To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

GT89

https://twitter.com/Niall_Boylan/status/1305938954525511682?s=19

odyssey06

Niall Boylan is too dumb to understand the concept of viral load.

AMKC

There really is some thick people out there.so I was on the bus this evening a short journey thankfully. In fact I was waiting longer for the bus than the time I was on ih bug that's another story. Anyway I seen the bus coming and but on my mask. Hot on the bus driver not wearing a mask but does have a shield between him and passengers still I would prefer if he was wearing a mask. Anyway I got on the bus played and walked down the aisle. Most people in fact all seemed to have there makes on. It was only when I sat down I seen there was a thick stupid idiot two seats up from me who was half wearing his mask. I wanted to say something but did not. Next time I see this I know what I will say. Any thf thick idiot got off before my and where to but an Aldi still wearing his mask below his nose. I can not even comprehend how one can be so stupid as to do this. Its harder to wear a mask like that than it is the right way. These people make me angry. If he does not want to wear his mask right then he should not be on the bus.

GT89

odyssey06 wrote: »

Niall Boylan is too dumb to understand the concept of viral load.

If masks reduce viral load then why are they mandatory?

Graham

GT89 wrote: »

If masks reduce viral load then why are they mandatory?

if you don't wear a mask it won't reduce anything. Including spread of coronavirus.

GT89

AMKC wrote: »

Hot on the bus driver not wearing a mask but does have a shield between him and passengers still I would prefer if he was wearing a mask.

Bus drivers wearing masks is a safety issue

odyssey06

GT89 wrote: »

If masks reduce viral load then why are they mandatory?

Yes 2 plus 2 equals 4.

Less viral load should mean less infections (as the droplets are contained by the mask and those that arent are more easily dispersed) and for those who are infected, less severe symptoms.

Sconsey

GT89 wrote: »

If masks reduce viral load then why are they mandatory?

Wait what? masks can reduce the risk of spreading the virus through droplets and potentially aerosolized particles. The potential for a large viral load in a droplet is higher than in aerosolized particle. Is any of this making any sense to you yet?

GT89

Graham wrote: »

if you don't wear a mask it won't reduce anything. Including spread of coronavirus.

But if masks reduce viral loads are reduced by masks then people wearing are protected anyway so it dosen't matter if some are not. Why can't the government just reccomend elderly/vulnerable wear N95 or FFP2 masks and not have them mandatory.

odyssey06

GT89 wrote: »

But if masks reduce viral loads are reduced by masks then people wearing are protected anyway so it dosen't matter if some are not. Why can't the government just reccomend elderly/vulnerable wear N95 or FFP2 masks and not have them mandatory.

Masks reduce viral loads when worn primarily as a barrier and secondarily as PPE. Thats why they are mandatory because it is primarily about them being used as a barrier.

xhomelezz

GT89 wrote: »

But if masks reduce viral loads are reduced by masks then people wearing are protected anyway so it dosen't matter if some are not. Why can't the government just reccomend elderly/vulnerable wear N95 or FFP2 masks and not have them mandatory.

Credit to you for keep trying

Graham

Are we back on the "I'm going to pretend I don't understand the main purpose of masks is to reduce spread" cycle already?

I suppose we haven't done it for a few days.

Sconsey

GT89 wrote: »

But if masks reduce viral loads are reduced by masks then people wearing are protected anyway so it dosen't matter if some are not.

GT89

odyssey06 wrote: »

Masks reduce viral loads when worn primarily as a barrier and secondarily as PPE. Thats why they are mandatory because it is primarily about them being used as a barrier.

But an N95 or FFP2 would provide protection. Reccomend these for vulnerable and they are given protection that means there wouldn't have to be legal intimidation into wearing them and Garda time could be saved.

Graham

Who's intimidated?

Just wear a mask

odyssey06

GT89 wrote: »

But an N95 or FFP2 would provide protection. Reccomend these for vulnerable and they are given protection that means there wouldn't have to be legal intimidation into wearing them and Garda time could be saved.

