To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Seanergy

On this day, 14 years ago, Micheál Martin launched Business Continuity Planning – Responding to an Influenza Pandemic, a report which includes a user friendly preparedness checklist for enterprises and ten illustrative case studies.

DWN PDF LINK
https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/hl/hcaiamr/flu/detebcm.pdf

The user friendly preparedness checklist was replicated word for last year and repackaged as 2020.

The ten illustrative case studies from 2007, never resurfaced. They were based on a real company or on a composite from a number of real businesses and fictionalised in some respects.

Masks were mentioned twice, once in the IFSC Financial Services Company case study and once in the Medical Devices Company case study.

Medical Devices Company case study: Response to Workplace Risk:

The businessis considering whether to acquire a supply of disposable N95 facemasks for use during an influenza pandemic. They may be more practicable in this industry than in others because employees are accustomed to wearing specialist clothing. The business is investigating how effective face masks would be in a clean room environment, and how many would be needed per employee per day, before making a decision.

IFSC Financial Services Company case study: Response to Workplace Risk:

The business has acquired disposable face masks to be available for use by employees in the event of a pandemic. The quantity acquired was calculated at three per employee per day for three months.

AlekSmart

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Saw an ambulance today with two workers in the front, one of them wearing a mask over mouth and nose and another under their chin and not a window open.

Being ambulance workers, I thought they would have more cop on.

Perhaps they Have......?

Away With The Fairies

AlekSmart wrote: »

Perhaps they Have......?

Well one of them has, the other doesn't.

Away With The Fairies

Has anyone ever bought kn95 masks from Wish?

Came across 200 kn95 masks for €26, which makes me think that there's something dodgy about them but they're made in China anyways, so not like I can get better masks here. Took a chance and I'll probably do a test to see how genuine they are (YouTube has a test that involves cutting it open and lighting it on fire to see if it's genuine).

Seanergy

Is it NPHET that are not requiring face masks for under 12's in school? Who made the decision regarding age?

speckle

Not to forget some people are exempted from the government rules and are being discriminated against by a minority

https://ichr.ie/anti-discrimination-campaign-face-coverings/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFE9BrctseU

pjohnson

speckle wrote: »

Not to forget some people are exempted from the government rules and are being discriminated against by a minority

https://ichr.ie/anti-discrimination-campaign-face-coverings/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFE9BrctseU

Has she completed her gofundme yet?

Ha Long Bay

pjohnson wrote: »

Has she completed her gofundme yet?

Seems to have grifted over 100K so far.

one world order

NOBODY should we wearing a mask at this stage. I never wore a mask during this media induced fear propaganda. Time to move on folks, people were too easily brainwashed by the dishonest media yet again.

speckle

pjohnson wrote: »

Has she completed her gofundme yet?

Anti-Discrimination Campaign (Face Coverings)

Statutory Instrument 296 of 2020 stipulates the law around face coverings in shops and other businesses in Ireland – this regulation states that a person may not enter or remain in a shop (or other business) without wearing a face covering unless they have a “reasonable excuse”, with a reasonable excuse including physical or mental illness, impairment, disability or severe distress.

The Equal Status Act regulates private businesses in relation to refusal of service and provides that it is illegal to refuse service to a person on the basis of nine (9) protected grounds, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, age, gender, family status, civic status, membership of the travelling community and disability.

Many of the reasonable excuses listed under S.I. 296 of 2020 amount to a disability under the Equal Status Acts and it may therefore be considered illegal to refuse service to a person unable to wear a face covering due to a disability.

The ICHR has become increasingly concerned regarding the direct and outright discrimination being suffered by members of the public arising from an inability to wear a face covering in shops (or other businesses) and has therefore today commenced its anti-discrimination campaign – which is aimed at fighting back against this wave of discrimination.

The purpose of this campaign will be to select five (5) cases, the Complainants from which will be represented by the ICHR’s Solicitor and Junior Counsel, who after carrying out sufficient diligence on the incident of alleged discrimination, will commence writing to the shop or other business the subject of the alleged discrimination with a view to resolving the incident of alleged discrimination.

