Covid 19 Part XXI-27,908 in ROI (1,777 deaths) 6,647 in NI (559 deaths)(22/08)Read OP

Steve F

Speaking from personal experience the mandatory wearing of facemasks is a farce.

Example. A sign on the front window of an establishment.
"The wearing of face coverings is MANDATORY in this building.
Anyone NOT wearing one will NOT be permitted inside"

Needless to say it WASN'T unforced
What's the point unless ALL businesses and establishments are enforcing it?
Anyone?

ACitizenErased

expectationlost wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ErikaScally/status/1294939435923111936

To be fair, there’s a metre between those tables, no?
Not defending it btw before i get jumped at as usual, shut the place down

caveat emptor

ACitizenErased wrote: »

This whole blaming thing is ridiculous tbh, nobody goes out with the intention of being stupid and getting infected.
That Berlin place is known for this ****, it was made very clear last night. Blanket blaming an age group is incredibly out of touch.

I agree. Blanket blaming counties is different though. That’s ok because cork is doing fine and it’s an extension of the GAA.
Meanwhile every other county who has a case should cop on and be locked down post haste.

Am I right or am I right.

expectationlost

ACitizenErased wrote: »

To be fair, there’s a metre between those tables, no?
Not defending it btw before i get jumped at as usual, shut the place down

staff aren't protecting themselves and others

ACitizenErased

caveat emptor wrote: »

I agree. Blanket blaming counties is different though. That’s ok because cork is doing fine and it’s an extension of the GAA.
Meanwhile every other county who has a case should cop on and be locked down post haste.

Am I right or am I right.

Do you disagree that the majority of cases come from Dublin and Kildare? The numbers don’t lie.

Blame =/= stating a fact, with numbers to back it up.

Boggles

Half empty and everyone sitting down?

drunkmonkey

Steve F wrote: »

Speaking from personal experience the mandatory wearing of facemasks is a farce.

Example. A sign on the front window of an establishment.
"The wearing of face coverings is MANDATORY in this building.
Anyone NOT wearing one will NOT be permitted inside"

Needless to say it WASN'T unforced
What's the point unless ALL businesses and establishments are enforcing it?
Anyone?

I haven't been stopped anywhere, avoiding Centra though if you don't have one your charged €3 on the way in for one. Handed to you by someone who may or may not have covid, they can keep it.
I haven't spent any longer than 5 minutes in a shop though, probably put one on if in there for 15 minutes or more, trying to avoid those situations though.

expectationlost

Boggles wrote: »

Half empty and everyone sitting down?

there are plenty of other video and photos https://twitter.com/search?q=berlin%20d2&f=video

Jim Root

expectationlost wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ErikaScally/status/1294939435923111936

The punters need to be blamed here aswell.

caveat emptor

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Do you disagree that the majority of cases come from Dublin and Kildare? The numbers don’t lie.

Where do most of the people live?
Answer not cork.
There’s a thing called per capita, check it out.

The virus doesn’t recognise country borders let alone county borders.

Individual responsibility is the way to go

Steve F

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I haven't been stopped anywhere, avoiding Centra though if you don't have one your charged €3 on the way in for one. Handed to you by someone who may or may not have covid, they can keep it.
I haven't spent any longer than 5 minutes in a shop though, probably put one on if in there for 15 minutes or more, trying to avoid those situations though.

Yep.
My point I suppose is if the wearing of facemasks is mandatory yet we still can't get it right and enforce it,what chance have we got..... something so simple.
What else aren't people doing?

Renjit

ACitizenErased wrote: »

To be fair, there’s a metre between those tables, no?
Not defending it btw before i get jumped at as usual, shut the place down

Is that also within the criteria? Looks like normal pre covid seating arrangement to me.

ACitizenErased

caveat emptor wrote: »

Where do most of the people live?
Answer not cork.
There’s a thing called per capita, check it out.

The virus doesn’t recognise country borders let alone county borders.

