increase person to person contact, risk of infection is different than during a lockdown.

They understand that, while it's quite possible that vaccination reduces transmission, this is not proven yet, and it's reasonable to follow what you know, rather than what you assume.

19-06-2021 6:09pm

Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: »

Followed by a link that has nothing to do with people 'wanting' to wear masks, and everything to do with strategic decisions on how exactly to proceed with opening up.

The bottom line is: which percentage of people need to be vaccinated for which specific steps in the re-opening?

Wow, this is bizarre. Why would anyone enjoy wearing a mask? This is so completely detached from reality.

Most people wear masks in specific indoor settings, because they understand what masks do, they understand that, when 40% of the population are vaccinated, 60% are still unvaccinated, and can still get sick.

They understand that when you open up and increase person to person contact, risk of infection is different than during a lockdown.

They understand that, while it's quite possible that vaccination reduces transmission, this is not proven yet, and it's reasonable to follow what you know, rather than what you assume.

I said want masks to continue to be mandatory. But if they want them to continue to be mandatory then that means they want to wear them. I don't know what the difference is.

But they want them to be mandatory even when herd immunity has been reached. So even with 100% of the population vaccinated (will probably be around 95% in Ireland 'cause you'll never get 100%) they'd want mask wearing to continue to be mandatory, according to that poll. The statement is about most people being vaccinated. 65% still want them to be mandatory even after most people have been vaccinated.

People genuinely like wearing them. People have said they do. They are very popular. A minority can't stand them, but it's a tiny minority.

VG31 · 19-06-2021 6:20pm

Gortanna wrote: »

People genuinely like wearing them. People have said they do. They are very popular. A minority can't stand them, but it's a tiny minority.

I don't know how you're reaching this conclusion, but no one one I know likes wearing masks. Some people dislike it a lot more than others but I haven't heard anyone say they want to continue wearing them after everyone is vaccinated.

19-06-2021 6:26pm

VG31 wrote: »

I don't know how you're reaching this conclusion, but no one one I know likes wearing masks. Some people dislike it a lot more than others but I haven't heard anyone say they want to continue wearing them after everyone is vaccinated.

65% of the public want to continue wearing them post-vaccination, according to that poll. And they want people who don't want to wear them to wear them as well because they want them to continue to be mandatory.

Granted, the following articles aren't about Ireland, but they are about people who like wearing masks:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/10/the-people-who-want-to-keep-masking-its-like-an-invisibility-cloak

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/here-are-the-people-who-love-wearing-masks-and-not-just-because-they-want-to-avoid-covid-19/2021/03/11/7c6ec586-829a-11eb-81db-b02f0398f49a_story.html

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/04/the-people-who-plan-on-wearing-masks-forever.html

xhomelezz · 19-06-2021 6:31pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

65% of the public want to continue wearing them post-vaccination, according to that poll. And they want people who don't want to wear them to wear them as well because they want them to continue to be mandatory.

Granted, the following articles aren't about Ireland, but they are about people who like wearing masks:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/10/the-people-who-want-to-keep-masking-its-like-an-invisibility-cloak

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/here-are-the-people-who-love-wearing-masks-and-not-just-because-they-want-to-avoid-covid-19/2021/03/11/7c6ec586-829a-11eb-81db-b02f0398f49a_story.html

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/04/the-people-who-plan-on-wearing-masks-forever.html

So what do you want to do?

19-06-2021 6:37pm

xhomelezz wrote: »

So what do you want to do?

For life as it was in February 2020 to resume. People can choose to wear them. But 65% want to force everyone to wear them by wanting them to continue to be mandatory.

CalamariFritti · 19-06-2021 9:41pm

The whole covid thing has long since drifted into lala-land. After a year and some of state sponsored fear mongering I dont even blame Joe and Mary for wanting it to continue.

I just wonder though. If xxxhomelezz or odyssey watched the Euros and they see a stadium in Baku or wherever or they watch the tennis or they golf or whatever and see them at 10% or 15% capacity and people wearing masks and subs wearing masks and ball boys/girls wearing masks in 30 degrees celsius outside.

Would it not strike them that there has to be large element of bull to this?

odyssey06 · 19-06-2021 9:59pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

The whole covid thing has long since drifted into lala-land. After a year and some of state sponsored fear mongering I dont even blame Joe and Mary for wanting it to continue.
I just wonder though. If xxxhomelezz or odyssey watched the Euros and they see a stadium in Baku or wherever or they watch the tennis or they golf or whatever and see them at 10% or 15% capacity and people wearing masks and subs wearing masks and ball boys/girls wearing masks in 30 degrees celsius outside.

