For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 367
  • 368
  • 369
  • 370
  • 371
  • 582
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878610
@kanga I think I can help a little with the reasoning at least.

Mask wearing by the public was discouraged at the start because PPE was at a premium and urgently needed by NHS staff. This in turn was because of the failure to respond properly to the lessons learned on Project Cygnus and elsewhere.

Once the PPE crisis was contained mask wearing was encouraged/required but the legacy of the doubt cast on the usefulness of mask wearing continued to have an impact.

There was also confusion about mask wearing being a protection for the wearer, protection for others or both.

The simple fact is that Covid is transmitted primarily by aerosols and to a lesser extent by droplets (the emphasis was on droplets and therefore surface hygiene at the start) . It follows that mask wearing reduces the volume of aerosols in the atmosphere and thus the the transmission risk.
kanga, Paultheparaglider, JAFO and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878615
Can we eliminate the connection from doing more tests? We were doing almost double the tests of various european states at various stages.

Cases don't matter in the same way they used to and are largely academic & a 'big' scary number for headlines. They should only track hospitalisations - at least front and centre now most of the country is vacinated.

To me if a case doesn't end in serious illness it isnt actually important. Even if they pass it on the vacinated will be largely protected. A large amount of unvaccinated would also get over it. I thought many of those in hospital now 60-70% (of a few people) were unvaccinated.

50-200 deaths a day is miles less than any other cause of death, There are 67,000,000 in the UK. It is also a fraction of cases 30,000-50,000

Using full numbers as there was a survey last year in July that stated the british public thought the death toll of covid was 6-7%. That would have been 4.5 million bodies. People thought it was 100 times worse than it was at the time.

The perception of this is still way off and more so post vacinnation.

@johnm

I think skydriller said that there is risk and there is BS.

Even if a mask reduces transmission by 10% it depends on 10% of what.

10% of 90% is good. But if a risk has been reduced to 0.9% what's the point in reducing that by 10% it is playing around the edges and detracting from meaningful inteventions and making people even less compliant as they don't see the point and feel they have been dicked around. Guess it was my ALARP statement too.

I think your series of events is right though. What the government should have said at the start is "they work a little bit but please keep them for our health workers" rather than lying as people feel they have just been gaslit.

They didn't because they predicted panic buying. But that's only because they overplayed the severity at the start with all the images from Italy and china.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878619
Paultheparaglider wrote:
johnm wrote:The simple fact is that Covid is transmitted primarily by aerosols...


Are they the ones who won't wear masks? :wink:


Something like that :D
#1878623
johnm wrote:@kanga I think I can help a little with the reasoning at least.

Mask wearing by the public was discouraged at the start because PPE was at a premium and urgently needed by NHS staff. This in turn was because of the failure to respond properly to the lessons learned on Project Cygnus and elsewhere.

Once the PPE crisis was contained mask wearing was encouraged/required but the legacy of the doubt cast on the usefulness of mask wearing continued to have an impact.

There was also confusion about mask wearing being a protection for the wearer, protection for others or both.

The simple fact is that Covid is transmitted primarily by aerosols and to a lesser extent by droplets (the emphasis was on droplets and therefore surface hygiene at the start) . It follows that mask wearing reduces the volume of aerosols in the atmosphere and thus the the transmission risk.

That is complete fiction.

There was a shortage of medical grade N95/FFP2/FFP3 masks but no shortage of ordinary face masks. Not only are they easily homemade but they were also readily available online. I bought a 3-pack of double layer masks, with a washable inner layer, long before mask wearing was officially encouraged.

The reason for the initial reluctance to encourage mask wearing is because it was not part of the 'experts' pandemic planning. Even after it was suggested that masks could protect others the 'experts' insisted that they were not only unnecessary but actively harmful. We were constantly told that "masks don't protect the wearer", "people won't know how to use them" or "it will give people a false sense of security" and other patronising waffle. The decision to encourage mask wearing was a political act taken against the advice of the resentful 'experts'.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878625
@low&slow Interesting perspective!

