Masks

Pitch n Putt · 02-09-2020 12:42pm

joeguevara wrote: »

You can’t have it both ways. Access to supermarkets was very restricted so social distancing meant staff weren’t exposed to the level that there is now. Also due to the age demographic of employees even if infected, mild symptoms and lack of testing meant the real number of infections weren’t known.

You then use the numbers now when mask compliance is close to 98% as a reason not to wear masks.

Again, masks are being used to open up ireland. Can you not understand if we stopped our numbers would increase which would inevitably mean lockdown.

You can’t pick and choose. Your basis for supermarkets was predicated with lockdown and restricted access. Now everything is opened up with people wearing masks you are trying to use that as a reason not to wear masks.

There is absolutely no evidence that because everything is opened up as you put it that the spread has increased in supermarkets.

Ireland is not opening up it’s actually shutting down in front of our eyes. The question is why do NPHET and the government want to continue like it’s March all over again ?

Masks if anything are having a negative effect as the numbers are rising and there is absolutely no basis for another lockdown with the current trend of the virus over the last few weeks.

If anything things should be opening up quicker with what we’ve seen over last couple of weeks.

We know from hospital admissions in relation to the number of reported cases that this is well overhyped

bush · 02-09-2020 12:44pm

No: other

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Masks if anything are having a negative effect

I honestly think masks are useless bordering on harmful. I wear them all day in work and no one uses them properly.

BattleCorp · 02-09-2020 12:47pm

Yes: surgical

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Masks if anything are having a negative effect as the numbers are rising and there is absolutely no basis for another lockdown with the current trend of the virus over the last few weeks.

The masks are not having a negative effect. Yes, the numbers are rising but it's nothing to do with masks. It's to do with the fact that a lot of people have abandoned/relaxed social distancing and we are now mixing more than we did in April and May.

And the numbers will go further up as the weather gets colder and we all huddle around fires etc. and spend a lot more time indoors.

BattleCorp · 02-09-2020 12:48pm

Yes: surgical

bush wrote: »

I honestly think masks are useless bordering on harmful. I wear them all day in work and no one uses them properly.

Instead of abandoning them, there needs to be an education campaign to show people how to wear them properly.

But to be fair, how feckin hard is it to cover your nose and mouth with one.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 1:06pm

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

There is absolutely no evidence that because everything is opened up as you put it that the spread has increased in supermarkets.

Ireland is not opening up it’s actually shutting down in front of our eyes. The question is why do NPHET and the government want to continue like it’s March all over again ?

Masks if anything are having a negative effect as the numbers are rising and there is absolutely no basis for another lockdown with the current trend of the virus over the last few weeks.

If anything things should be opening up quicker with what we’ve seen over last couple of weeks.

We know from hospital admissions in relation to the number of reported cases that this is well overhyped

I never said increase has occurred in supermarkets. I said that because mask compliance it hasn’t. What I said was, during lockdown there was a reason why supermarket staff possibly weren’t infected I.e. restricted numbers and fact staff were in age group that even if infected mild or asymptomatic.

As for masks having negative effect with numbers rising, have you considered that numbers could be way higher if no mask usage.mthere is actual evidence of countries implementing mask usage sooner (Italy) meaning less infected as opposed to countries who brought in later. https://www.newswise.com/coronavirus/countries-with-early-adoption-of-face-masks-showed-modest-covid-19-infection-rates/?article_id=733625

https://www.fastcompany.com/90519909/countries-where-everyone-wears-masks-saw-covid-death-rates-100-times-lower-than-projected

Again, with regards opening, you haven’t said what is prohibited.

As for overhype, you fail to rebut that hospital admissions are low, because of mask usage. Have you looked at countries who don’t have Mask requirements and their infection and mortality rates. You can’t say, since wearing masks rates are low as a reason that masks are not effective. It’s like saying a country which prohibits guns and has low gun deaths, means that gun control is not required.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 1:09pm

bush wrote: »

I honestly think masks are useless bordering on harmful. I wear them all day in work and no one uses them properly.

