Masks

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

Viral load has been a known factor since March. It's the biggest argument for the use of masks.

Well, clearly some people are missing this and needs to read it.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

gozunda wrote: »

Is that so? "Nearly everyone"?Jaysus!

I don't think you've a great grasp of statistics or logic tbh

Let's look at those stats properly and refrain from making things up Ok?

From the Health Protection Surveillance Centre

"Number of deaths in all COVID-19 cases by sex and age group notified in Ireland up to midnight
16/08/2020"

The attached table shows that 44.96% of deaths due to Covid were in the the 85+ yrs age bracket.

That means that 55.04% of all deaths due to Covid occured in people under 85 years of age.

It is true that risk of death rises with age - but it is also true to say that death due to Covid can occur at any age.

That's the nasty thing about this pandemic - there are no guarantees of outcomes on the individual level.

It remains for each of us - as they say in the movies "Hope you stay lucky punk"

Interesting stat. I would like to know how many of those who died had two or more underlying conditions and how many actually died OF COVID-19. I think those stats are absolutely essential as how to deal with this going forward.

i_surge

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Interesting stat. I would like to know how many of those who died had two or more underlying conditions and how many actually died OF COVID-19. I think those stats are absolutely essential as how to deal with this going forward.

The died "of" covid is such a red herring that antimask fools cling to for dear life trying to pretend it is more than a marginal error in the death count.

Newsflash, all the stats are rife with error due to different methodologies of collection but if you zoom out they paint a very clear picture.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

i_surge wrote: »

The died "of" covid is such a red herring that antimask fools cling to for dear life trying to pretend it is more than a marginal error in the death count.

Newsflash, all the stats are rife with error due to different methodologies of collection but if you zoom out they paint a very clear picture.

That’s a pretty hostile post for a question.... And it’s not really a red herring of a question given we’ve already knocked 600 deaths off that list. I’d like to see a better breakdown of the stats.

I guess someone else might answer.

i_surge

Hunky Monster wrote: »

That’s a pretty hostile post for a question.... And it’s not really a red herring of a question given we’ve already knocked 600 deaths off that list. I’d like to see a better breakdown of the stats.

I guess someone else might answer.

It is a red herring in the scheme of things.

Tell me how is relevant?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

i_surge wrote: »

It is a red herring in the scheme of things.

Tell me how is relevant?

Tell me how it’s not relevant?

i_surge

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Tell me how it’s not relevant?

I won't be playing that game

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

i_surge wrote: »

I won't be playing that game

So a friend of a friend had terminal cancer, he died a few weeks ago, I didn’t know the man but apparently he died and tested positive for covid after the fact.

That’s just one example where it wasn’t a factor.

I would like to know how many of those there are amongst those stats. How many had days/weeks to live and tested positive after. How many were simply just too old to fight this (like influenza or pneumonia)

I don’t think that’s a wild question to ask and I’ve no idea why it triggers you so much.

i_surge

Hunky Monster wrote: »

So a friend of a friend had terminal cancer, he died a few weeks ago, I didn’t know the man but apparently he died and tested positive for covid after the fact.

That’s just one example where it wasn’t a factor.

I would like to know how many of those there are amongst those stats. How many had days/weeks to live and tested positive after. How many were simply just too old to fight this (like influenza or pneumonia)

I don’t think that’s a wild question to ask and I’ve no idea why it triggers you so much.

Are you using it to support an anti-mask or anti-police state argument?

I'm a bit weary dealing with that stupidity and sorry if that doesn't include you. If it does, no apology

odyssey06

Hunky Monster wrote: »

So a friend of a friend had terminal cancer, he died a few weeks ago, I didn’t know the man but apparently he died and tested positive for covid after the fact.
That’s just one example where it wasn’t a factor.
I would like to know how many of those there are amongst those stats. How many had days/weeks to live and tested positive after. How many were simply just too old to fight this (like influenza or pneumonia)
I don’t think that’s a wild question to ask and I’ve no idea why it triggers you so much.

The question has already been asked and answered as best as we can using excess mortality figures there is 1200-1300 increase.
Nursing homes have a pretty good idea of how many residents they lose per month... there were clear spikes.
You seem to be aware of this already from earlier posts on the subject and therefore re-raising it on this thread is just obfuscation.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

i_surge wrote: »

Are you using it to support an anti-mask or anti-police state argument?