I have to say that round here masks and gloves which I wear when working on paint, sanding wood etc.etc. were simply unobtainable at the start and I was told by my normal suppliers that everything available was going to medical use....

I do recall an element of disagreement amongst experts, but for me, having worked in universities, that's normal :-)
#1878649
Paultheparaglider wrote:
JAFO wrote:I had my booster on Saturday evening and have felt like I've been run over by a truck ever since.


I hope you are feeling better by now, JAFO.

Are you a 2 x Az and then a Pfizer booster?


Yes and pretty much fighting fit today, just a suggestion of a headache hanging around.
User avatar
By flybymike
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878666
johnm wrote:@kanga I think I can help a little with the reasoning at least.

Mask wearing by the public was discouraged at the start because PPE was at a premium and urgently needed by NHS staff. This in turn was because of the failure to respond properly to the lessons learned on Project Cygnus and elsewhere.
.


Mask wearing was discouraged at the start because people were following the expert guidance. You can of course always rely on the experts to be consistent.



StratoTramp liked this
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878672
I think it's band aid and placebo mostly for the public plus the need for the government to be seen to be doing 'something' - doesn't matter if that 'something' is useful or not just that it is perceived as action. Whereas doing nothing though also an action is not seen that way.

That said placebo works... though equally problem is if you are always getting stressed about getting ill, the stress may make you more likely to get ill.
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878686
I should have said "marginal" band aid - at least in this context (see my previous post about 10% effective, 10% of what exactly) Very much not in general. Used to use them all the time for work but that was for things that could kill in an instant.

It just a distraction from what really works which is vacinnation. Big wins. Masking afterwards minimal gains.

Vaccination largely means you don't need to be worried about getting it. Or giving it as most are vacinated. Masks are just a symbol playing around the edges.
#1878689
JAFO wrote:@StratoTramp - are you saying that facemasks are a placebo?


from my avowedly ignorant PoV .. :oops: .. the issue is whether they could in any way be a nocebo, ie do they ever do any harm (to me or others) ? And in that ignorance I'm tempted to say 'of course not'; they may do no harm, and might (sometimes, in some settings, among some people) do good. I shall continue to wear (when out in undistanced public, eg in shops or at museum) those sewn at home ~18 months ago, which are standing up well to repeated laundering.

Happy, of course, to be corrected by the better informed :?
StratoTramp liked this
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878692
With nocebo you had people touching their faces at the start. Either way marginal detriment, marginal gain.

But it's not enough of a benefit for me to wear one. Ok you aren't directly breathing virus into people's faces. But you are still wafting clouds of it everywhere if you are inside. It has to go somewhere. This video is actually pro mask. Everyone has experienced their galsses misting up.



Course it doesn't matter if we waft it round as we've been vacinated.

Two doses of Pfizer was 85% protection or something. What is the point in reducing 15% by a further 10% (1.5%), More so as even if we do get it again it won't be as bad. It's just getting a bit silly the point of the vacination was so we didn't have to go round scared of being near people. Back to old normal.
Last edited by StratoTramp on Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
#1878695
@StratoTramp - masks aren't simply playing around the edges.

This is a respiratory disease spread by aerosol and, to some extent, droplets. If you can limit the spread of aerosol/droplets to others, you reduce the possibility of transmission. There's plenty of evidence of their efficacy but, unfortunately, you need more than 70% of the public to have the good sense to wear masks indoors in order for it to have real effects on community transmission.
User avatar
By flybymike
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1878702
JAFO wrote:@StratoTramp - masks aren't simply playing around the edges.

This is a respiratory disease spread by aerosol and, to some extent, droplets. If you can limit the spread of aerosol/droplets to others, you reduce the possibility of transmission. There's plenty of evidence of their efficacy but, unfortunately, you need more than 70% of the public to have the good sense to wear masks indoors in order for it to have real effects on community transmission.


If only Whitty, Van-Tam, Harries, Hancock, et al, had known all this before spreading all that misinformation .
  • 1
  • 367
  • 368
  • 369
  • 370
  • 371
  • 582