#COVID19

[Strett]

The masks should have been mandatory from the start in shops etc, it's like making someone wear a condom after having the 12 weeks scan.

I think the timing here is critical and also the science is in flux. We all remember in March Sadiq Khan stating there is no chance of catching Covid-19 on the tube, a statement that now seems utterly ludicrous.
If we were all told to wear them back in March, there was a real risk of diverting a finite resource away from the greater need; think toilet paper and pasta when observing panic stricken sheep.

 

[weejockmcplop]

 

[in_the_top_one]

I think the timing here is critical and also the science is in flux. We all remember in March Sadiq Khan stating there is no chance of catching Covid-19 on the tube, a statement that now seems utterly ludicrous.
If we were all told to wear them back in March, there was a real risk of diverting a finite resource away from the greater need; think toilet paper and pasta when observing panic stricken sheep.

Odd that you should pick on Sadiq Khan's comment for being ludicrous among all those you could have chosen.

He said that on Good Morning Britain on the 5th March. This is the very same day Boris was just floating the idea/suggestion (that of course he didn't agree with) that we could let it run through society and we might "take it on the chin".
https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/london-coronavirus-no-risk-catching-17870746.

Anyway, Khan was naive and that comment was indeed ludicrous, even though we only had 90 confirmed infections in the UK when he said it.

He also said at the beginning of March that he didn't foresee the tube being closed or even concerts being cancelled. That hasn't aged well either.
https://www.cityam.com/coronavirus-sadiq-khan-says-tube-travel-ban-is-unforeseeable/

However, on 24th March he was apparently saying 'stop Tube travel or more will die'.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-52017910
(Incidentally, this was the same day Boris told his subjects that they could only leave their homes to buy essential items, exercise once a day, and travel for work where "absolutely necessary" or for any medical need. No mention of masks.)
The tube was not shut but ran a controversial restricted service that some said had the unfortunate effect of concentrating passengers into fewer carriages.


I think Khan was late but has consistently called for masks to be worn since 17th April.
https://www.cityam.com/coronavirus-london-mayor-sadiq-khan-calls-for-face-masks-on-tube/
"London mayor Sadiq Khan called on the government today to make coronavirus face masks compulsory for people using the Tube or shopping.

The mayor said that evidence from around the world was that face coverings help stop the spread of coronavirus.
“In those circumstances where its not possible for us to keep our social distance, think of public transport usage, think of when you’re in a shop, we should be using non-medical facial coverings like bandanas, like scarves, like reusable masks,” Khan told the BBC.

The government’s social distancing measures do not mention the wearing of face masks. But Khan said that should change."



I'm not a massive fan of his, but he was calling for action on masks, specifically, three months ago.
We are now in the middle of July.

 

[in_the_top_one]

I think the timing here is critical and also the science is in flux. We all remember in March Sadiq Khan stating there is no chance of catching Covid-19 on the tube, a statement that now seems utterly ludicrous.
If we were all told to wear them back in March, there was a real risk of diverting a finite resource away from the greater need; think toilet paper and pasta when observing panic stricken sheep.

I would contest that the science was in flux. Maybe the scientific advice to the government was, maybe not. We won't know until the inquiry.


No need for hindsight. I had quite a large box of masks shipped to me that were posted on the 15th March and arrived on 26th March. There had been a total of 'just' 878 deaths in the UK by 26th March.

Yours are arriving today.


If we had all started wearing masks when out and about on the 26th March would more people be alive today?

 

[Woanz]

The masks should have been mandatory from the start in shops etc, it's like making someone wear a condom after having the 12 weeks scan.

this is exactly where the problem lies.

 

[Strett]

Odd that you should pick on Sadiq Khan's comment for being ludicrous among all those you could have chosen.

He said that on Good Morning Britain on the 5th March. This is the very same day Boris was just floating the idea/suggestion (that of course he didn't agree with) that we could let it run through society and we might "take it on the chin".
https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/london-coronavirus-no-risk-catching-17870746.

Anyway, Khan was naive and that comment was indeed ludicrous, even though we only had 90 confirmed infections in the UK when he said it.