A seatbelt worn incorrectly is useless and bordering harmful. Should we get rid of seatbelts?

bush · 02-09-2020 1:18pm

No: other

joeguevara wrote: »

A seatbelt worn incorrectly is useless and bordering harmful. Should we get rid of seatbelts?

Do people drive taking on and off the seat belt the whole time?. I dunno how anyone could not wear a seatbelt properly to be honest.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 1:23pm

bush wrote: »

Do people drive taking on and off the seat belt the whole time?. I dunno how anyone could not wear a seatbelt properly to be honest.

Here is this seasons killer look

https://youtu.be/18GwKMxAWNw

odyssey06 · 02-09-2020 1:37pm

bush wrote: »

Do people drive taking on and off the seat belt the whole time?. I dunno how anyone could not wear a seatbelt properly to be honest.

There are people who wear it as a two-point a three-point with shoulder out.

Pregnant women need to be careful to ensure the seatbelt is set right:
https://www.nct.org.uk/pregnancy/travelling-when-pregnant/driving-while-pregnant-seat-belts-and-staying-safe

saneman · 02-09-2020 3:34pm

Yes: surgical

Dr. John Campbell: Pandemic science, Wear a mask to protect yourself

TL/DR (TL/DW?): Mask use protects wearer by minimising impact of virus (i.e. less severe form of the disease) if wearer becomes infected. This is due to the substantial reduction in amount of viral particles inhaled.

The data he presents has the references linked in video description.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 3:50pm

saneman wrote: »

Dr. John Campbell: Pandemic science, Wear a mask to protect yourself

TL/DR (TL/DW?): Mask use protects wearer by minimising impact of virus (i.e. less severe form of the disease) if wearer becomes infected. This is due to the substantial reduction in amount of viral particles inhaled.

The data he presents has the references linked in video description.

Everything he says is correct. I never thought I’d do this as a person who advocates wearing masks, but this guy should not be putting out videos as he does more harm than good. If I was anti mask the first thing I’d point out is this guy is not a medical doctor. He uses DR but is a doctor of Philosophy from Bolton university teaching bioscience in nurse education. He has no expertise in viruses and his main role is development of multimedia resources for nurses.

The fact that his videos could be used as expertise makes it easier for others to denigrate it. This guy is basically a fraud (with decent facts).

odyssey06 · 02-09-2020 3:56pm

joeguevara wrote: »

Everything he says is correct. I never thought I’d do this as a person who advocates wearing masks, but this guy should not be putting out videos as he does more harm than good. If I was anti mask the first thing I’d point out is this guy is not a medical doctor. He uses DR but is a doctor of Philosophy from Bolton university teaching bioscience in nurse education. He has no expertise in viruses and his main role is development of multimedia resources for nurses. The fact that his videos could be used as expertise makes it easier for others to denigrate it. This guy is basically a fraud (with decent facts).

He is not inventing his own facts e.g. he appears to call out his sources.
He is using his professional background in medical technical writing to explain the facts that are out there to the general public.
Then it seems a positive step to me to put those videos out there.

Away With The Fairies · 02-09-2020 4:13pm

Yes: valved

If a mask provides some protection to the wearer, shouldn't we also have eye protection?

02-09-2020 4:20pm

Yes: valved

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

If a mask provides some protection to the wearer, shouldn't we also have eye protection?

I don't breath through my eyes

Away With The Fairies · 02-09-2020 4:24pm

Yes: valved

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't breath through my eyes

The virus enters through the mucous membranes which includes the eyes.

granturismo · 02-09-2020 4:28pm

No: other

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

If a mask provides some protection to the wearer, shouldn't we also have eye protection?

Also gloves and a tyvex suit. Remember to use a fresh pair of gloves when taking all these off.

Face covering and hand washing will suffice.

