Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[btb]

44 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Oh thank GOD you got involved in the conversation.

I can rest easy now.

Yeah but it's still a choice, or would be if I actually believed your boasts.

[superbigal]

1 hour ago, superbigal said:

Daily Cases Update:  Decent Day 7 of dropping cases. Down an excellent 3.62% to 343.0  and infectivity down to 9.9%   I expect further small decreases in range of 1.5-2.5% over next 2 days.   I expect England to go past Scotland by 4pm UK announcement tomorrow.

 

 Covids coming home.

England just gone to 328.9 per 100K  They will exceed Scotland  at 4pm tomorrow

South Tyneside 1,361.8

Midlothian down to 12th.

36,660 cases in UK,  50 deaths, 564 hospital admissions.

[Granny Danger]

5 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

Again though, if there are not any other restrictions, why would there be a requirement for masks in any of these places? It's not being awkward for the sake of it by asking this, I think people genuinely want to know.

Because the virus has not gone away and expert opinion (real experts, not the P&B variety) believe that the wearing of masks in crowded indoor areas is a mitigation against the spread.  These particular indoor areas are places most people may need to go unlike, say pubs or restaurants, that folk can avoid if they have concerns.

[vikingTON]

41 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

At the start of the pandemic there was a proper point-and-laugh attitude on here at anyone who was wearing a mask because the experts at the time said it wasn't going to make a difference.

Then there was slowly but surely a move towards demanding masks be worn as the evidence seemed to change. People were slated for not wearing them.

And now we've come full circle.

If only there was a logical, causal factor like 'the most effective vaccine development and rollout program in history', that could explain this change in attitudes between the summer of 2021 and March 2020. 

[djchapsticks]

6 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

The point about not wearing them whilst sitting down is because you're eating and drinking, and therefore it's not possible to continue to wear a mask (or at least it would lead to some hilarious sights).
 

I mean that's patently not true. Every place I've been so far is quite happy for you to sit and converse without food at your table or a drink in your hand  and no mask.

My gym is also quite content for everyone on a machine to expel air a lot more quickly and forcefully on machines than they are whilst walking about. I can spend 30 minutes in once place on a cross trainer breathing out my arse but have to put a mask on to walk 10 yards across the floor for a wipe to clean the machine.

I know people on here hate the 'hygiene theatrics' term and I'm not a fan of it myself but what other way is there to describe that sort of rule?

[Detournement]

My gym and pretty much everyone in it has not given a f**k about masks since reopening this year and it's seems to have been fine. 

It's actually the most 2019 normal place I go other than homes. 

 

[BlueBear]

7 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

The point about not wearing them whilst sitting down is because you're eating and drinking, and therefore it's not possible to continue to wear a mask (or at least it would lead to some hilarious sights).

As well as that you're with the people you're with, and so if you're contagious, then you're not really spreading droplets any further round the restaurant /bar.

I can understand why they'd rather you wear them whilst moving around. It's adding a layer of protection, even if it's not a strong layer. I don't think you can say it made no difference. Maybe the cases would've been even higher without them?



Just to be clear I'm not advocating keeping masks. As a teacher, I'm very much hoping they f**k off whilst kids are in the classroom (i don't mind too much if we still need them whilst walking the corridors).

From what i can gather the evidence is still pretty inconclusive about whether masks protect folk from this virus.

I just think this thread has taken a bit of a wild ride on this issue.

Covid will be a wild ride until it ends. 

Maybe in the next decade or so and the argument will be no different or less divisive in the meantime. 

Have the flu or cold viruses ever gone away?! No, so why should Covid be different. It's now endemic, mutates constantly and is shortcycle in 3 waves in 16 months. Looks like we will always be playing catch up and to protect the NHS. 

[djchapsticks]

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Because the virus has not gone away and expert opinion (real experts, not the P&B variety) believe that the wearing of masks in crowded indoor areas is a mitigation against the spread.  These particular indoor areas are places most people may need to go unlike, say pubs or restaurants, that folk can avoid if they have concerns.

But you're talking in a scenario where there's no need whatsoever for other restrictions on any of these areas.

So surely if there's no need for any other restrictions in these places, then there's also no need for masks. I refer you back to the 'vaccines alone aren't enough, restrictions are needed too' argument that was always thrown about and turn that around on the crowd who are now advocating a drop in all other restrictions except masks and it just doesn't make sense. Particularly as vaccines alone are far more effective than masks alone.

So many people have completely talked themselves into knots here in what their beliefs are to the point that they are even confusing themselves over what to believe.

[Granny Danger]

Just now, djchapsticks said:

But you're talking in a scenario where there's no need whatsoever for other restrictions on any of these areas.

So surely if there's no need for any other restrictions in these places, then there's also no need for masks. I refer you back to the 'vaccines alone aren't enough, restrictions are needed too' argument that was always thrown about and turn that around on the crowd who are now advocating a drop in all other restrictions except masks and it just doesn't make sense. Particularly as vaccines alone are far more effective than masks alone.

