Coronavirus outbreak

[roubaixtuesday]

The only type of masks that could actually meaningfully reduce coronavirus transmission are proper medical/industrial grade ones for hazardous environments, and they are NOT comfortable to wear just for show, because they have to fit tightly and not leak.

Wrong. The best evidence shows that face covering does reduce transmission.

 

[Johnno260]

To be honest all the nonsense I have seen and some I have witnessed has lead me into being happy being apart from society anyway.

If my employer was to say work from home can be indefinite I would jump at the chance.

Either way things go government is damned, but also many people have been shown to be selfish and obnoxious, and could learn a lot from an insect on being socially and community responsible.

 

[Milzy]

I doubt you'll find many people who claim the virus is "fake". I'm well aware the virus is very real and is contagious. However, I do not believe that wrecking the economy, throwing millions of people out of work, destroying peoples businesses, and having a huge rise in deaths from other causes instead such as undiagnosed/untreated cancer, heart disease etc, is a price worth paying just to make the headline virus numbers look more palatable.
The mask wearing thing is just a joke. The only type of masks that could actually meaningfully reduce coronavirus transmission are proper medical/industrial grade ones for hazardous environments, and they are NOT comfortable to wear just for show, because they have to fit tightly and not leak. The sort of face coverings being promoted are nothing more than stage props and are ineffective against minute droplets. Wearing a coarse weave decorators dust mask or a bit of bedsheet tied over your mouth like a bandana is going to achieve nothing. Worse still, when people wear masks they irritate the face, so they fiddle about with them. They touch the mask and adjust it's position, they touch their nose. They rub their eyes. I see all this going on in public every day. All the wearers are doing is touching their faces with hands that might be pre-contaminated from a surface or from the outside of their own mask. They've got more chance of actually infecting themselves with either the coronavirus or any number of other nasties than preventing it!
As far as allowing businesses to make money, you aren't going to do that unless you abolish social distancing and allow normal customer densities in hospitality venues. No pub or restaurant is going to make a profit if only half the normal amount of customers are allowed in and the atmosphere is also spoiled by being told where and how to sit and to wear a mask. That isn't my idea of an enjoyable evening out, and nor I suspect will it appeal to the majority of drinkers and diners. I won't be spending any of my money in such venues until I can sit exactly how and where I want and can socialise normally. If I ran such a business I would stay shut, keep my staff on furlough, and let the government carry on picking up the bill until I could get enough customers in to justify all the staffing costs and electricity bills etc. Most such businesses have a lot of loss-making hours in the week and only make their money during the busy periods when they are full up. If you prevent a business running at full capacity you take away their ability to be profitable.

This is the most sensible post I've read on C C for a long time. The government are only making things worse and more drawn out. Set sail for FAIL. Someone on Facebook is saying it's a hoax I hope he gets it.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

However, someone posting "I don't intend to follow suit though, whether the government thinks I should wear one or not" is probably not someone with a medical exemption, unless being a daffodil is now a disease affecting face covering.

So if you believe that mask wearing is effective, do you therefore think it's acceptable for certain groups of people with medical exemptions to have special dispensation to spread the virus, but not the rest of us? Or are those with medical exemptions some special pure group who can't possibly be virus carriers? If wearing a mask made that much difference, then no-one should be exempt from it. Everyone or no-one, no special treatment.

 

[mjr]

The sort of face coverings being promoted are nothing more than stage props and are ineffective against minute droplets. Wearing a coarse weave decorators dust mask or a bit of bedsheet tied over your mouth like a bandana is going to achieve nothing.

Whereas in reality, even shoot masks halve the number of virus particles reaching a metre, if I recall correctly, with some well made fabric masks reducing it by over 80%.

Yes, it needs good mask handling and it's a scandal that gov.uk haven't put out public information films about it, such as seen in other countries. They spend millions on apocalyptic scaremongering stay-at-home adverts but naff all on masks. Another Boris fail.

I won't be spending any of my money in such venues until I can sit exactly how and where I want and can socialise normally.

Well, I'm more likely to visit pubs if they will actually serve me outside, more German-style, on decent furniture, under decent umbrellas that keep typical rain off, instead of having a choice of carrying my own beer over a sequence of trip hazards to rickety rough picnic tables outside or cramped inside situations with sometimes idiot drunks trying to sit on our table. I really hope we get this right and more pubs become better places to be!

 

[midlife]

Went to our hospital Covid lecture today, head of ITU.

