Jump to content

Our Society


Fudger

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Scooby_Doo said:

How do you know what everyone is doing?

It's commonplace for those in China to wear masks day to day. That worked out well didn't it?

I can see they are wearing them. 

Everyone I know is regularly washing them. 

Sorry if that random sample isn't enough for you. 

The disadvantage is we are a long way behind in terms of herd immunity 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2020 at 12:39 PM, gdevoy said:

People ask "for how long?" They reply "we don't know".

The government's attitude to ending lockdown will be like the England cricket team batting in the third innings.

They will have accumulated more than enough runs to declare but will go on batting for another couple of sessions "just to make sure".

 

 

Edited by skygod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Scottish Government has now issued guidance that people should wear face coverings in enclosed spaces, despite them also saying that 'The evidence on the use of face coverings is limited' and that 'the evidence of impact on transmission is relatively weak'.

What happened to following the science? In what other scenario would you advise people to do something based on weak scientific evidence. Insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scooby_Doo said:

The Scottish Government has now issued guidance that people should wear face coverings in enclosed spaces, despite them also saying that 'The evidence on the use of face coverings is limited' and that 'the evidence of impact on transmission is relatively weak'.

What happened to following the science? In what other scenario would you advise people to do something based on weak scientific evidence. Insane.

You have to question the reasons for this . The misuse of all PPE is dangerous and the possible transference of contaminated material to anywhere on the face when removing a mask is very high . That’s why NES instruct all medical professionals on the correct use of these on an 3 year mandatory cycle in the primary care setting . 

Edited by Bonbon19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Bonbon19 said:

You have to question the reasons for this . The misuse of all PPE is dangerous and the possible transference of contaminated material to anywhere on the face when removing a mask is very high . That’s why NES instruct all medical professionals on the correct use of these on an 3 year mandatory cycle in the primary care setting . 

Yes you have to question why this is being advised

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, killie1961 said:

Yes you have to question why this is being advised

I'm questioning why the wearing of masks is even being questioned. It's common sense that it will stop the basic spread of the virus, what kind of f**king idiots are buying into the concept that masks make no difference? The government are not pushing it because they don't have enough masks to make it mandatory and they don't want to face legal action for not providing citizens with equipment that could save their lives.

Just watched the video above and looked at the figures

Czechia - 7449 confirmed cases - 223 deaths

UK - 157,000 confirmed cases - 21,092 deaths

Are you still questioning why mask wearing is advised? The more people who do it the better it will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My better half has been making 100% cotton masks for care homes since the lockdown and has given away hundreds now. Filters are like gold dust through so she had to go ahead and make them without filters, but as you can see in that video posted above, they are still effective in stopping the spread of the virus and the more people that wear them the better. She bought the material and elastic a few weeks back but most places have now quadrupled their prices and are advertising their stock as "suitable for masks". Profiteering bastards, won't go near any of them again once this is over. The bottom line here is that if it helps then do it, all the noise about how its a waste of time emanates from people with an agenda, that agenda being trying to cover their arse. There is "little evidence" because they don't want to gather evidence as it might put them in a spot...look at the online facts and figures yourself and you can make your own mind up whether wearing mask helps or not, hint...it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 18yardhero said:

I'm questioning why the wearing of masks is even being questioned. It's common sense that it will stop the basic spread of the virus, what kind of f**king idiots are buying into the concept that masks make no difference? The government are not pushing it because they don't have enough masks to make it mandatory and they don't want to face legal action for not providing citizens with equipment that could save their lives.

Just watched the video above and looked at the figures

Czechia - 7449 confirmed cases - 223 deaths

UK - 157,000 confirmed cases - 21,092 deaths

Are you still questioning why mask wearing is advised? The more people who do it the better it will be.

I'm questioning it because the Scottish Government themselves, have said 'the evidence of impact on transmission is relatively weak'.

PPE makes a difference in a clinical setting because the clinicians are trained and the PPE has to meet a standard that limits transmission. The Scottish Government are advising that untrained members of the public should use 'a facial covering of the mouth and nose, that is made of cloth or other textiles and through which you can breathe, for example a scarf'

As for the Czech example, is the wearing of face masks the only difference in their approach to the pandemic. If it is, then you have a point. If it isn't, and I strongly suspect it isn't, then the comparison is irrelevant. Correlation does not imply causation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with this advice is unrelated as to how effective any face covering is . There are arguments both ways .

My point is that if they were going to do this they should have released at the same time a basic instructional video on the safe use and the correct way to remove face masks or coverings .(Fiona McQueen could have done this in no time as she was at the forefront of this for AAHB when she was director of nursing their ) The risk of cross contamination or infection when doing so could outweigh their usefulness . The Czech video is a good example 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scooby_Doo said:

As for the Czech example, is the wearing of face masks the only difference in their approach to the pandemic. If it is, then you have a point. If it isn't, and I strongly suspect it isn't, then the comparison is irrelevant. Correlation does not imply causation.