I'm a bit weary dealing with that stupidity and sorry if that doesn't include you. If it does, no apology

It’s just a question. You’re not able to answer as it’s not in the stats you showed but it does show a lot of people over 70 dying. It would be nice to know.

Zaph

GT89 wrote: »

If you are expected another 30 years then you are probably not gonna die of covid.

True, but at the same time Covid isn't factored into those statistical models, it's a bit of a spanner in the works. So would you be happy if you or one of your loved ones who you could reasonably expect to be around for another 30-odd years had their life cut short because of this new virus?

GT89 wrote: »

Nearly everyone who died of cv19 were in their 80s which is same as the life expectancy in Ireland so it's hardly like they all had 30 years to live.

As has already been pointed out by another poster, a significant number of those who died were not in their 80s. People in their 20s and children have died from it. Statistically the mortality rate increases with age, but that's the same for pretty much every illness. It doesn't mean that younger people don't die from those illnesses either. Ireland has the 4th highest prevalence of asthma in the world. I am one of 380,000 asthmatics in the country, that's one in thirteen of the population. One in five children develop it at some stage, but most grow out of it. Now imagine if you had a kid with asthma, you'd do everything you possibly could to keep them safe, right? Because let's face it, an airborne pathogen that attacks the lungs is not going to be any fun for an asthmatic. And how can you minimise the chances of your kid, or me, or any other asthmatic from becoming infected? Well a simple mask seems like a pretty good start don't you think? It probably won't be 100% effective, but short of living in a plastic bubble I'd imagine nothing is. But it will improve a person's chances of not contracting it, and that's the best any of us can hope for. And I'm only using asthma as an example, there are plenty of people with COPD, diabetes, various immunocompromised conditions, etc. in the same boat. Is it too much to ask that people aren't so selfish and that they wear a mask for the benefit of those who are more vulnerable than them? Do you think I enjoy wearing a mask? Of course I don't, it can get hot and it makes my glasses fog up something rotten, but at the same time it's a relatively minor inconvenience considering what the alternative could be.

GT89 wrote: »

Can't read your article as it's behind a paywall btw and I don't trust the msm anyway.

It's not behind a paywall, so that suggests you've already used up your allocation of free articles in the Irish Times this week. But notwithstanding that, perhaps you could tell me what the IT has to gain from recounting one woman's experience of her post-Covid recovery?

MadYaker

Yes: surgical

3xh wrote: »

We agree on Tubridy then.

People listening to him being idiots etc is one thing yet their views and opinions on not flying and vilifying those who do, needing to wear a mask nearly everywhere, quarantining yourself for 2 weeks upon return from abroad, ban all tourists, close bars, etc. all get amplified and spouted in public arenas like here, radio chat shows, letters to the editor, WhatsApp groups and so on.

It then becomes the norm, the consensus. People on the fence or easily influenced regurgitate it for fear of offending with an alternative view.

And the Government picks up on it and acts accordingly.

I’m intrigued about your last point though regarding increased cases and increased testing.
You’re hardly saying published positive case numbers are up because actual positive case numbers are up only? Doing more testing will eventually find more cases. That is a fact.

Consider this; we could have 5000 true, actual cases in Ireland and find 200 of them.
The next week we could have 3000 true, actual cases and find 400 of them. Yet the second example will be sold as a doomsday 100% increase in cases, time to shut down the economy again.

My point is, the aforementioned biased media only ‘emphasise’ the positive case number itself and not explain further to the masses how going from say, 100 positives from 3,000 tests last week to 200 positives from 13,000 tests this week is not so bad. Yes, of course, I want zero. Ultimately.

But those figures can be shown and suggested by media to mean many things. The likes of RTÉ would allude to the ‘100% increase in people testing positive for coronavirus in the past week’ to scare the daylights out of people who can’t decipher stats.

Yet it’s taken a >4-fold increase in testing to double the positive cases. That is a significant fact that is often left in the shadows.

The % of tests coming back positive has increased also. That points to an increase in community transmission. I struggle to see what point you are making here. Are you saying community transmission hasn't increased at all and it's all down to more testing?

