To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Again, you're another person who disagrees with a dissenting voice and because you're not capable of saying anything better, you simply slap "conspiracy theory nutter" on me.... In that case you may as well just call me Aunty Starmix66 😂

Not all of us rolled over and took one for the team in the name of "science" just because "de man on de telly" said so. I don't have blind faith, I don't believe in God and I certainly don't believe in Tony. I also don't have full faith in their science either, it was manipulated to suit their needs at the time.

How about the time the EU tried to get the South Africans to doctor their covid report to say that whatever variant they discovered was more deadly than it actually was?

You can't trust politicians or the "science" if it's being used to push an agenda. That is a fact, and that is just the first example that springs to mind.

And for the record, I never wore a mask correctly, I had to protest somehow, anything else and you got stomped on. No one wants to be the nail that gets hammered after all... you need to make the best of a bad situation or you'll go completely crazy.

Convict what now?

Call me a coward all you want, I don't care, I had no interest in protesting and possibly getting arrested, only to have the media then publish my full name and address, leading to me being ostracized by people who know me, and possibly also getting fired.

Unfortunately protesting in Ireland during the covid had real life consequences, it was in fact illegal, and despite my convictions, I had to balance all that with paying for the mortgage, so small protest it was.

People were outdoing themselves to be judge, jury & executioner... the government literally had us by the short and curlys all in the name of public health.

It's easy for you to to complain about me not fully following through on my convictions when it was your side calling all the shots and the government was singing your tune, you didn't need to protest, you were happy to watch the rest of us being forced to wear masks.

Thankfully I don't need your respect, you're just another random keyboard warrior on the internet, same as myself and everyone else on boards, except now you're on the losing side and you don't like it. Masks are thankfully a thing of the past despite what the die hards mask lovers want.

The restrictions are gone, Tony is gone, NPHET are gone, and the unions thankfully didn't get their way with the masks over Christmas.

We just need to ditch those mask rules in the doctors surgery now.... they're just an unwelcome hangover from the covid era.

More big words and name calling because I'm a dissenting voice.... Just because it's a law, doesn't make it a just law.

The government needed to control us to be seen to do something, so they threw out the agreed pandemic action plan, adopted the Chinese approach, clutched at a few straws, locked us down, introduced masks and hoped for the best.

They were more worried about saving votes than public health, and it was quite clear that they were hiding behind NPHET.

If they really cared about public health they would have taken a step back and done a proper cost / benefit analysis with regards to the socioeconomic impact of the restrictions and the knock on effect of missed medical diagnoses, and don't give me the line that it was a emergency, it's not like the tanks were rolling over the border.

I mean, if they really, really cared about public health they wouldn't have cleared old folk out of the hospitals and clustered them in retirement homes...

I've never met a politician who was more interested in the public than they were about getting themselves voted back in and staying in power. And like I said earlier, if a politician told me that it was raining outside, I'd go outside and check for myself first before believing them.

They're not to be trusted.

It's curious that the same government who initially locked us down was the same government that told the unions to take a hike when they were looking for masks at Christmas.

That tells me that they will swing whatever way the popular winds are blowing, and that for all the shouting the unions did about masks, the government decided not to opt for that approach this time.

That also tells me that they either know masks are pointless, or than an election is coming, or maybe even a bit of both.

Nope they didnt.

For starters the covid situation between 2020 and 2022 had changed dramatically due to variants and vaccines and therefore how many severe cases derive from widespread transmission. You ignore all of that.

When mask mandates were brought in we had had months of pubs were shut and we have restrictions on movements. Such measures were all part of WHO pandemic plan not merely aping China. All of this was not done for control as an end in itself but out of a sincere basis that it would reduce spread of covid. It was not done just in Ireland. Politicians were listening to the advice of their health authorities. It was not some political solo run by Irish politicians.

It was an emergency as we saw in Wuhan and Italy. The ambulances were at the gate. In the UK estimates were that tens of thousands of lives could have been saved by earlier lockdown.

Your attempt at revisionism is therefore wrong on basic timelines and facts.

Therefore to present this as 'needing to control' is just conspiracy theory dog whistling.

Right, why do politicians all over the world want to make us wear masks during a pandemic if there's no reason for it? e.g. I'm a politician, I want to make my constituents wear masks, why exactly..

How are these views any different from Alex Jones low-brow views that all politicians are cartoon villains who want to make us wear masks to "control us".

So far, seems identical to me. As mentioned a lot of anti-maskers seem to have these strange views.