Would it not strike them that there has to be large element of bull to this?

(ignores some nonsense about lala land and 'state sponsored fear mongering as this isn't the thread for that nonsense)

What does 30 degrees celsius have to do with anything?
Does that reduce the risk?
I think that just shows how confused your logic is here.

If you're sitting downwind of the same person for an hour, there's a risk there.

CalamariFritti · 19-06-2021 10:02pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

(ignores some nonsense about lala land and 'state sponsored fear mongering as this isn't the thread for that nonsense)

What does 30 degrees celsius have to do with anything?
Does that reduce the risk?
I think that just shows how confused your logic is here.

If you're sitting downwind of the same person for an hour, there's a risk there.

So for the record. You find it reasonable that for example 250 people sitting in the French Open court have to wear masks including the ball boys and girls and everyone? Because of the risk to public health? You see no political show/bull element to this at all?

Seanergy · 19-06-2021 10:08pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

So for the record. You find it reasonable that for example 250 people sitting in the French Open court have to wear masks including the ball boys and girls and everyone? Because of the risk to public health?

So for the record, your just placing a few buffer posts to dilute your claim that the Irish mask mandate expired?

Once again, you misread it or posted falsely, which was it?

CalamariFritti · 19-06-2021 10:11pm

Seanergy wrote: »

So for the record, your just placing a few buffer posts to dilute your claim that the Irish mask mandate expired?

Once again, you misread it or posted falsely, which was it?

Erm, that is quite funny. because that expiry discussion was someone else entirely. I guess it would be cheap if I threw that 'which was it' line right back at you?

odyssey06 · 19-06-2021 10:15pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

So for the record. You find it reasonable that for example 250 people sitting in the French Open court have to wear masks including the ball boys and girls and everyone? Because of the risk to public health? You see no political show/bull element to this at all?

The spectators for the reasons already outlined, if that's deemed a risk I understand why.

The ball boys should be treated more like active participants imo but you'll have to ask the French authorities or share their reasons for it. I wouldn't read anything into it of any wider signifiance for masks, other than what happens when any kind of public health advice or indeed regulations meets bureaucracy.

CalamariFritti · 19-06-2021 10:17pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

The spectators for the reasons already outlined, if that's deemed a risk I understand why.

The ball boys should be treated more like active participants imo but you'll have to ask the French authorities or share their reasons for it. I wouldn't read anything into it of any wider signifiance for masks, other than what happens when any kind of public health advice or indeed regulations meets bureaucracy.

Masks outside, with distancing (10% capacity)...

Then there is no point discussing it with you. You and I, we're just too far apart on this and will never find common ground.

19-06-2021 10:19pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Masks outside, with distancing (10% capacity)...

Then there is no point discussing it with you. You and I, we're just too far apart on this and will never find common ground.

There's no discussion in this thread.

Seanergy · 19-06-2021 10:24pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Erm, that is quite funny. because that expiry discussion was someone else entirely. I guess it would be cheap if I threw that 'which was it' line right back at you?

Hands up, confused you with another Anti-mask bluffer.

19-06-2021 10:26pm

Seanergy wrote: »

Hands up, confused you with another Anti-mask bluffer.

What's the point in this thread? Is it to debate and discuss masks? Or is anyone and everyone who is against masks, or even questions them, just anti-mask?

CalamariFritti · 19-06-2021 10:35pm

Seanergy wrote: »

Hands up, confused you with another Anti-mask bluffer.

Come on man. Can we just do a single line/post without cheap shots and childish name calling? It doesnt do anything for your credibility tbh.

You may think I'm a fool or ignorant or whatever but at least I dont do that.

Unicorn Milk Latte · 19-06-2021 11:22pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

.. some of the population are still behaving as though there's a deadly mass killing virus out there.

Thankfully covid was not that. The only thing we're protecting right now is the waste and inefficiency of the HSE and Tony Holohan's ego.

Gortanna wrote: »

People genuinely like wearing them.

CalamariFritti wrote: »

... a year and some of state sponsored fear mongering

This may be a good time to move the whole thread to the Conspiracy section.

To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Comments