3xh

MadYaker wrote: »

The % of tests coming back positive has increased also. That points to an increase in community transmission. I struggle to see what point you are making here. Are you saying community transmission hasn't increased at all and it's all down to more testing?

So the % of tests coming back positive has increased. As have the actual number of tests carried out. So I’d ask; are they in line?!

This is the thing with stats and is exactly my point above in how certain groupings/sides twist and portray certain figures a certain way.

If the % ‘hit’ has increased by say, 5% (in other words from 100 cases one week to 105 cases the next week) but tests carried out increased by 100% (in other words from 6,000 to 12,000), I wouldn’t be so concerned, no. Especially if the increase in cases (community transmission or otherwise) is a few weeks after sectors of the economy are opened up.

I just feel people immediately latch on to any increase they hear. They can’t think critically and just swallow the big doomsday headline ‘increase’ they hear from RTÉ and such.

gozunda

Yes: surgical

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Interesting stat. I would like to know how many of those who died had two or more underlying conditions and how many actually died OF COVID-19. I think those stats are absolutely essential as how to deal with this going forward.

First thing is correlation does not imply causation
However let's run with that

Take two very common listed comorbidities of Covid19. And for argument sake lets take hypertension (high blood pressure) and smoking.

Hypertension

For 2020 it has been estimated that the number of adults aged 45+ years with hypertension (high blood pressure) is 1220,000. Ie 63.1%

(This figure includes stats for both clinically diagnosed and estimates for undiagnosed cases.)

Thats a lot of at risk individuals.

Lets add Smoking.

It has been estimated that more than one in five people aged 15 or over in Ireland are smokers ie nearly 100,000 individuals who smoke. Then there are those who have given up smoking but may have suffered some damage to their lungs etc.

From the literature - those with either / or both comorbidities face significant risks in relation to health outcomes in relation to contracting Covid 19.

Don't smoke - I hear you say? Absolutley sure you aren't one of the generation who suffered from second hand smoke in all their years in pubs etc prior to the smoking ban?

Don't have hypertension? When's the last time you were checked?

Still sure? - grand so. It remains the two above examples of risk factors means that there large numbers of people who may be at increased risk if they contact Covid 19.

You can do the same exercise for a whole range of other conditions (known and unknown) and for all ages of people

The picture It doesn't get any better unfortunately ...

v638sg7k1a92bx

3xh wrote: »

So the % of tests coming back positive has increased. As have the actual number of tests carried out. So I’d ask; are they in line?!

This is the thing with stats and is exactly my point above in how certain groupings/sides twist and portray certain figures a certain way.

If the % ‘hit’ has increased by say, 5% (in other words from 100 cases one week to 105 cases the next week) but tests carried out increased by 100% (in other words from 6,000 to 12,000), I wouldn’t be so concerned, no. Especially if the increase in cases (community transmission or otherwise) is a few weeks after sectors of the economy are opened up.

I just feel people immediately latch on to any increase they hear. They can’t think critically and just swallow the big doomsday headline ‘increase’ they hear from RTÉ and such.

The real metrics for an epidemic and deaths and ICU admissions while accounting for the lag. By this rate we should have seen people presenting in ICU by now so it begs the questions as to where this second wave is going to come from?

v638sg7k1a92bx

i_surge wrote: »

The died "of" covid is such a red herring that antimask fools cling to for dear life trying to pretend it is more than a marginal error in the death count.

Newsflash, all the stats are rife with error due to different methodologies of collection but if you zoom out they paint a very clear picture.

Here's another newsflash, very few people are getting sick or dying from this virus.

v638sg7k1a92bx

odyssey06 wrote: »

The question has already been asked and answered as best as we can using excess mortality figures there is 1200-1300 increase.
Nursing homes have a pretty good idea of how many residents they lose per month... there were clear spikes.
You seem to be aware of this already from earlier posts on the subject and therefore re-raising it on this thread is just obfuscation.

Approx 1,000 of those people died in care homes.

odyssey06

Kendrick Jolly Ibex wrote: »

The real metrics for an epidemic and deaths and ICU admissions while accounting for the lag. By this rate we should have seen people presenting in ICU by now so it begs the questions as to where this second wave is going to come from?

It will come if the virus gets from the current demographic into the vulnerable in the community... the more cases we have the more likely that is.