Individual responsibility is the way to go

What’re you going on about Cork for? It has 5 times less cases per capita than Dublin, 40 times less than Kildare over the past two weeks.
Dublin and Kildare accounted for 75% of cases yesterday, and Leinster accounted for 82% of cases over the past two weeks. Check my posts for proof of this, I did the maths.
That’s not blaming, that’s stating a fact.

hmmm

Steve F wrote: »

Needless to say it WASN'T unforced
What's the point unless ALL businesses and establishments are enforcing it?
Anyone?

It's difficult for businesses now, they are all struggling and there are plenty of precious gob****es going around maskless trying to create trouble. Businesses have enough on their plate without trying to deal with these people.

I think we'll have to make it an offence to serve someone without a mask. That will make it easier for businesses.

Boggles

expectationlost wrote: »

there are plenty of other video and photos https://twitter.com/search?q=berlin%20d2&f=video

I know, but that particular picture was put up to show "wrong doing".

Renjit

hmmm wrote: »

It's difficult for businesses now, they are all struggling and there are plenty of precious gob****es going around maskless trying to create trouble. Businesses have enough on their plate without trying to deal with these people.

I think we'll have to make it an offence to serve someone without a mask. That will make it easier for businesses.

My flatmate didnt even know that masks are required in enclosed spaces now. Dunnes store rep had to tell him but let him in anyway.

drunkmonkey

hmmm wrote: »

It's difficult for businesses now, they are all struggling and there are plenty of precious gob****es going around maskless trying to create trouble. Businesses have enough on their plate without trying to deal with these people.

I think we'll have to make it an offence to serve someone without a mask. That will make it easier for businesses.

Who's going to enforce such a policy especially one based on no real world science the only evidence we have says mandatory masking may prevent 1 in every 200,00 cases.
I'd prefer it was based on time and specific to browsing shops rather than grab and go shops with doors on the high street.
There is no difference drawn between 1hr fluting around in TKMaxx in the shopping center and 2 minutes in the corner shop. That is bad policy, just like the €9 pizza policy.

niallo27

That video is the main headline line on the rte news App, would they ever **** off. How the **** does that even deserve to make the news.

hmmm

Renjit wrote: »

My flatmate didnt even know that masks are required in enclosed spaces now. Dunnes store rep had to tell him but let him in anyway.

There's a big difference between those who don't have a mask/out of touch/forget a mask and the "I'm deliberately not wearing a mask and look everyone I'm not wearing a mask because I'm special and you're all sheeple" crowd.

ACitizenErased

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Who's going to enforce such a policy especially one based on no real world science the only evidence we have says mandatory masking may prevent 1 in every 200,00 cases.
I'd prefer it was based on time and specific to browsing shops rather than grab and go shops with doors on the high street.
There is no difference drawn between 1hr fluting around in TKMaxx in the shopping center and 2 minutes in the corner shop. That is bad policy, just like the €9 pizza policy.

There’s a big misconception that masks are meant to stop cases. Not true. Masks are primarily to lower viral load. Masks could go a long way to explaining why we have so many asymptomatic cases (if the factory stories are to be believed) as of late.

Renjit

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Who's going to enforce such a policy especially one based on no real world science the only evidence we have says mandatory masking may prevent 1 in every 200,00 cases.
I'd prefer it was based on time and specific to browsing shops rather than grab and go shops with doors on the high street.
There is no difference drawn between 1hr fluting around in TKMaxx in the shopping center and 2 minutes in the corner shop. That is bad policy, just like the €9 pizza policy.

Here people are not able to follow simple advice and you talk about complicating it with more variables :pac:

Here is the list which I posted earlier and your all hail denmark is also going for strict mask policy now. It's time that you wait for Denmark for more updates:D

If someone asks: What's the evidence for mask wearing? Here is a list of *SEVENTY* papers, including reviews/meta-analysis and individual studies, in reverse chronological order. Includes 31 from 2020 alone (!!). META = meta-analysis or systematic review. (Source: https://threader.app/thread/1279144399897866248)

Steve F

hmmm wrote: »

It's difficult for businesses now, they are all struggling and there are plenty of precious gob****es going around maskless trying to create trouble. Businesses have enough on their plate without trying to deal with these people.

