To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

bush

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Which is correct.

I find it amazing that the screen bugs people but the dozens of people touching your food before you bring it home and eat it, thats grand.

Some people have a massive hard on for masks. They won't be happy until we are wearing them 24/7. They are mandatory and most people wear them but these people will obsess over the one person they saw not wearing a mask.

Graham

bush wrote: »

Some people have a massive hard on for masks.

Most people I know just understand why masks are necessary.

You must mix in some different circles.

bush

Graham wrote: »

You must mix in some different circles.

Ye, here.

tjdaly

Was delighted to see two shops with small posters up today letting people know that they won't be judged for not wearing a mask. I do wear masks in shops but I will be supporting these businesses.

weldoninhio

Graham wrote: »

Most people I know just understand why masks are necessary.

You must mix in some different circles.

What % of those who understand are professors in Oxford University in Evidence based Medicine?

If it’s 0%, what makes them think they know better than an Oxford Professor in Evidence based Medicine?

Graham

bush wrote: »

Ye, here.

Form some reason I'd envisaged something more underground.

Most people here just appear to have an understanding of why masks are necessary.

Graham

weldoninhio wrote: »

If it’s 0%, what makes them think they know better than an Oxford Professor in Evidence based Medicine?

The rest of the medical profession

weldoninhio

Graham wrote: »

The rest of the medical profession

No they don’t. Jesus, my own GP doesn’t.

weldoninhio

There is a small bit of evidence that shows that if one has influenza in one’s household - a child, for example - and if one wears a mask for one week in the house, one can reduce one’s risk of influenza or likely illness by about 10%. However, one has to completely adhere to mask wearing for the whole week. If one stops adhering to it, as 50% of people did, one loses all the effect. That is one of the problems.

The second issue is that the evidence comparing cloth masks to surgical masks or the N95s shows clearly that cloth masks are worse and may actually increase the risk of infection. Therefore, that is why they are not recommended in hospitals or in health professional settings.

What happens in these situations of uncertainty is that the opinion divides. Someone thinks mask are a good idea while someone else does not think they are and that people should not wear them. That is why we end up with people proposing them more and more. They say people should put them on in schools, pubs and shops. However, there is no clear evidence. They use observational data to inform their decision. If one looks at what has happened in the UK, for instance, it put masks in on 24 July. They were supposed to reduce the risk of infection by 40% over the next two weeks. In fact, infections detected have gone up. In effect, people are not looking at the evidence.

When Norway looked at this, it said that at low circulation, the public health consequences were so minimal that it was not clear they worked and, even if they did work, it reckoned about 200,000 people would have to wear a mask fully for a week to prevent one infection.

Graham

weldoninhio wrote: »

No they don’t. Jesus, my own GP doesn’t.

Your GP doesn't think masks work? I guess you're just lucky he's not your surgeon.

How odd.

How coincidental.

railer201

bush wrote: »

Some people have a massive hard on for masks. They won't be happy until we are wearing them 24/7. They are mandatory and most people wear them but these people will obsess over the one person they saw not wearing a mask.

Make these kinksters happy and wear them so.

Graham

I think some are confused about the types of mask under discussion

bush

railer201 wrote: »

Make these kinksters happy and wear them so.

I do. Where did I say I didn't?

ginoginelli

bush wrote: »

Ah would you stop. Don't go to the shop anymore if it bothers you that much.

Attitudes like this are extremely unhelpful. The goal is to keep society safe and the economy functioning. We cant do this if we ignore the latest science and bury our head in the sand.

weldoninhio

Graham wrote: »

Your GP doesn't think masks work? I guess you're just lucky he's not your surgeon.

How odd.

How coincidental.

Surgical mask work under strict conditions. Temp controlled sterile environments, masks changed regularly. I’ve never seen a surgeon with a cloth mask either.

railer201

bush wrote: »

I do. Where did I say I didn't?

Good to hear

Graham

weldoninhio wrote: »

Surgical mask work under strict conditions. Temp controlled sterile environments, masks changed regularly. I’ve never seen a surgeon with a cloth mask either.

Fortunately most of our population aren't performing surgery.

Just limiting the spread of coronavirus.

bush

Graham wrote: »

Just limiting the spread of coronavirus.

That's working out well...

Graham

bush wrote: »

That's working out well...

Turns out a rather large proportion of the new cases are arising from people socialising in their homes where obviously masks aren't being worn.

Hence the new restrictions.

Tork

bush wrote: »

That's working out well...

Oh, so we're back to conflating mask usage and the rise in cases again, are we?

risteard7

ginoginelli wrote: »

Attitudes like this are extremely unhelpful. The goal is to keep society safe and the economy functioning. We cant do this if we ignore the latest science and bury our head in the sand.