Ten of Swords

Tickers, forum banned for ignoring threadban

1990sman

wild itchy, some more than others.

gozunda

Yes: surgical

Kendrick Jolly Ibex wrote: »

The real metrics for an epidemic and deaths and ICU admissions while accounting for the lag. By this rate we should have seen people presenting in ICU by now so it begs the questions as to where this second wave is going to come from?

If I remember correctly - lots of posters were asking the very same questions when the first spate of cases had already taken off here.

And as predicted ICU admissions started to rise. I've little doubt it will happen again ...

littlecbear

Zaph wrote: »

"As has already been pointed out by another poster, a significant number of those who died were not in their 80s. People in their 20s and children have died from it."

79% of all deaths in Ireland to date related to Covid-19 were over the age of 75.

6 people in Ireland between the age of 15 and 34 have died with Covid-19 and only 1 of those was aged 15 to 24 . Nobody under the age of 15. So at the most, one young person aged 15 or more in Ireland has died where Covid-19 was on their death certificate. Keeping in mind that Covid-19 was recorded as cause of death event in the absence of a positive test, it's not possible to be sure right now that they actually even had the virus.

Seanergy

Yes: valved

https://twitter.com/DrZeroCraic/status/1297628907118698497

SeaBreezes

No: I don't care enough

Hunky Monster wrote: »

So a friend of a friend had terminal cancer, he died a few weeks ago, I didn’t know the man but apparently he died and tested positive for covid after the fact.

That’s just one example where it wasn’t a factor.

I would like to know how many of those there are amongst those stats. How many had days/weeks to live and tested positive after. How many were simply just too old to fight this (like influenza or pneumonia)

I don’t think that’s a wild question to ask and I’ve no idea why it triggers you so much.

sigh.

Google excess deaths and explain why they are so high. and not even counted as covid19 deaths.
Covid19 deaths are undercounted if anything.

Also why do so many anti maskers seem to believe that every doctor in the country has been struck by a stupidity bug that they are incapable of filling out death certs with cause of death anymore?

Doctors that have (somehow).for years managed to fill in death certs correctly are now incapable?

Riightt..

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Seanergy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/DrZeroCraic/status/1297628907118698497

Ridiculous. A man on his own working on a car in his driveway alone wearing a mask.

Jesus wept.

patnor1011

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

odyssey06 wrote: »

The question has already been asked and answered as best as we can using excess mortality figures there is 1200-1300 increase.
Nursing homes have a pretty good idea of how many residents they lose per month... there were clear spikes.
You seem to be aware of this already from earlier posts on the subject and therefore re-raising it on this thread is just obfuscation.

Nursing houses spike were mainly due to the fact that we emptied hospitals and shipped people right in there. Nobody can argue that nursing house care is not on par of what they could have in hospitals.

odyssey06

patnor1011 wrote: »

Nursing houses spike were mainly due to the fact that we emptied hospitals and shipped people right in there. Nobody can argue that nursing house care is not on par of what they could have in hospitals.

Multiple other countries saw spikes in nursing home deaths.
Excess mortality has spiked in country after country as covid-19 had taken people before their time.
The notion that all or the majority of deaths recorded to covid19 were just about to die regardless has been refuted and those who continue to peddle it now do so on the basis of fake news in support of a political agenda.

CertifiedSimp

Can anyone tell me how months ago we were told masks actually contributed to the spread of Covid and now they prevent the spread?

odyssey06

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Can anyone tell me how months ago we were told masks actually contributed to the spread of Covid and now they prevent the spread?

Well it started in January as the Chinese spead disinformation that the virus was spread primarily by contact.
It continued here in March as we didnt have enough masks... and they were approached from the view as PPE to protect the wearer.

Better late than never in late april their true worth is reducing transmission from infected patients was realised here... cue dramatic drop in cases in health and care settings.

dwayneshintzy

Yes: to protect myself and others

SeaBreezes wrote: »

sigh.

Google excess deaths and explain why they are so high. and not even counted as covid19 deaths.
Covid19 deaths are undercounted if anything.

Also why do so many anti maskers seem to believe that every doctor in the country has been struck by a stupidity bug that they are incapable of filling out death certs with cause of death anymore?

Doctors that have (somehow).for years managed to fill in death certs correctly are now incapable?

Riightt..