MrStuffins · 02-09-2020 4:35pm

Yes: other

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

If a mask provides some protection to the wearer, shouldn't we also have eye protection?

Good idea, start wearing eye protection too! Nothing stopping you.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 4:44pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

He is not inventing his own facts e.g. he appears to call out his sources.
He is using his professional background in medical technical writing to explain the facts that are out there to the general public.
Then it seems a positive step to me to put those videos out there.

Odyssey you know which side I am on. Completely agree with your first line. As I said in the post that you replied to, the fact he is portraying himself as a doctor (intentionally or not) can be used by anti maskers as a reason to attack.

There are enough actual experts creating content that we can rely on their expertise. I have a PHD but I don’t create videos on Covid under the title DR (fact he capitalises both letters is proof of him using it to pretend he is a medical doctor) joeguevara talking about masks. Unless his LinkedIn omits all relevant virus experience he has as much expertise as me. (I have none). Also, top of his current role is partime doctor. Again, that appears to relate to his doctor of philosophy.

The fact that his only job is to create multi media for nurses shows his purpose. The fact everything he says is correct is his only saving grace. Could it be construed that he is giving the impression that he is a medical doctor which may be a criminal offence. If people based on that started requesting advice and were charged, what would be thoughts?

odyssey06 · 02-09-2020 4:57pm

joeguevara wrote: »

There are enough actual experts creating content that we can rely on their expertise. I have a PHD but I don’t create videos on Covid under the title DR (fact he capitalises both letters is proof of him using it to pretend he is a medical doctor) joeguevara talking about masks. Unless his LinkedIn omits all relevant virus experience he has as much expertise as me. (I have none). Also, top of his current role is partime doctor. Again, that appears to relate to his doctor of philosophy.
The fact that his only job is to create multi media for nurses shows his purpose. The fact everything he says is correct is his only saving grace. Could it be construed that he is giving the impression that he is a medical doctor which may be a criminal offence. If people based on that started requesting advice and were charged, what would be thoughts?

From the Youtube 'about' I don't think there's attempt at mis-representation:

https://www.youtube.com/c/Campbellteaching/about

My name is John Campbell and I am a retired Nurse Teacher and A and E nurse based in England. I also do some teaching in Asia and Africa when time permits. These videos are to help students to learn the background to all forms of health care. My PhD focused on the development of open learning resources for nurses nationally and internationally...
These media including videos, book, e book, articles, podcasts are not peer-reviewed. They should never replace individual clinical judgement from your own health care provider. No media-based material on this channel is suitable for using as professional medical advice. All comments are also for educational purposed only and must never replace advice from your own health care provider.

timetogo1 · 02-09-2020 5:09pm

No: I don't care enough

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

If a mask provides some protection to the wearer, shouldn't we also have eye protection?

All of the measures that are recommended are to reduce risk. They don't eliminate it. To eliminate it is prohibitivly complicated or expensive. For example in a hospital the risk is higher and they can't social distance so they take the extra precautions. For us with maintaining social distancing on top of the other precautions then doing most of our daily stuff is not a huge risk. .

Visors are available if you think the risk of the virus entering through your eyes is sufficient. Or goggles if the risk is closer to 100%.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 5:16pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

From the Youtube 'about' I don't think there's attempt at mis-representation:

https://www.youtube.com/c/Campbellteaching/about

My name is John Campbell and I am a retired Nurse Teacher and A and E nurse based in England. I also do some teaching in Asia and Africa when time permits. These videos are to help students to learn the background to all forms of health care. My PhD focused on the development of open learning resources for nurses nationally and internationally...
These media including videos, book, e book, articles, podcasts are not peer-reviewed. They should never replace individual clinical judgement from your own health care provider. No media-based material on this channel is suitable for using as professional medical advice. All comments are also for educational purposed only and must never replace advice from your own health care provider.

In all my life, I have never gone into YouTube about.