Why do you think they arent?
Anything to do with their shortage, priority for health care staff and they need to be trained in their use as PPE for secure fit and protection?

Legal intimindation? I dont know what that means ... are you legally intimidated into wearing a seatbelt?

GT89

odyssey06 wrote: »

Why do you think they arent?
Anything to do with their shortage, priority for health care staff and they need to be trained in their use as PPE for secure fit and protection?

Legal intimindation? I dont know what that means ... are you legally intimidated into wearing a seatbelt?

The shortage can be solved by using reusable masks and training can be solved by the government putting out an educational campaign on their proper use.

Apples with oranges masks are not seatbelts last time I checked. The legal intimidation is not coming form the Gardai but the likes of power happy shop workers and bus drivers whose responsibility is to serve not enforce laws.

You use the seatbelt analogy but last time I was on a long distance coach the majority of oassengers did not use a seatbelt however no issue was taken by the driver even though it's a legal requirement to wear them yet Andy Heasman was bundled off a Bus Eireann coach for not wearing a mask. Whilst nothing was done about the masked non seatbelt wearing other passengers.

Graham

GT89 wrote: »

The shortage can be solved by using reusable masks and training can be solved by the government putting out an educational campaign on their proper use.

There's no issue with shortages for medical staff now afaik.

The general public are wearing reusable or disposable masks which helps keep it that way.

odyssey06

GT89 wrote: »

The shortage can be solved by using reusable masks and training can be solved by the government putting out an educational campaign on their proper use.
Apples with oranges masks are not seatbelts last time I checked. The legal intimidation is not coming form the Gardai but the likes of power happy shop workers and bus drivers whose responsibility is to serve not enforce laws.
You use the seatbelt analogy but last time I was on a long distance coach the majority of oassengers did not use a seatbelt however no issue was taken by the driver even though it's a legal requirement to wear them yet Andy Heasman was bundled off a Bus Eireann coach for not wearing a mask. Whilst nothing was done about the masked non seatbelt wearing other passengers.

Do you wear a seatbelt when legally required to do so?
Do you do so cos you are intimidated?

I dont know what the rest of this rant means.
Smoking on buses not allowed or allowed?
Getting onto a bus without paying... allowed or not allowed?
Bus drivers should change careers if they dont want to deal with the public.

If someone is asked to wear a seatbelt or mask on public transport and refuses to do so they can have no complaints if refused service.

GT89

Graham wrote: »

There's no issue with shortages for medical staff now afaik.

The general public are wearing reusable or disposable masks which helps keep it that way.

Elderly/vulnerable people can wear reusable FFP2 or N95 masks like this which offers protection and dosen't use up hospital supplies that would be more effective than everyone wearing a piece of cloth or a disposable mask which will causing pollution.

https://m.geekbuying.com/item/Smartmi-KN95-Mask-with-Breathing-Valve-Size-M-Black-423463.html?ref=w&Currency=EUR

GT89

odyssey06 wrote: »

Do you wear a seatbelt when legally required to do so?
Do you do so cos you are intimidated?

I dont know what the rest of this rant means.
Smoking on buses not allowed or allowed?
Getting onto a bus without paying... allowed or not allowed?
Bus drivers should change careers if they dont want to deal with the public.

Most bus drivers couldn't care less if you wore a mask or not it's only a few power happy ones who take issue. Most couldn't care less if you paid or not either again only a few power happy ones who take issue. Bus drivers don't have to do anything if someone get's on without paying or without wearing a mask Dermot O'Leary of the NBRU has said that.

I work in a shop and certainly couldn't care less if someone dosen't wear a mask and and so do 90% of my colleagues it's not my job.

odyssey06

GT89 wrote: »

Most bus drivers couldn't care less if you wore a mask or not it's only a few power happy ones who take issue. Most couldn't care less if you paid or not either again only a few power happy ones who take issue. Bus drivers don't have to do anything if someone get's on without paying or without wearing a mask Dermot O'Leary of the NBRU has said that.

Most bus drivers are idiots then.
If they let anyone on without paying where do they think their wages gonna come from.
Oh wait that would require them to think.