I think their new tack is to claim that these would be people who'd die in the next couple years "anyway", so if we eventually look at excess deaths over a multi-year period(starting from covid era) it'll be the same as "normal".

CertifiedSimp

odyssey06 wrote: »

Well it started in January as the Chinese spead disinformation that the virus was spread primarily by contact.
It continued here in March as we didnt have enough masks... and they were approached from the view as PPE to protect the wearer.

Better late than never in late april their true worth is reducing transmission from infected patients was realised here... cue dramatic drop in cases in health and care settings.

This is not true as Luke O'Neill was on TLLS saying how masks are useless and the virus goes in the eyes.

odyssey06

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

This is not true as Luke O'Neill was on TLLS saying how masks are useless and the virus goes in the eyes.

When did he say that?

This is him in June backing masks fully.
https://www.rte.ie/amp/1149435/

He also says the evidence for masks gets stronger by the day.
As the data changed he changed his view.

Please dont deliberately quote out of date info.

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

odyssey06 wrote: »

Well it started in January as the Chinese spead disinformation that the virus was spread primarily by contact.
It continued here in March as we didnt have enough masks... and they were approached from the view as PPE to protect the wearer.

Better late than never in late april their true worth is reducing transmission from infected patients was realised here... cue dramatic drop in cases in health and care settings.

Don't forget the Chinese living here we're buying supplies here and sending them back home in the early days.

So our masks were useful to the Chinese but weren't for us. Of course, they were only trying to protect supplies here for the healthcare workers.

patnor1011

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

It is worrying to see so much of a hate around all this. Some people suddenly become national health advice experts just by googling and soaking every bit of news they can find supporting their view.

To me it looks like we lost common sense. We act like children and somehow perceive others like some sort of challenged people who can not think or take care of themselves. I wonder how it happened that we dumbed down so much.

Instead of talking, debating and arguing our points we straight switch to hate and immediately dismiss people whose opinion differ from our own quickly attaching some hateful labels like antimaskers and so on.

What is next? Vigilante squads patrolling shops interrogating people why they do not wear mask? Perhaps some light beating behind a corner to remind them they are killing our old and vulnerable?

People need to cop on and realize that most of vulnerable and old people or their families already know what to do to minimize their exposure and risk of catching this or any other virus. These people, me included, are sick, not retarded. I can not and will not demand everyone else to step on eggshells around me I have no problem to accept that most of the people have enough of their own problems to care about mine. It is solely my own responsibility to try to stay safe while I am also trying to live my life as best as I can.

This whole issue become almost religious to some people who go around looking for deviation of what they think others should be doing. Some people do have legitimate reasons not to wear masks and when I see one "maskless antimasker" I smile on them instead of giving them dirty looks or trying to question them. These people do have their reasons not to wear them and I accept it. The same way I accept people who wear one.

gozunda

Yes: surgical

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Don't forget the Chinese living here we're buying supplies here and sending them back home in the early days.

So our masks were useful to the Chinese but weren't for us. Of course, they were only trying to protect supplies here for the healthcare workers.

Much the same as the denial by China that there was any need for travel restrictions into and out of China whilst they themselves strictly closed down all internal travel to and from known Covid hotshots.

That even had the WHO telling us that there was absolutely no evidence of person to person contact of Covid19

You couldn't make it up tbh ...

patnor1011

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

odyssey06 wrote: »

Multiple other countries saw spikes in nursing home deaths.
Excess mortality has spiked in country after country as covid-19 had taken people before their time.
The notion that all or the majority of deaths recorded to covid19 were just about to die regardless has been refuted and those who continue to peddle it now do so on the basis of fake news in support of a political agenda.

Nope, it was not refuted. Stats are there for everyone to see. Absolute majority of people who died were old people with other ailments. This virus is killing vulnerable people and there is no doubt about it. Numbers do not lie.

Seanergy

Yes: valved

patnor1011 wrote: »

Nursing houses spike were mainly due to the fact that we emptied hospitals and shipped people right in there. Nobody can argue that nursing house care is not on par of what they could have in hospitals.

There was a significant correlation between the proportion of staff with symptomatic COVID-19 and resident numbers with confirmed/suspected COVID-19. Among the 675 unmasked Nursing home staff across twenty-four sites who had confirmed/suspected COVID-19 (23.6%, 159/675) were asymptomatic.