I think we'll have to make it an offence to serve someone without a mask. That will make it easier for businesses.

I forgot to say....This was an NCT Centre

growleaves

I'm always wary of people who draw conclusions with incomplete data.

Then why did you call immunity from reinfection a "pipe dream" when there's no conclusive evidence that people are being reinfected?

Renjit

hmmm wrote: »

There's a big difference between those who don't have a mask/out of touch/forget a mask and the "I'm deliberately not wearing a mask and look everyone I'm not wearing a mask because I'm special and you're all sheeple" crowd.

Earlier (a month or so), his reason for not wearing mask was that no one else was wearing mask and it looks stupid wearing one. What more can I say :pac:

caveat emptor

That Berlin D2 bar has some nice tweets.

https://twitter.com/berlin_d2/status/1250890725253951489?s=21

owlbethere

In one breath some experts are saying the virus is not transmissible from kids. Then there is this:

https://theliberal.ie/parents-are-being-advised-to-wash-lunchboxes-when-kids-return-to-school-as-virus-lives-longer-on-plastic-surfaces-2/

Some experts reccomending for parents to wash plastic lunch boxes every day when children go back to school because virus can live on plastic for some time. Surely advice like this would indicate that children with the virus can have infectious bodily fluids/saliva and can transmit the virus.

Jim_Hodge

Renjit wrote: »

My flatmate didnt even know that masks are required in enclosed spaces now. Dunnes store rep had to tell him but let him in anyway.

Renjit wrote: »

His reason for not wearing mask was that no one else is wearing mask and it looks stupid wearing one. What more can I say :pac:

Which was it?

drunkmonkey

Renjit wrote: »

Here people are not able to follow simple advice and you talk about complicating it with more variables :pac:

Here is the list which I posted earlier and your all hail denmark is also going for strict mask policy now. It's time that you wait for Denmark for more updates:D

If someone asks: What's the evidence for mask wearing? Here is a list of *SEVENTY* papers, including reviews/meta-analysis and individual studies, in reverse chronological order. Includes 31 from 2020 alone (!!). META = meta-analysis or systematic review. (Source: https://threader.app/thread/1279144399897866248)

Every single one based on clinical based studies in a labatory environment.
Let's wait for the Denmark study, can't see how the government are going to backtrack as it will require them admitting they are wrong on the effectiveness outside labatory settings.
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/

What absolutely stuns me though regardless of which of us is correct is were only discovering these things now. We heard the other day some masks are actually worse than no masks as we're turning the big droplets into smaller droplets which give a larger spray.

hmmm

owlbethere wrote: »

In one breath some experts are saying the virus is not transmissible from kids. Then there is this:

https://theliberal.ie/parents-are-being-advised-to-wash-lunchboxes-when-kids-return-to-school-as-virus-lives-longer-on-plastic-surfaces-2/

Some experts reccomending for parents to wash plastic lunch boxes every day when children go back to school because virus can live on plastic for some time. Surely advice like this would indicate that children with the virus can have infectious bodily fluids/saliva and can transmit the virus.

I think some of these posts are missing the point. If kids are being exposed to the virus in classrooms or lunchboxes, we've already failed. We need to keep community transmission low, so that there is a very low likelihood of outbreaks in schools. Whether we can do that or not remains to be seen.

Boggles

ACitizenErased wrote: »

There’s a big misconception that masks are meant to stop cases. Not true. Masks are primarily to lower viral load.

That's not true.

Masks prevent infections, it's a simply concept that has been around for a 100 years.