Full details of the anti-discrimination campaign will be disclosed to those who are selected as Complainants.

If you wish to apply to join this campaign, please completed the questionnaire set out below.

https://ichr.ie/anti-discrimination-campaign-face-coverings/

Seanergy

Seanergy

Seanergy

Nphet to consider wearing of masks for primary school children.

https://www.independent.ie/news/nphet-to-consider-wearing-of-masks-for-primary-school-children-40146449.html

Seanergy

Not sure sure at all who the 'we' is in this article, or if all the content inside the points is accurate at all.

Covid-19: 10 things we thought about the virus a year ago – that turned out to be wrong: IT article LINK

3. Masks don’t work

There was resistance to changing the guidance on mask wearing in the early days of the pandemic. In the beginning, some of this was due to global shortages of personal protective equipment. But even as late as May, when members of the public were being told to wear a mask on public transport or indoors where they couldn’t socially distance, chief medical officer Dr Tony Holohan continued to be “concerned about the fact that use of face coverings may be seen as some kind of ... magic shield”, a phrase echoed by then-Health Minister, Simon Harris.

There were concerns, too, that the public would not wear their masks properly, and that this could heighten the risk.

A key scientific moment came in early June with the changing of the guidance on mask wearing by the World Health Organisation and the European Centre for Disease Control. The HSE began advising people to wear masks indoors too from the same time, and mask wearing became mandatory in August.

This should have happened earlier, says Prof Luke O’Neill, Trinity College Dublin immunologist. “As soon as [asymptomatic spread] became clear, mask-wearing became absolutely essential because then everybody wears a mask and then anybody who could be infected could spread it. Sadly, our administration dragged their heels on it. I was banging on about it probably a good four to six weeks before the guidelines said it. I had seen the science: we’d got to have masks.”

Seanergy

Today the American Mask Manufacturers Association & INDA both wrote letters to the Biden Administration supporting 'our' scientists letter, & showing there is sufficient US supply & capacity to provide workers w/ the needed respiratory protection (respirators & ASTM face cov.)

The letter makes clear that there is NOT a U.S. supply problem, only the failure to support production & to recommend/require the necessary respiratory protection for workers with higher risk of exposure...

Look at the liquid gold(2nd image) production ramp up ( 0 )( 0 ) That was the key.

Seanergy

Court of Appeal rejects appeal against High Court decision in failed challenge to Covid restrictions by the two individuals, below.

EXTTRACT FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL FROM MAY

GEMMA O’DOHERTY & JOHN WATERS
APPELLANTS
AND
THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
RESPONDENTS
AND
DÁIL ÉIREANN, SEANAD EIREANN AND AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The applicants are aggrieved by the judge’s criticisms of them for giving unsubstantiated opinions and speeches, engaging in empty rhetoric and seeking to draw a historic parallel with Nazi Germany. They say that they are experienced journalists in the fields of law, science and medicine, and that what they had contended for was fully supported by scientific studies, factual reports and medically-qualified persons. The judge is criticised for showing deference to a government whose actions are described as catastrophic, leading to the virtual abolition of the most fundamental rights and freedoms of the Irish people. By way of example, the applicants assert that “no scientific studies exist to support the wearing of face coverings to stop the spread of viruses, while voluminous scientific evidence concludes that facemasks are deleterious to human health and can cause oxygen deprivation, lung disease and cancer”. At another stage, in the course of oral submissions, the applicant, Ms. O’Doherty, asserted without equivocation that there is a cure available for coronavirus in the form of hydroxychloroquine zinc and vitamin C, but that what some health services have been doing is placing patients in the intensive care unit, putting them on ventilators and actually bringing about their deaths. This, she claims, is well documented. To put it at its mildest, there is a tendency on the part of the applicants to present, as unchallenged fact, what is keenly in dispute. One is reminded of comments in another context of the existence of “alternate facts”.