His LinkedIn specifically states as his main role part time doctor.

Listen, I’m splitting hairs. He literally speaks what actual experts do. I just think it opens up to anti maskers to say that non experts are doing videos.

As an aside, the guidance given to anyone accredited as a nurse who receives a doctorate is to always be completely transparent and if using Dr must explain that they are not a medical doctor.

arccosh · 02-09-2020 5:26pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

The figure you didn't post was our spare hospital beds and ICU capacity.
It's not baffling because this is an infectious disease which has the potential to overwhelm our health service.

From the main thread: 287 critical care beds in use compared to 286 same time last week. 41 available as of last night.

thanks for the info, hadn't actually seen the numbers before... Irish ICU's are a fine line between OK and overwhelmed

CalamariFritti · 02-09-2020 5:26pm

joeguevara wrote: »

Ok, firstly the reason there was no evidence of transmission in supermarkets is due to the fact there was no contract tracing. Did you ever consider why during lockdown there was exponential growth of infection when we were on lockdown and the only place people were going was supermarkets? Do you not think that at least some of the infections may have been transmitted there.

Masks were adopted here due to new understanding of transmission and to assist opening up. Nothing to do with seeing to be doing something.

No idea why Kildare Offaly and Laois were mentioned.

As for the last paragraph. Apart from cliched vitriol, what isn’t being moved forward? What in your opinion is being held back?

Well actually thats rubbish. There was no exponential growth during lockdown. In fact the R number started to come back down before lockdown even started. And then it didnt really drop any steeper during lockdown. Casting a lot of doubt on whether lockdown was ever necessary to begin with. But some people will fight tooth and nail to debunk that for some reason.

And then there was a group of people who were always present in the supermarkets during lockdown and after. The staff. And miniscule infections rates among them. It was ALL about doing something while in reality flying more or less blind. But again some people will fight tooth and nail...

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 5:56pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Well actually thats rubbish. There was no exponential growth during lockdown. In fact the R number started to come back down before lockdown even started. And then it didnt really drop any steeper during lockdown. Casting a lot of doubt on whether lockdown was ever necessary to begin with. But some people will fight tooth and nail to debunk that for some reason.

And then there was a group of people who were always present in the supermarkets during lockdown and after. The staff. And miniscule infections rates among them. It was ALL about doing something while in reality flying more or less blind. But again some people will fight tooth and nail...

Schools closed on 12 March. Public sector around same time. Full lockdown I think 29 March. Little to know testing until much later. Highest daily cases with little testing was a month later and stayed from 600 to 900 until late May. It was the. Realised that symptoms requiring a test were incorrect and was changed. Also, it was realised that asymptomatic cases were much higher than thought so saying that no exponential growth and reduction of R number is simply unverifiable.

As for lockdown, it’s a catch 22. Having lockdown meant numbers were low is being used as people saying lockdown wasn’t needed. But if no lockdown, then those numbers would be increased which is an argument for lockdown.

Again, see previous regarding supermarkets and demographic. But anyway, this is a mask thread. High compliance means numbers low. Again low numbers are being used as a reason not to wear masks, but I’ve shown comparisons between countries.

At this stage if someone is saying that masks are useless or harmful, nothing written will change their mind. Why bother trying. At this stage if they are in the minority, they are getting the best of both worlds. Protection from mask wearers, sporting rubbish while breathing without a cloth barrier over their mouth. Honestly I wish I was able to be as carefree as them.

CalamariFritti · 02-09-2020 6:15pm

I'm not trying to go back into what seems now a pointless discussion about the effectiveness of masks. But when you say we had exponential growth during lockdown and try to blame it on no masks in supermarkets then there is simply nothing to base that on and in fact everything points to the opposite. You're trying to rewrite history then and I will call you out on that.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 6:59pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I'm not trying to go back into what seems now a pointless discussion about the effectiveness of masks. But when you say we had exponential growth during lockdown and try to blame it on no masks in supermarkets then there is simply nothing to base that on and in fact everything points to the opposite. You're trying to rewrite history then and I will call you out on that.