Like many people I don't like wearing a mask either, but I don't feel the need to invent some big conspiracy about being persecuted. That's silly stuff.

If you don't want to be compared to people like Alex Jones, then I suggest not repeating his conspiracy views verbatim. Simply an observation.

First of all, that is not the conspiracy that was being alleged in the present discussion which was about control as an end in itself. So I've no idea what strawman conspiracy you've invented to argue against.

Second of all, nope he doesn't say that. I have the article in front of me and nowhere does he say that.

Find us the exact quote where he says the whole response was anti science and inhumane.

Nowhere does he say that masks were inhumane or anti science in the version I am reading.

Or accept you are dishonestly and deliberately misrepresenting his views.

How about you present the parameters for an ethical real world RCT in a pandemic that would generate this data.

Large peer reviewed studies have not confirmed mask mandates were of no benefit. Point us to the particular study which demonstrates this if you dispute this.

The closest that was put together was the study from Bangladesh with masks and social distancing which showed a clear reduction in cases with only a modest adoption of them - both of which Cormican takes an issue with.

We don't have the 'clear' data you seem to think is required for public health decisions and such decisions that were taken such as banning smoking in pubs did not rely on RCTs. RCTs are not actually typically relied upon for such decisions because of the difficulty of assessing 'indirect' impact.

If NPHET was wrong about the mask mandate then so were the health authorities of every other country in Western Europe (except Sweden) and in most of the rest of the world!

Why ?

Your statement here says it all....

They're a hateful burden, and I don't care about any science or statistics around them.

It is a combination of hyperbole and ignorance of the facts. Just because you dont care about the facts, thankfully the vast majority do and will follow public health guidance when asked.

I think that masks, restrictions and Tony Holohan are all fantastic .

Its proof of no such thing... as explained below.

One of studies cited showed there was no benefit if staff in a hospital wore a reusable cloth mask as PPE versus flu.

We knew that already. How is that relevant to covid mask mandates?

One of the other studies showed regular mask wearers in Denmark had fewer cases than non mask wearers but due to low level of covid significant case numbers were not hit in the study.

The advice from health authorities was always not to rely on such masks as PPE.

That does mean they dont help to reduce transmission from an infected person.

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/do-masks-work

If you are getting a bus everyday your number will eventually come up.

Different odds if you have vulnerable people needing to access essential services occassionally during a breakout.

And measures like masks and distancing improve those odds.

Effectively useless?

Or very limited effect?

In the same post you cant even keep your story straight and resort to strawman argument to have to make your case.

Rather important everybodys number didnt come up at the same time. And bought time to rollout vaccines etc

So nope. No point proven.

The study John Campbell refers to is flawed

Here's some interesting reads on that study that he refers to

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/2/22/23609499/masks-covid-coronavirus-cochrane-review-pandemic-science-studies-infection

And you feel qualified to state that like its a fact, yes?

No. Mask mandates were never about direct protection of the wearer by non respirator masks. It was always stressed you should not rely on them as PPE. This has been pointed out dozens of time on the threads from the when mandates were first brought in here.

For much of the pandemic there was a shortage of respirator type masks and priority for them was as PPE for health care workers.

Mask mandates were about limiting droplets FROM an infected person. Masks as barriers not PPE.

:D :D :D :D !! John Campbell!!! again not a reliable source for anything but misinformation and misinterpretation.

Why not take a look at the flaws in the Cochran report while you are at it

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/i/101670953/then-the-cochrane-review-was-published-and-took-social-media-by-storm

And other experts in the field have produced the study.

Thanks and yes I do know that it is a meta study or a compilation if you like.

But IMO we're really back to the same old argument. If an iron clad mask benefit could be derived from studies then this would have happened. But we're still in the same ballpark, may have, may not have. The case for masks just was never strong enough IMO for the pro-mask fraction to claim 'masks work, case closed'. We've seen it from the start when it went 'masks won't work' then 'masks work'. It was never like 'seatbelts work' or 'not smoking helps' or anything like such a case closed thing, not even remotely.

One way or the other thats still the same thing I'm getting from this. And considering such weak evidence it never justified the boohaa that was made about them. Never mind mandates.

I disagree tbh. There was a very strong political element to the mandate and then to the debate about them too. And like it is every time when politics gets involved things get murky and dogmatic. Before we knew it people who questioned were branded selfish and deniers and Trumpists and off we went. Which was a hallmark of all things covid. You either followed unquestionably or you were one of them arseholes, very polarised in no time.