To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

odyssey06

Bumping an earlier post linking to a summary of the reasons why the US CDC changed their advice on masks for general public, based on:

* Comparative data between countries based on mask wearing
* Comparative data between US states based on mask wearing, including the same US states before and after mask policies changed
* Data from case studies where infected people (hairdressers, flight passengers) wearing surgical masks did not infect any of their close contacts
* Data from laboratory studies showing the effectiveness of masks at reducing emission of droplets
* Data showing that people with covid-19 are highly infectious just before they start to show symptoms

The CDC reviewed the latest science and affirms that cloth face coverings are a critical tool in the fight against COVID-19 that could reduce the spread of the disease, particularly when used universally within communities. There is increasing evidence that cloth face coverings help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2...ear-masks.html

Summarised in this article:
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/41...-masks-prevent

moonage

odyssey06 wrote: »

This was your claim:
"99% of people who get it barely know they have it and are recovered in a week."

So what you are also forgetting is that you have excluded people who were sicker than that but didn't reqiure hospitalisation. Mild symptoms does not mean no hospitalisation. Your numbers are bogus to say the least, and that's the most diplomatic way I can put it.

You are pulling numbers out of thin air.
It's laughable to watch your change and shift the goalposts on your claims with this obvious and blatant abuse of statistics when you are challenged on these nonsense figures.
For you to claim statistics in circulation are 'fanciful', when you provide not a single shred of support for any of your claims is hypocrisy of the highest order.

I think you're mixing me up with someone else.

It's only logical that the infection/hospitalistion rate is far, far lower than the "case" numbers/hospitalistion rate of 11.5%.

odyssey06

moonage wrote: »

I think you're mixing me up with someone else.

It's only logical that the infection/hospitalistion rate is far, far lower than the "case" numbers/hospitalistion rate of 11.5%.

Mea culpa, thanks for the correction. Original post corrected.

gozunda

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Similar to all the claims from the pro mask side. Two sides to every story. Face coverings are completely useless as the variation of fabrics used in their production renders them nothing but an optical means. I could make one from a sieve and put it on ...Would that be any addition in reducing anything?? No it wouldn’t Surgical masks are surgical mask for a reason.But we hadn’t them in the beginning so nothing was mentioned about masks etc until supplies were secured. Secured for a kings ransom I might add.

Even if you want to use a surgical mask (easily obtained on Amazon etc) rather than a face covering (and as you believe that nothing will happen to you personally) what's the problem with wearing it as required?

If there's an even 10% chance across the population to help prevent the spread of Covid -
to someone vulnerable- why would anyone say 'fuk that'?

What are you afraid of? Do you really believe it's all a big conspiracy or is it something else?

Merry_Hell

I'm against masks. I don't know if they work at slowing transmission or not. I've read papers and reports that support both theories. I just think if they do work, we are three months past the point were they would have been needed. Putting them on now does more harm than good for reasons outlined by others already in this thread.

To the people in favour of masks, particularly those on this thread practically sneering at people with an opposite opinion to them, I have a question.

Strains of Adenovirus, Influenza virus, Rhinovirus and others can spread asymptomatically and can cause death in the at risk population that you are trying to save by wearing masks. If Coronavirus was eliminated tomorrow, would you take off your mask knowing those other viruses are out there?

If yes, it can be argued that you're practically as evil as me.

If no, I commend your commitment but have to ask why you weren't campaigning for or wearing masks in previous years while the old and infirm succumbed to viral pneumonia. It's like you've just recently latched on to a handy virtue to feel smug about on the internet.

Pablo Escobar

Merry_Hell wrote: »

I'm against masks. I don't know if they work at slowing transmission or not. I've read papers and reports that support both theories. I just think if they do work, we are three months past the point were they would have been needed. Putting them on now does more harm than good for reasons outlined by others already in this thread.

To the people in favour of masks, particularly those on this thread practically sneering at people with an opposite opinion to them, I have a question.

Strains of Adenovirus, Influenza virus, Rhinovirus and others can spread asymptomatically and can cause death in the at risk population that you are trying to save by wearing masks. If Coronavirus was eliminated tomorrow, would you take off your mask knowing those other viruses are out there?

If yes, it can be argued that you're practically as evil as me.