I think you misunderstood what I said. I was replying to a point that said that little to no infections in supermarkets during lockdown when masks weren’t required. I actually stated that it is likely that little transmission in supermarkets during lockdown because strict numbers were allowed in. I said there was exponential (probably an incorrect term but when you go from 100 to 15000 in two months exponential is adequate) growth as masks weren’t required and since they are figures are low.

The poster in question was trying to state that masks have no evidence of working. If you look at my posts and in particular what they were responding to it hopefully is clear that I never said that no masks in supermarkets was the cause of huge rise of Covid cases in lockdown.

patnor1011 · 02-09-2020 9:15pm

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

joeguevara wrote: »

I think you misunderstood what I said. I was replying to a point that said that little to no infections in supermarkets during lockdown when masks weren’t required. I actually stated that it is likely that little transmission in supermarkets during lockdown because strict numbers were allowed in. I said there was exponential (probably an incorrect term but when you go from 100 to 15000 in two months exponential is adequate) growth as masks weren’t required and since they are figures are low.

The poster in question was trying to state that masks have no evidence of working. If you look at my posts and in particular what they were responding to it hopefully is clear that I never said that no masks in supermarkets was the cause of huge rise of Covid cases in lockdown.

To go from 100 to 15000 in two months show only one thing that there was exponential growth in testing which resulted in more cases. Not to mention that early testing was done with tests of doubtful quality and I personaly witnessed that dear in headlights look in people who were told they are positive and were taken away to isolation.
Also lockdown was not really lockdown as about third of workforce remained working to cater for those who stayed home. It came way too late to have any meaningful positive effect.

Charles Babbage · 02-09-2020 9:22pm

No: I don't care enough

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

If a mask provides some protection to the wearer, shouldn't we also have eye protection?

Yes, although the eyes pose less risk to others. Wearing sunglasses or the like would help.

joeguevara · 02-09-2020 9:50pm

patnor1011 wrote: »

To go from 100 to 15000 in two months show only one thing that there was exponential growth in testing which resulted in more cases. Not to mention that early testing was done with tests of doubtful quality and I personaly witnessed that dear in headlights look in people who were told they are positive and were taken away to isolation.
Also lockdown was not really lockdown as about third of workforce remained working to cater for those who stayed home. It came way too late to have any meaningful positive effect.

Honestly I got a kick out of that. Reminded me of trump saying that he is happy that they have so many cases, it means they are testing more.

https://youtu.be/ukGbEnAIXc8

But jokes aside, did you really say that exponential growth in cases was down to one thing, an exponential growth in testing. Did you forget that growth could be due to increased infection. As for testing, it was abysmal until late May. From March 13 until early May we were only doing 1000 tests a day and then it ramped up when tests were available. So the exponential increase was based on minimal testing.

But anyway, what’s the point of discussing any of this. No matter what is said to someone who thinks masks are pointless, they stonewall.

So as I can’t see my parents due to their age and risk, I wonder what it would be like to disregard everything and just convince myself that it’s a lie and see my mum and give her a hug and sit watching spurs with my dad and not worry that one cough is harmful. And no worries that my bro’s wife who had brain surgery a couple of weeks ago means I can’t see my nephews because of the risk. Fcuck it tommy had it right.

https://youtu.be/WFyOm9Bg2aM

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 02-09-2020 11:03pm

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

To the idiots who keep saying "It's just a mask" and who scream "TINFOIL HAT" and every second poster on this forum have a look at what's in store for us all if you don't wake up.

Soon "It's just a mask" will become "It's just an app". The video below shows you what's ahead. If you don't know what the green, amber and red colours mean there's a second video below of how it works in China. Health passports are on the way, this is an undeniable FACT, it is written in stone.

Skip one minute in.

Good luck.

Masks

Comments