Extremely detailed study

Asymptomatic carriage rates and case-fatality of SARS-CoV-2 infection in residents and staff in Irish nursing homes.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.11.20128199v1

i_surge

patnor1011 wrote: »

It is worrying to see so much of a hate around all this. Some people suddenly become national health advice experts just by googling and soaking every bit of news they can find supporting their view.

To me it looks like we lost common sense. We act like children and somehow perceive others like some sort of challenged people who can not think or take care of themselves. I wonder how it happened that we dumbed down so much.

Instead of talking, debating and arguing our points we straight switch to hate and immediately dismiss people whose opinion differ from our own quickly attaching some hateful labels like antimaskers and so on.

What is next? Vigilante squads patrolling shops interrogating people why they do not wear mask? Perhaps some light beating behind a corner to remind them they are killing our old and vulnerable?

People need to cop on and realize that most of vulnerable and old people or their families already know what to do to minimize their exposure and risk of catching this or any other virus. These people, me included, are sick, not retarded. I can not and will not demand everyone else to step on eggshells around me I have no problem to accept that most of the people have enough of their own problems to care about mine. It is solely my own responsibility to try to stay safe while I am also trying to live my life as best as I can.

This whole issue become almost religious to some people who go around looking for deviation of what they think others should be doing. Some people do have legitimate reasons not to wear masks and when I see one "maskless antimasker" I smile on them instead of giving them dirty looks or trying to question them. These people do have their reasons not to wear them and I accept it. The same way I accept people who wear one.

I get your point but some types of things are damaging to the greater good and can't be tolerated.

They are the intolerant ones, trying to stop others protecting themselves and others and the paradox of tolerance states that a tolerant society must be intolerant of the intolerant.

gozunda

Yes: surgical

patnor1011 wrote: »

It is worrying to see so much of a hate around all this. Some people suddenly become national health advice experts just by googling and soaking every bit of news they can find supporting their view.

To me it looks like we lost common sense. We act like children and somehow perceive others like some sort of challenged people who can not think or take care of themselves. I wonder how it happened that we dumbed down so much.

Instead of talking, debating and arguing our points we straight switch to hate and immediately dismiss people whose opinion differ from our own quickly attaching some hateful labels like antimaskers and so on.

What is next? Vigilante squads patrolling shops interrogating people why they do not wear mask? Perhaps some light beating behind a corner to remind them they are killing our old and vulnerable?

People need to cop on and realize that most of vulnerable and old people or their families already know what to do to minimize their exposure and risk of catching this or any other virus. These people, me included, are sick, not retarded. I can not and will not demand everyone else to step on eggshells around me I have no problem to accept that most of the people have enough of their own problems to care about mine. It is solely my own responsibility to try to stay safe while I am also trying to live my life as best as I can.

This whole issue become almost religious to some people who go around looking for deviation of what they think others should be doing. Some people do have legitimate reasons not to wear masks and when I see one "maskless antimasker" I smile on them instead of giving them dirty looks or trying to question them. These people do have their reasons not to wear them and I accept it. The same way I accept people who wear one.

Get where you are coming from ...

However I dont reckon anyone has an issue with those who 'cant' wear a facemask for medical reasons etc

On that a question - would you smile on someone who refused to wear a seat belt in the backseat of your car and as a result took out your elderly mother after you had to brake suddenly?

By wearing a seat belt / mask you are protecting both yourself and others. Thats really not too hard to understand is it?

GT89

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

odyssey06 wrote: »

When did he say that?

This is him in June backing masks fully.
https://www.rte.ie/amp/1149435/

He also says the evidence for masks gets stronger by the day.
As the data changed he changed his view.

Please dont deliberately quote out of date info.

0:52. Only useful if you are infected.

https://youtu.be/g7_P2RmrA6U

CertifiedSimp

odyssey06 wrote: »

When did he say that?

This is him in June backing masks fully.
https://www.rte.ie/amp/1149435/

He also says the evidence for masks gets stronger by the day.
As the data changed he changed his view.

Please dont deliberately quote out of date info.

Watch the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7_P2RmrA6U

He literally says masks are pointless unless you are infected and that people fidget with the mask and that it goes in through the eyes.