If no, I commend your commitment but have to ask why you weren't campaigning for or wearing masks in previous years while the old and infirm succumbed to viral pneumonia. It's like you've just recently latched on to a handy virtue to feel smug about on the internet.

I've seen papers supporting masks, but none saying they're useless. Could you possibly post a link to this? I wouldn't mind taking a look.

Secondly, to your question on whether masks will stay the norm, no they won't. There's prededence for this from Spanish Flu where masks were common and even without Facebook, YouTube, etc. the anti-maskers still existed and tried to get their message across whatever way they could. However, masks have not been common for the past 100 years or so.

odyssey06

Masks work better v covid than some of the other respiratory viruses as theorised to be more reliant on large droplets to spread.
Its not valid to compare milder viruses or those for which we have vaccines either in terms of mandatory masks.

Pitch n Putt

odyssey06 wrote: »

Masks work better v covid than some of the other respiratory viruses as theorised to be more reliant on large droplets to spread.
Its not valid to compare milder viruses or those for which we have vaccines either in terms of mandatory masks.

Said nobody ever.....

is_that_so

odyssey06 wrote: »

Masks work better v covid than some of the other respiratory viruses as theorised to be more reliant on large droplets to spread.
Its not valid to compare milder viruses or those for which we have vaccines either in terms of mandatory masks.

I don't believe that is fact. Could, may or shown to be in a lab is as far as they have got. The rising numbers of cases seems to undermine the claim anyway. Masks are aimed at allowing a lot of people to move about where they may not be able to stay far enough apart. It's not the masks, it's the staying apart that is the key factor.

weldoninhio

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Said nobody ever.....

Clean your mouth out!! Don’t you know Odyssey is that arbiter of what masks can and can’t do, and how they should be worn.

Pitch n Putt

weldoninhio wrote: »

Clean your mouth out!! Don’t you know Odyssey is that arbiter of what masks can and can’t do, and how they should be worn.

:pac::D:pac:

Seanergy

Merry_Hell wrote: »

I'm against masks. I don't know if they work at slowing transmission or not. I've read papers and reports that support both theories. I just think if they do work, we are three months past the point were they would have been needed. Putting them on now does more harm than good for reasons outlined by others already in this thread.

To the people in favour of masks, particularly those on this thread practically sneering at people with an opposite opinion to them, I have a question.

Strains of Adenovirus, Influenza virus, Rhinovirus and others can spread asymptomatically and can cause death in the at risk population that you are trying to save by wearing masks. If Coronavirus was eliminated tomorrow, would you take off your mask knowing those other viruses are out there?

If yes, it can be argued that you're practically as evil as me.

If no, I commend your commitment but have to ask why you weren't campaigning for or wearing masks in previous years while the old and infirm succumbed to viral pneumonia. It's like you've just recently latched on to a handy virtue to feel smug about on the internet.

Masks do work at slowing transmission and they work instantly. Great you can read, what exactly did you read? Putting them on now does more harm than good for reasons outlined by others already in this thread.

Your question to the sneering and non sneering pro masks side is based on your assumption that all pro maskers are wearing masks to protect the vulnerable, which is not the case, some are just doing everything in their powers to avoid another lockdown for various personal reasons, others are doing everything they can so that they or someone they know can have access to elective surgery, the picture is a lot bigger than the one you paint in your head.

I couldn't give a rats arse if you commend or condone my behaviour, regarding the future of mask/non mask wearing, aren't you getting totally ahead of yoursef?

odyssey06

weldoninhio wrote: »

Clean your mouth out!! Don’t you know Odyssey is that arbiter of what masks can and can’t do, and how they should be worn.

Well thanks but actually when I looked back over my previous posts I couldn't find the article that stated that, so consider the claim withdrawn.
For flu v coronavirus, the trasnmission profile appears to be similar.

However, I would still put coronavirus is in a different category re: mask wearing until we have vaccine or non hospital medical treatments available.

xhomelezz

weldoninhio wrote: »

Clean your mouth out!! Don’t you know Odyssey is that arbiter of what masks can and can’t do, and how they should be worn.

Well you still around..great. When Odyssey posts, he can usually backup everything he says, not like you and your pals. Shows he got the brain and common sense, that's the difference between you and him.

Graham

Merry_Hell wrote: »

I'm against masks.