He also said at the beginning of March that he didn't foresee the tube being closed or even concerts being cancelled. That hasn't aged well either.
https://www.cityam.com/coronavirus-sadiq-khan-says-tube-travel-ban-is-unforeseeable/

However, on 24th March he was apparently saying 'stop Tube travel or more will die'.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-52017910
(Incidentally, this was the same day Boris told his subjects that they could only leave their homes to buy essential items, exercise once a day, and travel for work where "absolutely necessary" or for any medical need. No mention of masks.)
The tube was not shut but ran a controversial restricted service that some said had the unfortunate effect of concentrating passengers into fewer carriages.


I think Khan was late but has consistently called for masks to be worn since 17th April.
https://www.cityam.com/coronavirus-london-mayor-sadiq-khan-calls-for-face-masks-on-tube/
"London mayor Sadiq Khan called on the government today to make coronavirus face masks compulsory for people using the Tube or shopping.

The mayor said that evidence from around the world was that face coverings help stop the spread of coronavirus.
“In those circumstances where its not possible for us to keep our social distance, think of public transport usage, think of when you’re in a shop, we should be using non-medical facial coverings like bandanas, like scarves, like reusable masks,” Khan told the BBC.

The government’s social distancing measures do not mention the wearing of face masks. But Khan said that should change."



I'm not a massive fan of his, but he was calling for action on masks, specifically, three months ago.
We are now in the middle of July.

Khan is responsible for TFL and policing in the capital. Anyone observing him though, would think his primary role is bed wetting remoaner in-chief more concerned about Trump and Brexit, than his job.
Not me, I think he’s alright,

 

[Polly 433]

this is exactly where the problem lies.

At the start of this pandemic, the front line staff were struggling to obtain enough masks and PPE. If 30M adults were also wearing masks to go to Primark the medical, nursing and carers would have really been at risk. Now there are plenty of masks the recommendation can change. It remains debatable the value, particularly if you socially distance.

 

[Strett]

At the start of this pandemic, the front line staff were struggling to obtain enough masks and PPE. If 30M adults were also wearing masks to go to Primark the medical, nursing and carers would have really been at risk. Now there are plenty of masks the recommendation can change. It remains debatable the value, particularly if you socially distance.

No, no, no. It’s all wrong advice at the wrong time because Tories, etc.

 

[Pope John XXIII]

At the start of this pandemic, the front line staff were struggling to obtain enough masks and PPE. If 30M adults were also wearing masks to go to Primark the medical, nursing and carers would have really been at risk. Now there are plenty of masks the recommendation can change. It remains debatable the value, particularly if you socially distance.

Are there plenty of masks?

I'm not sure about that.

The actual choice out there is extremely poor, especially for non-disposable ones. I have yet to see any kind of range sold anywhere yet; my local paper shop sells some disposable ones and that is is. I've been in B&M, B,&Q, Tesco's and not seen any for sale- at least not in any prominent place.

How is someone elderly who does not have the internet supposed to get hold of them? Especially after 24th when they can't go in a shop to buy one without wearing one in the first place.

 

[in_the_top_one]

No, no, no. It’s all wrong advice at the wrong time because Tories, etc.

Very grown up. If that refers to me then I've said on more occasions than once that the delay was only because of the risk to supplies for front line staff who clearly couldn't get hold of enough.
That doesn't absolve the government of responsibility for: a) not ensuring there was enough despite cygnus; b) not sourcing some quickly; c) telling people the science of masks was dubious instead of coming clean and saying there just wasn't enough to go around.

You can't have it both ways by saying they didn't have enough of this vital protective gear and then say it isn't effective anyway. Social distancing is important and so is wearing a mask. I read that analyses in China show that your chances of contracting it from someone in your own house (where social distancing is harder) are reduced four-fold if you wear a mask.
It is obvious that not being anywhere near anyone with the virus is the best thing to do but if we are to reopen the economy, shopping, attendance at football, the pub, dentists, nail bars etc, then cover your face.