Kunta Kinte

Seanergy wrote: »

Court of Appeal rejects appeal against High Court decision in failed challenge to Covid restrictions by the two individuals, below.

EXTTRACT FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL FROM MAY

GEMMA O’DOHERTY & JOHN WATERS
APPELLANTS
AND
THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
RESPONDENTS
AND
DÁIL ÉIREANN, SEANAD EIREANN AND AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The applicants are aggrieved by the judge’s criticisms of them for giving unsubstantiated opinions and speeches, engaging in empty rhetoric and seeking to draw a historic parallel with Nazi Germany. They say that they are experienced journalists in the fields of law, science and medicine, and that what they had contended for was fully supported by scientific studies, factual reports and medically-qualified persons. The judge is criticised for showing deference to a government whose actions are described as catastrophic, leading to the virtual abolition of the most fundamental rights and freedoms of the Irish people. By way of example, the applicants assert that “no scientific studies exist to support the wearing of face coverings to stop the spread of viruses, while voluminous scientific evidence concludes that facemasks are deleterious to human health and can cause oxygen deprivation, lung disease and cancer”. At another stage, in the course of oral submissions, the applicant, Ms. O’Doherty, asserted without equivocation that there is a cure available for coronavirus in the form of hydroxychloroquine zinc and vitamin C, but that what some health services have been doing is placing patients in the intensive care unit, putting them on ventilators and actually bringing about their deaths. This, she claims, is well documented. To put it at its mildest, there is a tendency on the part of the applicants to present, as unchallenged fact, what is keenly in dispute. One is reminded of comments in another context of the existence of “alternate facts”.

This is just another reminder of how these two characters are complete nutjobs.

Seanergy

Professor Gabriel Scally backs mask wearing for primary pupils. INDO LINK

Leading public health expert Dr Gabriel Scally says primary-age pupils should be wearing masks in school and that more attention needs to be paid to ventilation in the classroom.

Dr Scally told a webinar on safety in schools that that he was “at a loss to know” why mask-wearing wasn’t happening for children for children from six up, as part of the suite of infection prevention and measures.

In a discussion document on safe school re-opening released today, ISAG also calls for mask wearing by pupils from age six up, in line with World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines.

Seanergy

Current policy of not requiring primary school children to wear masks is to continue for “the present time” after HIQA review. NPHET briefing this eve heard that this policy should be kept under review though & that evolving evidence may lead to changes.

Away With The Fairies

Seanergy wrote: »

Current policy of not requiring primary school children to wear masks is to continue for “the present time” after HIQA review. NPHET briefing this eve heard that this policy should be kept under review though & that evolving evidence may lead to changes.

This sounds like what the adults had last year. No face masks at first and with evidence we had to start wearing them.

They are slowly warning parents here with this kind of messaging.

Irish Stones

Seanergy wrote: »

Current policy of not requiring primary school children to wear masks is to continue for “the present time” after HIQA review. NPHET briefing this eve heard that this policy should be kept under review though & that evolving evidence may lead to changes.

I keep asking myself why this. Like if children couldn't be contagious.

Seanergy

Advice to NPHET: Wearing of face masks in the community to reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2
Health Information and Quality Authority Published 17 December 2020

Several countries identify groups of individuals that are exempt from obligations in relation to face mask use. Children are exempt in many countries; however, the age at which the exemption applies varies substantially (ranging from those aged less than two years to those aged less than 13 years).

The majority of countries included do not cite or report in their guidance documents the literature evidence that was used to underpin their recommendations on face mask use. However, it should be considered that the format of many of these guidance documents is that of concise summaries, often one to two-page documents that lay out the key recommendations and which are intended for a lay audience. Therefore, it should be noted that whilst underpinning evidence is often not cited within the text, this does not mean that the evidence does not exist or that it wasn’t used to inform the recommendations made.