Most of it was about Cpap, pronation, ventilation, remdesivir etc we all know that the death rate in ICU is 50% once ventilated....

but the thing that made me stop and think was the negative health impact on the survivors, both from ITU and the wards....Lungs, kidneys, loss of limbs from vascular damage and the rest.

Not a nice infection to have and end up in hospital, even if you make it the effects can be life changing.

 

[mjr]

So if you believe that mask wearing is effective, do you therefore think it's acceptable for certain groups of people with medical exemptions to have special dispensation to spread the virus, but not the rest of us? Or are those with medical exemptions some special pure group who can't possibly be virus carriers? If wearing a mask made that much difference, then no-one should be exempt from it. Everyone or no-one, no special treatment.

Another false dichotomy. It's a balancing act. Do it if it causes you no ill effects - that's just being kind to those around you. Don't do it if it's probably gonna cause medical problems and put more strain on health services.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

This is the most sensible post I've read on C C for a long time. The government are only making things worse and more drawn out. Set sail for FAIL. Someone on Facebook is saying it's a hoax I hope he gets it.

You cant agree with me, you'll have the PC attitude police after you!
I don't see the point in overwhelming the NHS with coronavirus this winter on top of all the normal seasonal illness either - but that is exactly what will happen if the virus isn't allowed to peak naturally as soon as possible and burn itself out in time to clear the decks for the winter flu and icy fall broken bones. The virus is certainly not fake, it's very real and the less of it still around in six months the better. The 1918 Spanish flu virus remained in circulation for YEARS after the main pandemic subsided.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The evidence now seems clear that masks, even simple fabric ones, reduce transmission.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/4...s-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

Ideally, noone should be exempt but the vast majority of us wearing masks with a few limited exemptions would still be hugely helpful in terms of asymptomatic carriers spreading covid, which seems to be the newest area of concern.

 

[Rezillo]

Mask effectiveness - there's a good summary here, with links to studies:

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/4...s-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

One quote:

The bottom line is that any mask that covers the nose and mouth will be of benefit.

“The concept is risk reduction rather than absolute prevention,” said Chin-Hong. “You don’t throw up your hands if you think a mask is not 100 percent effective. That’s silly. Nobody’s taking a cholesterol medicine because they’re going to prevent a heart attack 100 percent of the time, but you’re reducing your risk substantially.”

If we’re practicing social distancing, do we still need to wear masks?

A mnemonic that Chin-Hong likes is the “Three W’s to ward off COVID-19:” wearing a mask, washing your hands, and watching your distance.

“But of the three, the most important thing is wearing a mask,” he said. Compared to wearing a mask, cleaning your iPhone or wiping down your groceries are “just distractors.” There’s little evidence that fomites (contaminated surfaces) are a major source of transmission, whereas there is a lot of evidence of transmission through inhaled droplets, said Chin-Hong.

“You should always wear masks and socially distance,” said Rutherford. “I would be hesitant to try to parse it apart. But, yes, I think mask wearing is more important".

 

[marinyork]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53257101

After Italy, the UK takes sewage epidemiology seriously!

 

[mjr]

You cant agree with me, you'll have the PC attitude police after you!
I don't seethe point in overwhelming the NHS with coronavirus this winter on top of all the normal seasonal illness either - but that is exactly what will happen if the virus isn't allowed to peak naturally as soon as possible and burn itself out in time to clear the decks for the winter flu and icy fall broken bones. The virus is certainly not fake, it's very real and the less of it still around in six months the better. The 1918 Spanish flu virus remained in circulation for YEARS after the main pandemic subsided.

1. We still don't know if this virus can "burn itself out" rather than keep recirculating, maybe with slight mutations.
2. Back of an envelope sums make me think we cannot now infect most of the population before autumn without overwhelming the NHS. How do you think we can?
3. As time goes on, more treatments and maybe preventives will be discovered or developed. Surely a sane country aims to be last off the cliff, rather than bonkers Boris vowing to lead the rebound back in Feb?

 

[mjr]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53257101

After Italy, the UK takes sewage epidemiology seriously!

Well, that's shoot!

 

[marinyork]

Well, that's shoot!

If there's anything in it we can look forward to the photo opportunities for Matt Hancock suited and helmeted up coming out of a sewer.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

If there's anything in it we can look forward to the photo opportunities for Matt Hancock suited and helmeted up coming out of a sewer.

I'd watch that backwards. It's where he should be.