Talk about bed wetters? People are bleating about this clearly advantageous and not-very-inconvenient act as if they are being microchipped by Bill Gates. It is also curious the correlation between people who constantly harp on about Britain in WW2, blitz spirit, the trenches, etc, and those who won't even put a bit of cloth in front of their noses while popping to the shops in order to save the lives of their countrymen and women. Pathetic and unpatriotic in the extreme.

 

[Pope John XXIII]

Talk about bed wetters? People are bleating about this clearly advantageous and not-very-inconvenient act as if they are being microchipped by Bill Gates. It is also curious the correlation between people who constantly harp on about Britain in WW2, blitz spirit, the trenches, etc, and those who won't even put a bit of cloth in front of their noses while popping to the shops in order to save the lives of their countrymen and women. Pathetic and unpatriotic in the extreme.

It isn't as simple as that.

I find the things horrific quite honestly. As a glasses wearer I find them near enough impossible to live with while also being able to see. I have tried to wear a mask three times before this announcement and abandoned it as a bad job all three times simply because I can't see properly and it makes shopping such a deeply unpleasant experience.

So it isn't just boomers. There are a lot of people who are very uncomfortable with wearing these.

I am not refusing to wear them. But now it is mandatory, I will simply avoid going in shops as much as possible because it renders shopping such an vile experience. And let's face it, social distancing already makes it unpleasant anyway. I won't be the only one. Boris appeals to our patriotism to spend money to get the economy going, but my money will continue going to Amazon because that is the only shopping experience I feel comfortable with now.

The range available is really, really shit. I haven't really seen any major shops yet selling them. Where are the elderly or the vulnerable or those without many means supposed to get these?

And the more the government (and the left wing press such as the Guardian) encourages social shaming of those who aren't masked, the more disabled people who can't wear them or don't understand about wearing them will be abused and ostracised.

 

[in_the_top_one]

I get the mitigating factors for the elderly and disabled but these aren't the objections I was referring to in the post you quoted.

I think most of the criticisms are overblown.
I get that wearing them with glasses is unpleasant but surgeons, anaesthetists, nurses, dentists, body shop paint sprayers, crop/weed sprayers, anyone working with aerosols, and so on, have always worn them - with glasses- all day every day.

For those who didn't choose those professions, check out the uptake of mask usage in other countries. They are not superior humans and don't have better eyesight than us but the level of complaining certainly seems lower and attitude towards giving it a go seems better.

The sooner we can kick this disease out, the sooner we can all return to enjoying the pubs, shops, gigs, and sporting fixtures that we love in the ways we used to. It's pretty simple.
If it is really that unpleasant then you always have the choice not to go to town and to stick with Amazon. I don't want that to sound too harsh but those are the options. Or you could go anyway because unless you kick up an unholy fuss nobody is going to get fined.

 

[mr ron]

You can use a scarf, bandana or make your own there won't be any about now I saw a few in shops on Monday panic buying will be in full swing now. They could have told people to cover faces with anything from the start not just face masks, bit of a leap up in the new cases today.

 

[in_the_top_one]

Suppliers have been prioritising supply chains to key workers but masks have been available in a limited way.

I bought a box of 20 not long ago. It will be harder to find some today for obvious reasons.

 

[Pope John XXIII]

I get the mitigating factors for the elderly and disabled but these aren't the objections I was referring to in the post you quoted.

I think most of the criticisms are overblown.
I get that wearing them with glasses is unpleasant but surgeons, anaesthetists, nurses, dentists, body shop paint sprayers, crop/weed sprayers, anyone working with aerosols, and so on, have always worn them - with glasses- all day every day.

For those who didn't choose those professions, check out the uptake of mask usage in other countries. They are not superior humans and don't have better eyesight than us but the level of complaining certainly seems lower and attitude towards giving it a go seems better.

The sooner we can kick this disease out, the sooner we can all return to enjoying the pubs, shops, gigs, and sporting fixtures that we love in the ways we used to. It's pretty simple.
If it is really that unpleasant then you always have the choice not to go to town and to stick with Amazon. I don't want that to sound too harsh but those are the options. Or you could go anyway because unless you kick up an unholy fuss nobody is going to get fined.