The only people stopping the Economy functioning are Nephet & the government.

Graham

risteard7 wrote: »

The only people stopping the Economy functioning are Nephet & the government.

and a pandemic.

pjohnson

Graham wrote: »

Fortunately most of our population aren't performing surgery.

Just limiting the spread of coronavirus.

Might as well be asking some to perform brain surgery given the struggles this simple task causes.

risteard7

Graham wrote: »

and a pandemic.

A pandemic? Cop yourself on. Hospital wards are empty. More chance of being killed bringing the dog for a walk.

Graham

pjohnson wrote: »

Might as well be asking some to perform brain surgery given the struggles this simple task causes.

I think the majority are wearing masks when out and about. It's or 100% but it's getting pretty close.

The issue now is socialising at home but obviously a discussion for another thread.

pjohnson

risteard7 wrote: »

A pandemic? Cop yourself on. Hospital wards are empty. More chance of being killed bringing the dog for a walk.

Some people probably do need adult supervision when they go outside richie.

risteard7

You should be ok though, stay at home & dont answer the door to strangers. I presume you're getting the Covid pay handout from the state too? Stay safe P. If you are brave and venture out to the post office wear the mask

hotmail.com

weldoninhio wrote: »

There is a small bit of evidence that shows that if one has influenza in one’s household - a child, for example - and if one wears a mask for one week in the house, one can reduce one’s risk of influenza or likely illness by about 10%. However, one has to completely adhere to mask wearing for the whole week. If one stops adhering to it, as 50% of people did, one loses all the effect. That is one of the problems.

The second issue is that the evidence comparing cloth masks to surgical masks or the N95s shows clearly that cloth masks are worse and may actually increase the risk of infection. Therefore, that is why they are not recommended in hospitals or in health professional settings.

What happens in these situations of uncertainty is that the opinion divides. Someone thinks mask are a good idea while someone else does not think they are and that people should not wear them. That is why we end up with people proposing them more and more. They say people should put them on in schools, pubs and shops. However, there is no clear evidence. They use observational data to inform their decision. If one looks at what has happened in the UK, for instance, it put masks in on 24 July. They were supposed to reduce the risk of infection by 40% over the next two weeks. In fact, infections detected have gone up. In effect, people are not looking at the evidence.

When Norway looked at this, it said that at low circulation, the public health consequences were so minimal that it was not clear they worked and, even if they did work, it reckoned about 200,000 people would have to wear a mask fully for a week to prevent one infection.

Why don't the mask Nazi people get this?

Mask wearing is only part of the solution, if worn properly.

Surely the focus should be on good hygiene, social distancing and reducing your contacts.

odyssey06

weldoninhio wrote: »

There is a small bit of evidence that shows that if one has influenza in one’s household - a child, for example - and if one wears a mask for one week in the house, one can reduce one’s risk of influenza or likely illness by about 10%. However, one has to completely adhere to mask wearing for the whole week. If one stops adhering to it, as 50% of people did, one loses all the effect. That is one of the problems.

The second issue is that the evidence comparing cloth masks to surgical masks or the N95s shows clearly that cloth masks are worse and may actually increase the risk of infection. Therefore, that is why they are not recommended in hospitals or in health professional settings.

What happens in these situations of uncertainty is that the opinion divides. Someone thinks mask are a good idea while someone else does not think they are and that people should not wear them. That is why we end up with people proposing them more and more. They say people should put them on in schools, pubs and shops. However, there is no clear evidence. They use observational data to inform their decision. If one looks at what has happened in the UK, for instance, it put masks in on 24 July. They were supposed to reduce the risk of infection by 40% over the next two weeks. In fact, infections detected have gone up. In effect, people are not looking at the evidence.

When Norway looked at this, it said that at low circulation, the public health consequences were so minimal that it was not clear they worked and, even if they did work, it reckoned about 200,000 people would have to wear a mask fully for a week to prevent one infection.

Norway have mandated masks on publuc transport in Oslo. They dont seem to trust that earlier look at it.

The rest of the data you are quoting are red herrings. They are studies quoted by Heneghan that have nothing to do with the use of masks as barriers. The cloth covering study was in relation to their use as PPE by hospital cleaning staff.
The other study was in relation to caring for a sick person in your own house 24-7.
To cite them in relation to the use of masks as barriers in public settings is nonsense.

They are already rebuttals from some of Heneghans associates in his organisation challenging his view on this.

odyssey06

risteard7 wrote: »

A pandemic? Cop yourself on. Hospital wards are empty. More chance of being killed bringing the dog for a walk.

9 acute hospitals report ICU capacity reached.

https://www.thejournal.ie/covid-19-zero-icu-beds-available-in-10-acute-hospitals-across-ireland-5233814-Oct2020/