Apparently it is power happy for someone providing a service to expect people to you know pay for it...
You can write this stuff but dont expect it to convince anyone with half a brain.

Graham

GT89 wrote: »

Elderly/vulnerable people can wear reusable FFP2 or N95 masks like this which offers protection and dosen't use up hospital supplies that would be more effective than everyone wearing a piece of cloth or a disposable mask which will causing pollution

Wouldn't stop the virus moving through the general population.

Graham

GT89 wrote: »

Most bus drivers couldn't care less if you wore a mask or not

Fortunately the majority of people are wearing their masks anyway.

da_miser

Riddle me this!
If vaccines work and you are getting one and are now safe, why do you want everyone to get a vaccine?

Same for masks, if you are wearing one and are safe, why do you care if others don't wear one?

GT89

Graham wrote: »

Fortunately the majority of people are wearing their masks anyway.

Seen lots of people take them off or lower them around the chin once upstairs

odyssey06

da_miser wrote: »

Riddle me this!
If vaccines work and you are getting one and are now safe, why do you want everyone to get a vaccine?
Same for masks, if you are wearing one and are safe, why do you care if others don't wear one?

You are confusing masks as barriers to contain the infectious droplets from someone with covid versus masks as PPE to protect an uninfected person.

So define what you mean by "work" and come back to us.

Ditto for vaccines.
Do you mean vaccines to A prevent you from getting infected, B passing on infection, and or for all demographics.
What if the vaccine only does A or B for some.
Does it still work or not.

GT89

odyssey06 wrote: »

You are confusing masks as barriers to contain the infectious droplets from someone with covid versus masks as PPE to protect an uninfected person.

So define what you mean by "work" and come back to us.

Ditto for vaccines.
Do you mean vaccines to prevent you from getting infected, passing on infection, and or for all demographics.

Masks can be used as PPE though as I pointed out it should in my view be reccomended that elderly/vulnerable wear the N95/FFP2 masks when out of the house. Healthy people should not be advised to wear face coverings as not wearing them would mean they spread the virus to other healthy individuals and once every healthy is infected herd immunity would be built and elderly/vulnerable are protected and would no longer need to wear masks.

odyssey06

GT89 wrote: »

Masks can be used as PPE though as I pointed out it should in my view be reccomended that elderly/vulnerable wear the N95/FFP2 masks when out of the house. Healthy people should not be advised to wear face coverings as not wearing them would mean they spread the virus to other healthy individuals and once every healthy is infected herd immunity would be built and elderly/vulnerable are protected and would no longer need to wear masks.

I already explained why it is unrealistic to expect untrained eg 80 year olds to perfectly use specific masks as PPE.
All because you dont want to wear a mask in limited circumstances.
The me fein attitude behind your position is transparent.

At least you are now honest that you are advocating herd immunity.
A fantasy strategy which somehow expects nobody vulnerable to be infected while the virus is rampant in the community.
A fantasy strategy which somehow perfectly knows who will and wont die from the virus or suffer long term complications... bearing in mind hundreds of people have already died in the UK who were not considered vulnerable.

GT89

odyssey06 wrote: »

I already explained why it is unrealistic to expect untrained eg 80 year olds to perfectly use specific masks as PPE.
All because you dont want to wear a mask in limited circumstances.
The me fein attitude behind your position is transparent.

At least you are now honest that you are advocating herd immunity.
A fantasy strategy which somehow expects nobody vulnerable to be infected while the virus is rampant in the community.
A fantasy strategy which somehow perfectly knows who will and wont die from the virus or suffer long term complications... bearing in mind hundreds of people have already died in the UK who were not considered vulnerable.

Again that be done by government issuing instructions on their proper use lot's people aren't wearing masks properly anyway. Like what was reccomended with cooconing a reccomendation but not a legal requirement.

Firstly vulnerable people have still gotten covid regardless and people are getting the virus regardless of masks. No strategy is going to elminate all risk. Lockdown didn't do it and masks aren't doing it either. You're the one living in a fantasy world if you believe masks are going to stop all cases and deaths.