And as I clearly said, that is the option I choose, with regret. I'm not moaning about wearing them. Just sad that something I used to enjoy doing is no longer enjoyable; hence why I won't be doing it.

Not sure the doctor comparison is really a relevant one; shopping is meant to be a pleasant leisure activity, not a day at work.

 

[Lienking]

I would contest that the science was in flux. Maybe the scientific advice to the government was, maybe not. We won't know until the inquiry.


No need for hindsight. I had quite a large box of masks shipped to me that were posted on the 15th March and arrived on 26th March. There had been a total of 'just' 878 deaths in the UK by 26th March.

Yours are arriving today.


If we had all started wearing masks when out and about on the 26th March would more people be alive today?

You don't need a public enquiry to see that WHO didn't change their advice on wearing masks till 6th June. Even then social distancing is deemed to be more important than wearing a mask, and their advice was for countries with higher levels of cv.

 

[Strett]

Very grown up. If that refers to me then I've said on more occasions than once that the delay was only because of the risk to supplies for front line staff who clearly couldn't get hold of enough.
That doesn't absolve the government of responsibility for: a) not ensuring there was enough despite cygnus; b) not sourcing some quickly; c) telling people the science of masks was dubious instead of coming clean and saying there just wasn't enough to go around.

You can't have it both ways by saying they didn't have enough of this vital protective gear and then say it isn't effective anyway. Social distancing is important and so is wearing a mask. I read that analyses in China show that your chances of contracting it from someone in your own house (where social distancing is harder) are reduced four-fold if you wear a mask.
It is obvious that not being anywhere near anyone with the virus is the best thing to do but if we are to reopen the economy, shopping, attendance at football, the pub, dentists, nail bars etc, then cover your face.

Talk about bed wetters? People are bleating about this clearly advantageous and not-very-inconvenient act as if they are being microchipped by Bill Gates. It is also curious the correlation between people who constantly harp on about Britain in WW2, blitz spirit, the trenches, etc, and those who won't even put a bit of cloth in front of their noses while popping to the shops in order to save the lives of their countrymen and women. Pathetic and unpatriotic in the extreme.

It does not refer to you, sir.

 

[Strett]

It isn't as simple as that.

I find the things horrific quite honestly. As a glasses wearer I find them near enough impossible to live with while also being able to see. I have tried to wear a mask three times before this announcement and abandoned it as a bad job all three times simply because I can't see properly and it makes shopping such a deeply unpleasant experience.

So it isn't just boomers. There are a lot of people who are very uncomfortable with wearing these.

I am not refusing to wear them. But now it is mandatory, I will simply avoid going in shops as much as possible because it renders shopping such an vile experience. And let's face it, social distancing already makes it unpleasant anyway. I won't be the only one. Boris appeals to our patriotism to spend money to get the economy going, but my money will continue going to Amazon because that is the only shopping experience I feel comfortable with now.

The range available is really, really shit. I haven't really seen any major shops yet selling them. Where are the elderly or the vulnerable or those without many means supposed to get these?

And the more the government (and the left wing press such as the Guardian) encourages social shaming of those who aren't masked, the more disabled people who can't wear them or don't understand about wearing them will be abused and ostracised.

These are great...

https://www.ctshirts.com/uk/cotton-...ACF0002NAV.html?q=face*&qc=9&searchtype=range

You can also get a spray to douse your spec with that reduces/prevents fogging...

 

[Calvin Plummer]

m/world/2020/jul/14/action-to-stop-winter-covid-19-second-wave-in-uk-must-start-now

Stick to thinking the 1970s was the pinnacle of cuisine and trolling on other threads. Your nonsense here isn't helpful.

That estimate is the worst case scenario, much like Ferguson's 500,000.
But you know that, don't you?[/QUOTE]

Of course I know that, but I prefer to follow the experts than a troll account by a pensioner with 0 expertise.

 

[Strett]

That estimate is the worst case scenario, much like Ferguson's 500,000.
But you know that, don't you?

Of course I know that, but I prefer to follow the experts than a troll account by a pensioner with 0 expertise.[/QUOTE]

Why are you ragging on me? Troll account? Pensioner?