Which massively contradicts the thinking at the time of the CMO that there's no scientific evidence that masks work. So what is the scientific evidence?What do we know about masks now that we didn't know months ago?

patnor1011

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

i_surge wrote: »

I get your point but some types of things are damaging to the greater good and can't be tolerated.

They are the intolerant ones, trying to stop others protecting themselves and others and the paradox of tolerance states that a tolerant society must be intolerant of the intolerant.

I get it but in doing so they think we are intolerant. No policy ever had 100% backing and if they think so let them argue their point. We quickly apply some label and in most cases that label is derrogatory. This is a road to nowhere but more hate.
I said it many times I have no problem with people wearing masks but people seems to have problem with me not wearing one without knowing abything about my situation. I simply avoid going to shops as I am tired of getting dirty looks of everyone passing me and anyone else in the same situation.
We are in this for a very long run and this virus is going to stay with us. We will have to learn to live with it. Please let us not to have some civil war about it.

Graham

Masks haven't changed.

We now have a better understanding how Coronavirus spreads.

gozunda

Yes: surgical

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

...What do we know about masks now that we didn't know months ago?

Tbh that reminds me somewhat of when it was first understood that the earth actually orbited the sun and not the other way round.

"What do we know about the sun now that we didn't know months ago?"

This ....

Graham wrote: »

Masks haven't changed.

We now have a better understanding how Coronavirus spreads.

Tork

Yes: to protect others

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Watch the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7_P2RmrA6U

He literally says masks are pointless unless you are infected and that people fidget with the mask and that it goes in through the eyes.

Which massively contradicts the thinking at the time of the CMO that there's no scientific evidence that masks work. So what is the scientific evidence?What do we know about masks now that we didn't know months ago?

HE SAID THAT BACK IN FEBRUARY. If you watch his Twitter feed or listen back to the podcasts he does on Pat Kenny's show on Newstalk, you'll understand better why he has changed his thinking on this. But you know that, don't you.

patnor1011

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

gozunda wrote: »

Get where you are coming from ...

However I dont reckon anyone has an issue with those who 'cant' wear a facemask for medical reasons etc

On that a question - would you smile on someone who refused to wear a seat belt in the backseat of your car and as a result took out your elderly mother after you had to brake suddenly?

By wearing a seat belt / mask you are protecting both yourself and others. Thats really not too hard to understand is it?

It is very hard to make comparison which will completely apply. I ask everyone in my car to wear seatbelt but... I actually can not wear one yet I have to drive sometimes. So every time I sit behind wheel I take calculated risk fully knowing that it may cost me while I can not require or expect everyone on the road to go away because I have to go somewhere not wearing one. It is my choice and I have to live with consequences.
Same go for say diabetics - we cant ban all sugar and chocolate because it may hurt them or take out nuts as some people can die from exposure.

Not everything is black and white and this topic become so divisive for some people that they think that it is either their way or no way. There is always the middle road yet we seems to not be able to see it.

Seanergy

Yes: valved

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Watch the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7_P2RmrA6U

He literally says masks are pointless unless you are infected and that people fidget with the mask and that it goes in through the eyes.

Which massively contradicts the thinking at the time of the CMO that there's no scientific evidence that masks work. So what is the scientific evidence?What do we know about masks now that we didn't know months ago?

Prof O'Neil also says the main reason for wearing a mask is to stop you spreading it, which is very important.

It's very possible Prof O'Neil did not know about asymptomatic spread on the 28th of Feb when interview happened. The WHO only found out about asymptomatic spread in the 2nd week of February.

CMO at the time probably knew of asymptomatic spread but in an effort to protect supply used the no scientific evidence that masks work mantra.

CertifiedSimp

Graham wrote: »

Masks haven't changed.

We now have a better understanding how Coronavirus spreads.

Luke O'Neil was on the late late show in February confirming masks work when you are infected though. So Luke was pretty sure that masks prevented the spread of Covid in the same way they prevent the spread of Covid now.

What was the new data uncovered about masks? Half of Europe was wearing masks long before us - what did they know about Covid that we didn't?

Tork

Yes: to protect others

There are now scientific studies which prove that face coverings stop or greatly reduce the number of infected droplets coming from a person's nose and mouth. This one is from the British Medical Journal https://thorax.bmj.com/content/early/2020/07/24/thoraxjnl-2020-215748