Did you watch the video? They state that they are doing all the same things as everyone else, apart from the mark wearing, that is the emphasis on the whole first part of it. People pick and choose statistics to suit their argument, but just dismissing the likes of this this as "irrelevant" is crass and in all fairness, way off the mark. 95% - 100% of droplets don't pass through a mask. It's that's simple. If you put something in front of you it will hinder a cough or sneezes progress, I'm not sure what is so hard about that to understand. No one is claiming this is good enough for a medical environment, no one is claiming it will completely stop the spread. But it certainly hiders it to a great degree, and the facts bear that out no matter what kind of spin you want to put on it. Sometimes I think people on here just refuse to change their stance on something no matter what. It's not rocket science, wearing a mask is better than not wearing a mask in normal every day situations, not infallible just better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medical officer at conference tonight when questioned as to the Scots example of suggesting wearing masks said that science showed any benefit to wearing a mask was "small" Her word. So if the benefit is small is it then not worth doing? So Hancock habitually saying they following the scientific guidance, shouldnt they be saying "hang on Mr/Mrs scientist, if benefit is small, we should still do it!!!!" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging by the Scottish news tonight there still appears to be a misconception that a mask is to protect the wearer, whereas it is to protect others from the mask wearer's germs. Some of the people wearing them didn't have their nose covered either which seems pointless. If we want people to wear face covering there should be more emphasis on how to wear them and on cleaning them regularly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, blues said:

Did you watch the video? They state that they are doing all the same things as everyone else, apart from the mark wearing, that is the emphasis on the whole first part of it.

I did watch the video. It's talking about face masks. I'm talking about the Scottish Government specifically not talking    about masks, but using a scarf, when they say themselves that the evidence that they are effective is 'limited' and 'weak'. That is staggering.

Quote

People pick and choose statistics to suit their argument, but just dismissing the likes of this this as "irrelevant" is crass and in all fairness, way off the mark.

As for the Czech Republic response to Covid-19, I decided to look up what measures they took, instead of listening to someone on YouTube say that face masks are the only difference.

They closed their borders, stopped foreigners coming in and issued a curfew. All before they had a single death from Covid-19. That's significantly different from the UK approach, and would have had a much bigger impact.

New Zealand has just announced they have effectively eliminated Covid-19, thanks to the mandatory wearing of face masks. Oh no, wait, they didn't do that. That must be me cherry picking.

Quote

It's not rocket science, wearing a mask is better than not wearing a mask in normal every day situations, not infallible just better.

The NZ advice actually clearly states 'If a member of the public chooses to purchase and wear a mask, or make their own mask, we ask them to please consider carefully how they use it. There are risks associated with using masks poorly.'

So, to recap. The mandatory wearing of face masks wasn't the only thing the Czech Republic did differently, and therefore the comparison is irrelevant. Secondly, I understand that masks are effective - if you scroll up you'll see that I said PPE is effective when used correctly. However the Scottish Government are specfically not talking about medical masks - what is so difficult to understand about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shropshire_killie said:

Medical officer at conference tonight when questioned as to the Scots example of suggesting wearing masks said that science showed any benefit to wearing a mask was "small" Her word. So if the benefit is small is it then not worth doing? So Hancock habitually saying they following the scientific guidance, shouldnt they be saying "hang on Mr/Mrs scientist, if benefit is small, we should still do it!!!!" 

Do you wear a helmet when you go out for a walk?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scooby_Doo said:

If you fall whilst you're out walking, you might hit your head. You should wear a helmet.

It's unlikely, but it is of a small and limited benefit, so you should definitely do it.

Fair comment. However, missed the point a wee bit with respect. If you cough with a mask on in a supermarket if that reduces spread then surely better to wear one? Cant imagine us all walking round with crash helmets so you assumption eithe risk is minuscule? Who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shropshire_killie said:

Fair comment. However, missed the point a wee bit with respect.

Fair enough, I was being facetious.

Quote

If you cough with a mask on in a supermarket if that reduces spread then surely better to wear one?

If it was that simple, then yes. As Wrangodog said, some aren't even wearing them properly. Again, though, the ScotGov aren't talking about proper masks.

Quote

Cant imagine us all walking round with crash helmets so you assumption eithe risk is minuscule? Who knows?

Crash helmets, particularly bicycle helmets are a good example. They can help if you're in a crash, but if you haven't put it on properly or secured it properly, it will be next to useless. Same goes for face coverings.

On more than one occasion I've seen members of the public wearing a face covering make physical contact with people trying to get something off the shelf in a supermarket. Morrisons in Killie have closed off the end of aisles in order to route people to tills. I had to get something at the end of an aisle, and when I turned round there were two women walking towards me with masks on, walking two abreast. I couldn't get past, so waited. They pushed past me, ignoring the social distancing. What's the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Scooby_Doo said:

Fair enough, I was being facetious.

If it was that simple, then yes. As Wrangodog said, some aren't even wearing them properly. Again, though, the ScotGov aren't talking about proper masks.

Crash helmets, particularly bicycle helmets are a good example. They can help if you're in a crash, but if you haven't put it on properly or secured it properly, it will be next to useless. Same goes for face coverings.

On more than one occasion I've seen members of the public wearing a face covering make physical contact with people trying to get something off the shelf in a supermarket. Morrisons in Killie have closed off the end of aisles in order to route people to tills. I had to get something at the end of an aisle, and when I turned round there were two women walking towards me with masks on, walking two abreast. I couldn't get past, so waited. They pushed past me, ignoring the social distancing. What's the point?

Salute Scooby. I think my view is doing anything, even if it reduces risk by a very small margin, debateable or not, is worth implementing.

WM govt prob catch up in a few weeks who knows. They are very much hiding  behind the British "scientific advice", the easy option imo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shropshire_killie said:

Salute Scooby. I think my view is doing anything, even if it reduces risk by a very small margin, debateable or not, is worth implementing.

WM govt prob catch up in a few weeks who knows. They are very much hiding  behind the British "scientific advice", the easy option imo.

I agree with you here, but Scooby (internet medical guru) doesn't really care as long as he makes his point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, blues said:

I agree with you here, but Scooby (internet medical guru) doesn't really care as long as he makes his point.

No need to get personal, we don't know anybody's qualifications and public forums are about making points, not scoring them!

Edited by Scooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...