That's a rather odd position to take considering

Merry_Hell wrote: »

I don't know if they work at slowing transmission or not

odyssey06

xhomelezz wrote: »

Well you still around..great. When Odyssey posts, he can usually backup everything he says, not like you and your pals. Shows he got the brain and common sense, that's the difference between you and him.

Except when I post from phone - it's a bit like playing away in the league
Must stop doing that!

xhomelezz

odyssey06 wrote: »

Except when I post from phone - it's a bit like playing away in the league
Must stop doing that!

Makes no difference at this stage, some of the posters just blindly refusing facts, you might just throw bricks at them with the same effect.

Away With The Fairies

xhomelezz wrote: »

Makes no difference at this stage, some of the posters just blindly refusing facts, you might just throw bricks at them with the same effect.

You really cannot blame people in this. Our government fcuked up. Who sat down to make a list of places to wear masks but somehow other places aren't included on the list. They should have just made masks mandatory in all indoor public places. People are confused and I wouldn't blame them.

Making masks mandatory after talking about their new scientific evidence. Had some dope sit down and make a list to make masks mandatory. But somehow left out offices and factories.

It's not the people who should be blamed, it's our government. They seem to be waiting for something bad to happen before doing something.

xhomelezz

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

You really cannot blame people in this. Our government fcuked up. Who sat down to make a list of places to wear masks but somehow other places aren't included on the list. They should have just made masks mandatory in all indoor public places. People are confused and I wouldn't blame them.

Making masks mandatory after talking about their new scientific evidence. Had some dope sit down and make a list to make masks mandatory. But somehow left out offices and factories.

It's not the people who should be blamed, it's our government. They seem to be waiting for something bad to happen before doing something.

I agree to some point. Government, well both of last ones, lost any credibility at this stage. Half arsed measures they keep announcing since the start of this mess does more harm than good. But people by now should know better as well.

Merry_Hell

Seanergy wrote: »

Your question to the sneering and non sneering pro masks side is based on your assumption that all pro maskers are wearing masks to protect the vulnerable, which is not the case, some are just doing everything in their powers to avoid another lockdown for various personal reasons, others are doing everything they can so that they or someone they know can have access to elective surgery, the picture is a lot bigger than the one you paint in your head.

I couldn't give a rats arse if you commend or condone my behaviour, regarding the future of mask/non mask wearing, aren't you getting totally ahead of yoursef?

The first quoted paragraph implies people are putting on masks because they fear the government's response to the virus more than the virus itself. I've heard a few people justify it that way. Is that really a way we want to be governed?

I don't think I'm getting ahead of myself. Since May the death and illness caused by the virus has receded to a fraction of epidemic levels. As we move further away from the point where we may have needed masks, our fanatic demand for them increases. If they can be mandated in summer under threat of prison, when hospital figures are in single digits, I can't foresee a time when it will be acceptable to take them off.

Graham

Merry_Hell wrote: »

The first quoted paragraph implies people are putting on masks because they fear the government's response to the virus more than the virus itself. I've heard a few people justify it that way. Is that really a way we want to be governed?

If it means they wear their mask, I can live with it.

Some people just won't listen to reason so there unfortunately has to be another approach.

gozunda

Merry_Hell wrote: »

I'm against masks. I don't know if they work at slowing transmission or not. I've read papers and reports that support both theories. I just think if they do work, we are three months past the point were they would have been needed. Putting them on now does more harm than good for reasons outlined by others already in this thread.

To the people in favour of masks, particularly those on this thread practically sneering at people with an opposite opinion to them, I have a question.

Strains of Adenovirus, Influenza virus, Rhinovirus and others can spread asymptomatically and can cause death in the at risk population that you are trying to save by wearing masks. If Coronavirus was eliminated tomorrow, would you take off your mask knowing those other viruses are out there?

If yes, it can be argued that you're practically as evil as me.

If no, I commend your commitment but have to ask why you weren't campaigning for or wearing masks in previous years while the old and infirm succumbed to viral pneumonia. It's like you've just recently latched on to a handy virtue to feel smug about on the internet.

That is largely irrelevant to be fair. The fact is that mask use is now mandatory in a range of situations based on current scientific evidence. .

No one is being "harmed" by using a mask.

And yes colds and flu spread can also be reduced by mask use - but as colds / normal influenza can be managed via vaccines or medications inc secondary infections etc it is less of an issue*.