The age of recommended mask wearing in children was highlighted as needing clear and consistent messaging, alongside the rationale for the age bands used. It was acknowledged that age cut-offs differ across countries, and this may give rise to confusion.

Seanergy

Worth noting that "anxiety" is mentioned only once by HIQA, in the Dec 'Face Mask Report', Anxiety is not mentioned in HIQA's Aug 'Face Mask Report'.

HIQA Dec:

The high level of buy-in from citizens with respect to public health recommendations was acknowledged. However, anxiety and resistance to particular measures were also noted.

Anxiety = ?

Seanergy

Regarding HIQA 'Face Mask Reports'. There have been 3 published re the general public. Downloadable PDF's available from

Published on 04 Mar 2021
Reducing the minimum age for mask wearing requirements and recommendations in COVID-19
https://www.hiqa.ie/reports-and-publications/health-technology-assessment/reducing-minimum-age-mask-wearing

Published on 17 Dec 2020
Face mask use in the community to reduce SARS-COV-2 transmission – rapid evidence update
https://www.hiqa.ie/reports-and-publications/health-technology-assessment/face-mask-use-community-reduce-sars-cov-2

Published on 21 Aug 2020
Face masks in the community
https://www.hiqa.ie/reports-and-publications/health-technology-assessment/evidence-summary-face-masks-community

Seanergy

This is the first reference to mask wearing for children at a COVID-19 Expert Advisory Group Meeting
Wednesday 06/05/2020

Mask wearing in the community
The Chair provided an update on NPHET’s consideration of the issue at its meeting on Friday 01/05/20. The EAG presented its advice to NPHET in relation to the wearing of face masks in the community. NPHET acknowledged the advice but believes medical grade face masks should be prioritised for HCW at this time. NPHET would like EAG to look at the role for non-medical grade masks in the community.

A draft NPHET document in relation to the use of face masks/coverings in the community was circulated to the Group in advance of the meeting to inform discussion. The Chair asked the Group whether any further EAG opinion should be offered to NPHET in relation to mask use in the community. There was a general discussion on the issue in which the following points were made:

• There is insufficient evidence to recommend mandatory or universal cloth mask use in the community.
• Some members believe masks should be used when social distancing cannot be maintained in areas like supermarkets.
• Even if they are not 100% effective, a 10-15% reduction in transmission could have an impact.
• There is an absence of robust evidence to support community mask use and there is a lack of consensus among experts regarding the potential benefit; modelling suggests even partial protection with a mask can have a real impact on transmission.
• Some of the impact is potentially related to the timing of the introduction of community mask wearing.
• Given that many people are already using cloth masks, efforts should be directed to making sure they are being used as safely as possible and providing advice on cleaning and donning and doffing.
• It was suggested that it is not the remit of the EAG to give advice on how to safely make a mask at home.
• The community wearing of masks would most likely be one of the first measures to be lifted as soon as community transmission is no longer widespread.
• Mask wearing is not a substitute for other measures such as hand hygiene and physical distancing.

There was agreement that characterising the wearing of cloth masks in the community as ‘an act of solidarity” could be problematic. The aim of appropriate mask wearing is for infection control and not for solidarity. It may give the impression that those not wearing masks are disregarding the welfare of others which could give rise to social tensions. In addition, there will be some people who will find it difficult to wear masks, such as those with communication difficulties and younger children.
Action:

• EAG notes its previous advice to NPHET on the use of surgical masks in the community – this has not changed.
• Given that many people are choosing to wear masks, the HPSC infection prevention and control team will prepare guidance on how to do this in a safer manner and will bring this back to the EAG for review.

Seanergy

This is the 2nd reference to mask wearing for children at a COVID-19 Expert Advisory Group Meeting
Monday 11/05/2020

Mask wearing in the community
This item was not included in the original agenda, however a draft document prepared by the HSE IPC team on the use of face masks by the general public was discussed. The aim of the document is to provide information about the use of face masks in everyday life and not in healthcare settings. The draft document avoids the use of technical language in the interests of making it easily accessible. The document provides information on the role that masks may play in stopping the spread of the disease and features a “Do’s and Don’ts” section on mask wearing. The guidance also stresses the importance of other measures including self-isolation, social distancing and hand hygiene and touches on the skin irritation that can arise with mask use. Prof Cormican presented the document but indicated that it does not reflect his views with regard to the use of masks in the community.