Two compelling case reports also suggest that masks can prevent transmission in high-risk scenarios, said Chin-Hong and Rutherford. In one case, a man flew from China to Toronto and subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. He had a dry cough and wore a mask on the flight, and all 25 people closest to him on the flight tested negative for COVID-19. In another case, in late May, two hair stylists in Missouri had close contact with 140 clients while sick with COVID-19. Everyone wore a mask and none of the clients tested positive.

Renjit

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

Which was it?

Same flatmate. The second instance is old one (a month or more) when he used to wear mask.

hmmm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What absolutely stuns me though regardless of which of us is correct is were only discovering these things now. We heard the other day some masks are actually worse than no masks as we're turning the big droplets into smaller droplets which give a larger spray.

You know how science works right? We run experiments and develop our knowledge over time. We can only work off the knowledge we have now.

In that particular study, it was a very small number of masks (bandana types) which were shown to be a problem, the rest all had at least some impact in reducing transmission. That's how science works.

ACitizenErased

Boggles wrote: »

That's not true.

Masks prevent infections, it's a simply concept that has been around for a 100 years.

Saying masks 100% prevent infection is incredibly dangerous. It has been made fairly clear that masks are to be used with social distancing and all other hygiene measures.

John O.Groats

niallo27 wrote: »

That video is the main headline line on the rte news App, would they ever **** off. How the **** does that even deserve to make the news.

Of course it does. This was dangerous reckless selfish moronic behaviour that was being exposed. No matter how much you or anyone else want to bury your head in the sand in denial about it. Hopefully if any other morons engage in this behaviour they will receive the full glare of exposure as well.

GooglePlus

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Every single one based on clinical based studies in a labatory environment.
Let's wait for the Denmark study, can't see how the government are going to backtrack as it will require them admitting they are wrong on the effectiveness outside labatory settings.
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/

What absolutely stuns me though regardless of which of us is correct is were only discovering these things now. We heard the other day some masks are actually worse than no masks as we're turning the big droplets into smaller droplets which give a larger spray.

They're pretty good at mimicking real life environments.

It's safe to see masks clearly work.

Renjit

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Saying masks 100% prevent infection is incredibly dangerous. It has been made fairly clear that masks are to be used with social distancing and all other hygiene measures.

I think its reasonable to assume they reduce the risk. No one is saying masks make you invincible.

Other parameters like good hygiene and social distancing go hand in hand. It doesnt have to be mutually exclusive.

drunkmonkey

hmmm wrote: »

You know how science works right? We run experiments and develop our knowledge over time. We can only work off the knowledge we have now.

In that particular study, it was a very small number of masks (bandana types) which were shown to be a problem, the rest all had at least some impact in reducing transmission. That's how science works.

The science https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/
Why are we even bothering to trial vaccines when they just work in the lab, I'll tell you why as we can't see the unintended consequences without real world trails.
Leister in the UK which went into lockdown and introduced mandatory Masks cases went up, we introduced them cases went up, I'm not saying correlation equals causation but we just don't really know yet. I'm sceptical the corner shop is a major source or infection transmission that warrants 6mts in jail.

Renjit

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The science https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/
Why are we even bothering to trial vaccines when they just work in the lab, I'll tell you why as we can't see the unintended consequences without real world trails.
Leister in the UK which went into lockdown and introduced mandatory Masks cases went up, we introduced them cases went up, I'm not saying correlation equals causation but we just don't really know yet. I'm sceptical the corner shop is a major source or infection transmission that warrants 6mts in jail.

What about these false equivalences? Vaccines have long term impact (side effects). No mask is going to give you arthritis after years of wearing.

hmmm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm sceptical the corner shop is a major source or infection transmission that warrants 6mts in jail.

Seeing as you're not a public health expert and haven't published any scientific studies to prove your opinions, I'm going to follow the public health advice instead.

Sparko

Just a quick update, I mentioned a few days ago that I had a relative who was determined to be a close contact of a positive case.

The positive case was confirmed on Thursday, contact tracers were given details on Friday, my relative was contacted this morning and is waiting on a test date now. He has isolated since hearing of the positive case.