Finally no one who wears a mask or advocates for same is being 'smug' or "sneering" in the face of a global pandemic and doing everything possible to contain its spread whether that's for vulnerable groups, family members or otherwise.

Edit. *Clarified

xhomelezz

Merry_Hell wrote: »

The first quoted paragraph implies people are putting on masks because they fear the government's response to the virus more than the virus itself. I've heard a few people justify it that way. Is that really a way we want to be governed?

I don't think I'm getting ahead of myself. Since May the death and illness caused by the virus has receded to a fraction of epidemic levels. As we move further away from the point where we may have needed masks, our fanatic demand for them increases. If they can be mandated in summer under threat of prison, when hospital figures are in single digits, I can't foresee a time when it will be acceptable to take them off.

Manipulating at a fraction level
:pac:

Mrs OBumble

gozunda wrote: »

influenza outbreaks can be controlled via vaccines and medications etc it is less of an issue.

What medication can be used to control influenza?

super_furry

I see that *ahem* 'DJ Spiral' from Big Brother back in the 2000s is back and kicking off in a Lidl about his 'constitutional rights'.

Seeing as he sounds like Bosco now, I'd be more worried about him having laryngitis than Covid though.

https://twitter.com/ActingTheGom/status/1304711641481838597

xhomelezz

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

What medication can be used to control influenza?

Nice try. Still you forget this one is brand new. Influenza is been around for while.

gozunda

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

What medication can be used to control influenza?

Genuine question or ?

The full quote was
"And yes colds and flu spread can also be reduced by mask use but as normal influenza outbreaks can be controlled either by vaccines and medications etc it is less of an issue."

Mea culpa. Let me be a bit more precise.

Yes colds and flu spread can also be reduced by mask use - but as colds / normal influenza outbreaks can be controlled either by vaccines or medications etc it is less of an issue.

You asked about medications

And by the dictionary definition - that is

a drug or other form of medicine that is used to treat or prevent disease.

Influenza - vacines plus various antiviral medication such as Tamiflu

Colds - antibiotics and a range of other medications

And no none of negates the advice to wear masks in the midst of a pandemic.

brianregan09

Cystic Fibrosis sufferer here

I absolutely can't stand masks , ****ing hate them fogs up my glasses and I find it hard to breath regularly anyway , But I have to wear them , unfortunately taking a chance just isn't an option for me

Does it protect me ? I don't really know but as Batman once said about superman turning bad if there's even a 00000.1 % chance I have to consider it an absolute certainty , that's just how it is

I want to work , go outside and do all the normal **** everyone else does , but I find it farcial that people like that spiral muppet gemma o doherty and all these utter utter ***** are using this pandemic to push an agenda

I guess my point is though there are tonnes of people dozens like me who you don't think about or see around cos my/our conditions are invisible to most but when you decide nah I don't like mask's i'm not wearing one today , your putting my life at risk ........I wish more people would realise this

saabsaab

gozunda wrote: »

Genuine question or ?

The full quote was
"And yes colds and flu spread can also be reduced by mask use but as normal influenza outbreaks can be controlled either by vaccines and medications etc it is less of an issue."

Mea culpa. Let me be a bit more precise.

Yes colds and flu spread can also be reduced by mask use - but as colds / normal influenza outbreaks can be controlled either by vaccines or medications etc it is less of an issue.

You asked about medications

And by the dictionary definition - that is



Influenza - vacines plus various antiviral medication such as Tamiflu

Colds - antibiotics and a range of other medications

And no none of negates the advice to wear masks in the midst of a pandemic.

Just a note, antibiotics are useless against colds and flu. They may however be used against some secondary infections that may come after.

Mrs OBumble

gozunda wrote: »

Genuine question or ?

Influenza - vacines plus various antiviral medication such as Tamiflu

Colds - antibiotics and a range of other medications

And no none of negates the advice to wear masks in the midst of a pandemic.

Genuine question. Except I knew the answer.

Antibiotics don't work on viruses so are not a valid treatment for colds. They can be useful if you get a bacterial infection alongside the viral one.

Tamiflu can reduce the severity of influenza - but only if you take it soon enough, and yhata hard to do. Other than that, I've only heard of symptom relief treatments, not ones that address the disease.

If masks are effective for Covid, they should be used for these diseases too.