So many people have completely talked themselves into knots here in what their beliefs are to the point that they are even confusing themselves over what to believe.

I’m not sure the point you’re making.  There is nothing wrong with removing some restrictions and not others unless you believe that the virus has totally disappeared and/or masks are totally ineffective.  I don’t think either is the case.

[Detournement]

24 minutes ago, Snafu said:

 

Can't be many left in the Scottish population who haven't either caught the virus and have the antibodies this way or have been vaccinated. This variant has to be running out of people to infect by now.

Double vaccination doesn't prevent infection.

[BlueBear]

3 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

But you're talking in a scenario where there's no need whatsoever for other restrictions on any of these areas.

So surely if there's no need for any other restrictions in these places, then there's also no need for masks. I refer you back to the 'vaccines alone aren't enough, restrictions are needed too' argument that was always thrown about and turn that around on the crowd who are now advocating a drop in all other restrictions except masks and it just doesn't make sense. Particularly as vaccines alone are far more effective than masks alone.

So many people have completely talked themselves into knots here in what their beliefs are to the point that they are even confusing themselves over what to believe.

It's simple. 

You dont know what you don't know and there remains many unknowns about this virus and its long term effects, include those of vaccines as the experts attest to. 

So unless you are a moron willing to follow another moron that resides in Downing Street, caution is the better part of valour. 

[djchapsticks]

1 minute ago, Granny Danger said:

I’m not sure the point you’re making.  There is nothing wrong with removing some restrictions and not others unless you believe that the virus has totally disappeared and/or masks are totally ineffective.  I don’t think either is the case.

It's well established by now that the virus isn't going to totally disappear.

So do we continue with mask wearing in public places forever even with a fully vaccinated population, little to no community transmission and minimal risk of catching it and even lesser risk of catching it and becoming seriously ill?

 

[Michael W]

15 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

 

My gym is also quite content for everyone on a machine to expel air a lot more quickly and forcefully on machines than they are whilst walking about. I can spend 30 minutes in once place on a cross trainer breathing out my arse but have to put a mask on to walk 10 yards across the floor for a wipe to clean the machine.

South Korea has something to say about this. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-57798520

[Abdul_Latif]

3 minutes ago, Michael W said:

South Korea has something to say about this. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-57798520

Fucking hell. SG will love that idea for the reopening of nightclubs.

[djchapsticks]

1 minute ago, Abdul_Latif said:

Fucking hell. SG will love that idea for the reopening of nightclubs.

Ghost Town on repeat all night like in Father Ted.  

[Granny Danger]

8 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

It's well established by now that the virus isn't going to totally disappear.

So do we continue with mask wearing in public places forever even with a fully vaccinated population, little to no community transmission and minimal risk of catching it and even lesser risk of catching it and becoming seriously ill?

 

I’ve not seen or heard anyone advocating indefinite  face mask wearing; maybe there are a few folk out there arguing this but I’ve not seen them and I doubt they’d hold much sway.

I’m not going to specify when mask wearing should end as I have insufficient knowledge, but I don’t see doing it for a few more months as a huge problem.  Inconvenient, yes, but nothing beyond that.

[BlueBear]

Boris will be on the u turn soon enough. 

It's what he does best. 

[anotherchance]

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I’ve not seen or heard anyone advocating indefinite  face mask wearing; maybe there are a few folk out there arguing this but I’ve not seen them and I doubt they’d hold much sway.

I’m not going to specify when mask wearing should end as I have insufficient knowledge, but I don’t see doing it for a few more months as a huge problem.  Inconvenient, yes, but nothing beyond that.

Well that's the point - if it's 3/4 months then that takes us to the start of autumn, and a fair bet that they'll still be here another 6 months after that to see us through the winter.

I don't think it'll be enforced quite like that though - Sturgeon still seems to think people are booking into pubs and distancing outdoors, so there's every chance that mask wearing will go the same way as those non-measures, without her or anyone else's say so.

[Aladdin]

Scotland can hopefully avoid a fourth wave, albeit may see a wave 3.5 if all restrictions go on 9 August, but that would hopefully just burn out as quickly as the third did.

England may be heading for the 100,000 cases per day.  On the up just now, restrictions going on Monday and the Wembley variant dropping in a week's time.   I want to see border guards along Hadrian's wall, automatic weapons in one hand and Cohibas in the other to keep those plague ridden southerners out.

 

[Granny Danger]

Just now, Aladdin said:

Scotland can hopefully avoid a fourth wave, albeit may see a wave 3.5 if all restrictions go on 9 August, but that would hopefully just burn out as quickly as the third did.

England may be heading for the 100,000 cases per day.  On the up just now, restrictions going on Monday and the Wembley variant dropping in a week's time.   I want to see border guards along Hadrian's wall, automatic weapons in one hand and Cohibas in the other to keep those plague ridden southerners out.

 

Post-Covid too preferably.