His partner is also a close contact of the confirmed positive case. She asked her GP for a test immediately as she had cold like symptoms. Tested on Friday, negative result today thankfully. She was contacted by tracers on Saturday but she'd already had the test at that stage, and the tracers told her she could go back to work on Monday if she tested negative. Her GP also stated this. But the message she got with her test results said continue isolating until next weekend.

The HSE website says close contacts with negative results should continue to isolate and receive a second test, but the GP and tracers seem to have contradicted this in this case. This inconsistency in message is worrying to me.

Boggles

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Saying masks 100% prevent infection is incredibly dangerous.

Who said that?

drunkmonkey

GooglePlus wrote: »

They're pretty good at mimicking real life environments.

It's safe to see masks clearly work.

That's not what little science we have in the real world says, we know some masks cause more damage than good. I don't know how you can interpret face coverings as mandated by the government here are universally a good idea.
I'm sick or seeing them thrown everywhere, counted 5 on the beach the other day that's besides the ones on the street and getting blown into my garden. There filthy disgusting yokes and feck all people are using them in a clinically acceptable way.

ACitizenErased

Sparko wrote: »

Just a quick update, I mentioned a few days ago that I had a relative who was determined to be a close contact of a positive case.

The positive case was confirmed on Thursday, contact tracers were given details on Friday, my relative was contacted this morning and is waiting on a test date now. He has isolated since hearing of the positive case.

His partner is also a close contact of the confirmed positive case. She asked her GP for a test immediately as she had cold like symptoms. Tested on Friday, negative result today thankfully. She was contacted by tracers on Saturday but she'd already had the test at that stage, and the tracers told her she could go back to work on Monday. Her GP also stated this. But the message she got with her test results said continue isolating until next weekend.

The HSE website says close contacts with negative contacts should isolate and receive a second test, but the GP and tracers seem to have contradicted this in this case. This inconsistency in message is worrying to me.

I thought we were supposed to be testing contacts twice

expectationlost

Boggles wrote: »

I know, but that particular picture was put up to show "wrong doing".

its was put up as 1 of 4 photos the promoter posted, it would have been selective not to show all 4, you are being selective.

the corpo

Renjit wrote: »

Is that also within the criteria? Looks like normal pre covid seating arrangement to me.

This picture raises a different question for me, and one I may be wrong on, but unless the people at all those tables (and every table I've seen at a restaurant/cafe) recently are from the same household, should they not be seated further apart? Or am I wrong on the advice on this?

is_that_so

hmmm wrote: »

Seeing as you're not a public health expert and haven't published any scientific studies to prove your opinions, I'm going to follow the public health advice instead.

One doesn't need to be an expert to read the data on cases we've had. Based on that said corner shop is very low risk. The mask wearing is based on anticipated larger numbers and the likelihood that distancing will be far more difficult to do. If people see it as the panacea and drop other more important preventative measures then risks can rise.

Renjit

the corpo wrote: »

This picture raises a different question for me, and one I may be wrong on, but unless the people at all those tables (and every table I've seen at a restaurant/cafe) recently are from the same household, should they not be seated further apart? Or am I wrong on the advice on this?

Ideally they should be seated in alternate square spaces. This looks like a shoddy job to begin with. Belongs to /r/notmyjob :pac:

drunkmonkey

Renjit wrote: »

What about these false equivalences? Vaccines have long term impact (side effects). No mask is going to give you arthritis after years of wearing.

Don't know anything about the vaccine, just know I'll be in the 30/40% who don't take it until satisfied it's safe, certainly haven't my flight to Moscow booked like some here.

fm

niallo27 wrote: »

That video is the main headline line on the rte news App, would they ever **** off. How the **** does that even deserve to make the news.

A national broadcaster having this their top story, imagine the BBC doing that,RTE keeping the hysteria high
it's barely even daily mail ****e

Sparko

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I thought we were supposed to be testing contacts twice

As did I. Not sure what has happened here and the conflicting comments coming from the various parts of the system is not ideal.