The Group welcomed the document and provided some initial feedback on it.

Some members discussed the availability of surgical-type masks in the shops – these may not be of the highest standard and most likely are not as effective as masks used in the healthcare setting. It was suggested that the DoH may need to provide advice for the public on this. The observations of one member in a hospital clinic setting suggest that people can find masks uncomfortable and repeatedly touch their faces, while those not wearing masks focus more on hand hygiene. The requirement to wash masks at 60 degrees might be an issue although the use of a hot iron might be an alternative. The requirement for guidance on how to make cloth masks was noted, as poorly made and ill-fitting masks lead to poor infection control. The issue of mask wearing by children was discussed and a number of members had concerns in this regard, including the fact that they would be a choking hazard for younger children. It was agreed that children less than 13 should not use masks.

While there is no majority consensus within the EAG for a recommendation on the use of cloth masks in the community in instances where social distancing cannot be maintained, it was agreed that advice should be provided on how people who choose to wear masks in the community can do so in a safe manner. Members will respond with comments on the document directly to Prof Cormican and a revised draft of the document will be tabled for agreement at the next EAG.

Action:

• EAG will provide feedback on the draft guidance document on use of face masks by the general public.
• The revised document will be tabled at the next EAG meeting for approval.

Seanergy

Important to note, that two days later at the COVID-19 Expert Advisory Group Meeting on Wednesday 13/05/2020

The minutes from Monday 11 May 2020 were approved with a number of textual changes on pages 2 and 3. Prof Cormican also asked that it be noted in the minutes that, although he was involved in preparing the guidance on mask wearing in the community, the document does not reflect his views.

Mask wearing in the community
This featured as item 2 on the agenda but was taken as item 3 at the meeting.
The updated guidance prepared by the IPC team which provides advice to the public on the safe use of masks in the community was discussed. The changes made since the last iteration were outlined. The Group provided some feedback on the document. Members can revert with further comments by tonight.

Action:
• It was agreed that members would revert with comments on the guidance document by tonight in order for the document to be submitted to NPHET tomorrow.

lee_baby_simms

Interesting new report from the CDC here. It seems that mask mandates reduce infection but at a much lower rate than anticipated.

I suspect this may be due to poor quality materials, bad habits and lack of distancing due to complacency that has been outlined in this thread.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm

Glenbhoy

Seanergy wrote: »

Professor Gabriel Scally backs mask wearing for primary pupils. INDO LINK
Dr Scally told a webinar on safety in schools that that he was “at a loss to know” why mask-wearing wasn’t happening for children for children from six up, as part of the suite of infection prevention and measures.

Does Dr. Scally not know any 6 year olds, because if he did, that might answer the question for him. My OH is teaching 8yo, 2 or 3 wear masks from time to time, between constant adjusting, wearing on head and (i kid you not) a nose blowing incident (well, there must have been no tissue handy), it's quite easy to understand why their effectiveness might be limited in a primary school environment.

lee_baby_simms

Glenbhoy wrote: »

Does Dr. Scally not know any 6 year olds, because if he did, that might answer the question for him. My OH is teaching 8yo, 2 or 3 wear masks from time to time, between constant adjusting, wearing on head and (i kid you not) a nose blowing incident (well, there must have been no tissue handy), it's quite easy to understand why their effectiveness might be limited in a primary school environment.

This is it. We know masks can be effective but it’s an extremely complex behaviour to measure. So many variables can impact how useful they are, quality of material, personal hygiene and bad habits can render them practically useless.

I’d argue that with small children that they would lose all benefit in terms of virus spread but certainly make an impact on a child’s development.